Jump to content

Need Help! 35mm or 28mm


fotoshock_com

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am with the 28 camp.

Two reasons:

1) The 35 is not different enough since you already have a 50.

2) When you go digital you will have a 28 film and a 35 digital, which beats 35 film and 50 digital. Not sure that makes sense to anybody. :D

 

Andreas

Link to post
Share on other sites

x

I am a 28 and 50 guy. I have a 35, but it always seems either too long or too short; in a one lens system, maybe. I have a 28 Summicron and it is a great lens, perhaps the best lens out there. The Voigtlander Ultron is highly regarded for much less money. I wouldn't feel underdressed with either lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Guest Bastian A.

for me 24, 35, 50 and 85 is the perfect combination with my slr, for the m-system i would prefer the same lenses: 24, 35, 50 and 90 (or 75).

i do not like 28mm too much - but that might be very subjective and irrational :)

 

b.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Figured I put my $0.02 in.

Years ago I have a 28/50/90 kit with my first M3. I found the 28 to be either to wide for most shots and a little narrow at times. I used the 50 most with that kit. I now have a couple of M3's and a M8. for both kits I use 35/50/90/135 (with bug eyes) and it seems to work well with both systems. Next lens will be a 24 f/2.8 for normal wide on the digital side and WIDE on the film side.

I find right now I use the 35 most on digital and 50 on film but also like the 35 on film.

I see no need for a 28 at this time but I still might get one of the Elmarit f/2.8 models when they become available just because of the lower cost.

My suggestion is to get the 35mm f/2.0.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...