Using 28mm as a 35mm ?!

[01af]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Instead of cropping a 28 mm image, I'm saying you could just try getting a bit nearer to your subject. It's not wrong, it's an alternative solution to your 'problem'.

Sorry, but you are not right. The result is completely different.

He didn't say moving closer would yield exactly the same result. He said it would be a viable alternative solution to your problem. So please read carefully or this might lead to nowhere.

 

Moving closer by a factor of 1.25 in order to avoid cropping would give a slightly different result, not a completely different result. If it's a better, an equally good, or a worse picture depends on subject and circumstances. And that's what everybody keeps saying even though you stubbornly ignore—a 28 mm lens is a 28 mm lens is a 28 mm lens.

 

 

... and would like to make use of the added described benefit of the 28 mm. What's so hard to understand?

Somehow you're stuck in a mental one-way street. Being able to crop an image in post-processing is not a property specific to 28 mm lenses. You can crop any picture, and then crop even more—no matter what lens was used. You lose some resolution and you gain some flexibility. What else do you want to hear? Are you applying for a license to crop?

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[findranger]

Yes, having 28/35/50 all ASPH Crons would be very nice. But for the sake of affordability, fewer decisions, straight style and less weight I would like to have a 2 lens setup.

 

The reason for all the fuzz is currently I get a bit bored by the 35 focal lengh, though I think it's the best affordable all purpose lens (Cron Asph). Maybe that's why it bores me...So the plan is to get a 28 and work with it (as a 28 of course) and if I start missing the 35, crop to it. I think I'm pretty capable of imagining the 35 framelines in the VF and adapt to that.

 

Thank god i really dislike everything above 50mm so it's not too hard for me

...Mhhh "hard" might be the wrong term if you own Leica gear. Crazy luxury problems...

[exile]

Buy a cheaper 28mm and see how it works for you before committing to reallocation of the large resources invested in the 35Lux. If you sell it and regret the decision so much (e.g. because sometimes you want to use the 35 as a single lens solution) you wil loose money during both transactions. Any 28/2.8 from Leica or Zeiss will be good enough for a viable test run, or if you are really cost conscious, you could look at used Voigtlander or Leica thread mount lenses.

 

From my own experience:

 

1) I had a 75mm lens that I loved on an M8 but just could not work with it on a full frame M9, even though I new there was still a 100mm-ish lens "hidden" in every frame. What I found was that there were difficulties beyond the ability to crop, such as framing using the actual frame lines and restraints of minimal focal distance. It just didn't frame like I wanted it to. It's a question of vision and anticipation being better suited to a particulat focal length. If this is drawing you more towards 28 than 35, fair enough; but if you remain a predominantly 35mm kind of person wistfully regretting the loss of a few shots.... well, you have to either "learn to let them go gracefully", or step back to take the shot and accept the different perspective, or to carry more lenses. Personally I always carry between one and three lenses to travel light (why I chose Leica), and then do whatever I can to take the shot, including cropping in post processing to tidy the frame edges or reduce any empty space, etc.

 

2) I do crop liberally in post processing. With so much resolution to spare, why should I limit my expression to the dimensions of the digital sensor installed in my camera?

[findranger]

He didn't say moving closer would yield exactly the same result. He said it would be a viable alternative solution to your problem. So please read carefully or this might lead to nowhere.

 

Moving closer by a factor of 1.25 in order to avoid cropping would give a slightly different result, not a completely different result. If it's a better, an equally good, or a worse picture depends on subject and circumstances. And that's what everybody keeps saying even though you stubbornly ignore—a 28 mm lens is a 28 mm lens is a 28 mm lens.

 

 

 

Somehow you're stuck in a mental one-way street. Being able to crop an image in post-processing is not a property specific to 28 mm lenses. You can crop any picture, and then crop even more—no matter what lens was used. You lose some resolution and you gain some flexibility. What else do you want to hear? Are you applying for a license to crop?

 

 

01af, no need to get rude here. I really dislike if people comment off topic only to spread their views without reading the initial opening questions carefully. Nobody was interested in film or digital, nobody asked for brand recommendations. Forums are full of threads that lead to anything but the topic. Try to understand this and don't comment if you don't have anything to add. It seems you totally don't understand what I'm talking about.

 

 

a 28 mm lens is a 28 mm lens is a 28 mm lens

 

...interesting, also on an M8 ?!

[findranger]

Buy a cheaper 28mm and see how it works for you before committing to reallocation of the large resources invested in the 35Lux

 

It's a Cron but you're right. Maybe that's the best idea. Old elmarits (V4 and 3) go pretty cheap these days...

[earleygallery]

...interesting, also on an M8 ?!

 

Yes, a 28mm lens on an M8 is still a 28mm lens. The differences between a 28 and 35 lens have been pointed out to you in some of the responses.

 

But anyway you're taking this off topic, what's an M8 got to do with anything?

[findranger]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

But anyway you're taking this off topic, what's an M8 got to do with anything?

 

...pfff, I knew it

 

 

 

But at least some people were able to give good advices.

To sum it up:

Cropping an 28mm image to 35 FOV (in rare instances) will result in slightly different image characteristics (mainly the slightly larger DOF of the 28) compared to a lets say 35/2 ASPH, but it would work out pretty good because the two focal lenghs are that close to each other and the difference would be hard to spot.

Thank you.

[findranger]

I think I will try to catch a 28mm V3 or V4 Elmarit and give it a try.

 

With this thread I was trying to come up with the idea that it might be not absolutely (!) necessary to carry and pay both 28 and 35 mm lens if you mainly shoot 28 and occasionally want to switch to 35.

 

I wondered why this isn't discussed more often, because there are so many people who ask "shall I shoot 28 or 35 or both". Crop sensors (M8) do this anyways (basically turning a 28 to a 35 by cropping) and a lot of FF/Film 28mm lens shots see the light of day as a 35mm or even 50mm FOV image after PP.

 

This thread is not about using a lens as a different lens permanently. Of course.

 

Peace

[wattsy]

The OP seems to have all the answers. Why bother asking the question?

[findranger]

The OP seems to have all the answers. Why bother asking the question?

 

I wonder what's wrong with summing up the info I was able to gather by helping forum members so that others don't have to read the whole discussion?!

 

Some people just can't stay in the background even if they have nothing (!) to say. Sad.

[Steve Ash]

I wonder what's wrong with summing up the info I was able to gather by helping forum members so that others don't have to read the whole discussion?!

 

It is kind of bold to ask trivial questions and to grumble at the forum members that bother to help and waste their time.

 

BTW, that is the only one of your questions that I will bother to answer.

 

Kind regards,

Steve

[Jeff S]

...interesting, also on an M8 ?!

 

Of course it is, and based on this seemingly serious question, it's clear you're not clear.

 

Focal length is constant; it's the field of view that changes.

 

And field of view is different from perspective, which only changes based on distance from subject, regardless of focal length or degree of crop.

 

Basic stuff.

 

Jeff

[250swb]

2. Sorry, but you are not right. The result is completely different. The point is: moving doesn't equal zooming. Different result and therefore no "alternative". I've heard to often "use your feet to get a XYZ lens", and i think it's important to unterstand that this does't work

 

 

I'd like you to explain why it doesn't work? I think most people here would subscribe to the Robert Capa view that if the photograph isn't any good you weren't close enough. And a 28mm lens was Garry Winogrand's 'standard' lens for nearly all his published book work, and from his contact sheets you can see him moving back and forth to perfect the composition, not just standing rooted to one spot. I'd hardly call him a failure. There is nothing sacrosanct about the exact angle of view of a 35mm lens, no special truths are revealed, it has simply got a reputation as a good lens for people who want an average point of view, neither too wide nor too long.

 

But whatever. If you are now using a film camera cropping from a 28mm to 35mm is going to loose a lot of detail and increase apparent grain size. This isn't a problem on digital and an M9 could easily handle it. But I think you are creating problems before they appear, you may find you like the 28mm frame better, or compose the image in a different way. So don't overthink the 'problem' because you don't seem to have a 'problem' yet.

 

And rather than jump feet first into a 28mm Summicron (an excellent lens) I'd also suggest a CV or Zeiss ZM 28mm to see how things go.

 

Steve

[findranger]

Of course it is, and based on this seemingly serious question, it's clear you're not clear.

 

Focal length is constant; it's the field of view that changes.

 

And field of view is different from perspective, which only changes based on distance from subject, regardless of focal length or degree of crop.

 

Basic stuff.

 

Jeff

 

Thanks for teaching, but how does it help? Millions of M8 users bought and later sold 28mm lenses because they wanted to shoot with a 35mm to 50mm (equivalent, kind of). Of course it's not the SAME in the very sense of the word, I never said so. I really doubt you would spot the difference!

 

My question is STILL if you see a quality or operating problems in using a 28 as a 35 occasionally?

[earleygallery]

People have given you their opinions. I think it would be best now for you to purchase your 28mm lens and see how you get on.

 

Post some examples here and tell us what you think of the idea in practice after a few month's use.

[findranger]

And a 28mm lens was Garry Winogrand's 'standard' lens for nearly all his published book work, and from his contact sheets you can see him moving back and forth to perfect the composition, not just standing rooted to one spot. I'd hardly call him a failure

 

Thank you 250swb. Neither would I, of course. But personally I think theres a huge visual difference between 28mm and 35mm which has much more priority to me than what I can squeeze into the frame (which might be the same 'amount of information' with either lens).

That's why the often quoted "You can also use your feet" comment is so wrong (no offense by using this word) in my opinion. It's like saying "If it's too dark, heck, use a flash. Same thing as natural light". You know what I mean?

 

Best.

[findranger]

People have given you their opinions. I think it would be best now for you to purchase your 28mm lens and see how you get on.

 

Post some examples here and tell us what you think of the idea in practice after a few month's use.

 

Good idea James. Will do so.

 

Best.

[findranger]

It is kind of bold to ask trivial questions

 

Thank you Steve. That helped.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Stealth3kpl]

Sorry for going off topic but where is this bank, and how long is it? I ask because I fly hang gliders and this looks like a very good site.

Bucket | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Pete

[findranger]

Sorry for going off topic but where is this bank, and how long is it? I ask because I fly hang gliders and this looks like a very good site.

Bucket | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

Pete

 

Hey Pete, wow you must be a pro to spot it as a hang glider take off spot because indeed there were a lot of people waiting in the fog for take-off the other day.

It's the danish coast, the town is called Lønstrup.

 

Best.