Jump to content

Do the 28mm make you happy?


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

While skeptical at first, the 28mm focal length has proven its value to me.  It does a good job at landscapes, marvelous job at street shooting; plus I have had great luck and results with studio portrait work.

 

I'm finding its an all around great camera that takes great shots all around.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think 28mm is quite a clever choice because it differentiates from most of the others which are 35mm and it's always possible to crop pixels out but you can never add them back if they weren't captured in the first place.

 

Any fixed lens camera will be a compromise, if the 50mm Sigma DP wasn't quite so quirky I would buy one like a shot as a compliment to my Q (when it arrives).

Link to post
Share on other sites

As someone who primarily visualises in 50 mm field of view I will start the 'clamor' for a 50 mm Q and happy to also have 75 and 90 mm crop integrated.  I'd even be happy at a pinch with a Q35 with 50 and 75 mm integrated crops.

 

But a Q50 would get my credit card out. :)

 

Pete.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think for a camera with fixed focal length 28mm 24MP with ability to crop to 35mm with 15MP is a very nice solution. I do use 35mm FOV more often myself, but sometimes 28mm comes in really nice and more "dynamic" than 35mm.

 

I do sometimes want longer focal length, but then 35mm wouldn't cut it either.

So in this case I would use a camera with the ability to switch lenses.

That's also the reason, why the Q can not replace my T+lenses. So I will have to either keep both or the T.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In an interview,  the designers said that the choice of the 28 was based in part because it was the smallest,  cheapest focal length for the system -- a 35 or 50 would be bigger and  more costly. Although early days with my Q,  it is an absolutely first rate piece of equipment,  especially the quality of the files. It is a fully professiona, versatile tool, and in Leica terms,  a bargain.  Also I use 28's almost exclusively.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Did something happen to Lars?

 

I think there was a later posting from his wife saying he had had a serious stroke.  Nothing since as far as I know. He is, and will continue to be, sadly missed by all.

Edited by spylaw4
  • Like 6
Link to post
Share on other sites

I think for a camera with fixed focal length 28mm 24MP with ability to crop to 35mm with 15MP is a very nice solution. I do use 35mm FOV more often myself, but sometimes 28mm comes in really nice and more "dynamic" than 35mm.

 

I do sometimes want longer focal length, but then 35mm wouldn't cut it either.

So in this case I would use a camera with the ability to switch lenses.

That's also the reason, why the Q can not replace my T+lenses. So I will have to either keep both or the T.

I fully understand your view, planning to buy a T because of it's interchangeable lenses (and size) and probably in a second time a Q could be a good sister beside it...

robert

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am a Nikon DSLR guy and have used as a take everywhere, vacation camera the CoolPix A to partner with a DSLR over my shoulder. The Coolpix A is 28mm and I really like having this focal length for cities and some landscape work. But the IQ is just not up to what my 28mm Nikon lens shows with a DX or FX body.

 

That's why I can't wait for the Q. It is in UPS's hands and due at my home Monday. Clearly it will be a giant step forward from the Coolpix A in IQ.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi all,

 

the Q is an incredible beast compared to my Xses...

 

But I am not sure how the 28mm will work out for me in the long run. Mainly I am taking pictures of my kids. Not necessarily portraits but of course often from small distances.  To be honest for this purpose the 35mm seem more suitable. I just hope this is because I am used to this focal length for years now (since the X1) and I will adapt to the new setting.

 

Any hints to change my shooting style to get away from the "big nose - small feet-pictures" :-) ? Is it just going one step back before taking a picture?

 

- TK

35mm would be perfect, 28mm too wide for universal lens, i m afraid Leica underrated this "problem" regarding to sales...i m sure if it was 35mm it will sell 3 times more 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am with Franz...if there is a Q50, I am in.

I find it interesting that some folk are prepared to buy a 28mm fixed lens camera, at a considerable price, and want/make it work for them. Nothing wrong with it at all..their money their choice. And good luck to them.

 

I am still trying to maximize and improve on my ' seeing ' with a 50mm after more than two decades of use.

 

I am just too slow a learner to start experimenting with a 28mm.

 

Could it also be the case that having purchased a fixed 28mm is giving some buyers the feelings of buyer's remorse.

Edited by fursan
Link to post
Share on other sites

The camera is so attractive that I can understand people buying it despite a focal length with which they are not comfortable. I myself did not buy it because it has that particular focal length. I scarcely ever use even 35mm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having swapped from 36mm, I'm finding using 28mma challenge, particularly with the composition. Suddenly, there are many more elements to take into consideration, with many potential spoilers within a frame.

I do like it for environmental portrait when working with a willing model. Otherwise, sticking the lens element into someone's personal space is daunting indeed.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd probably have gone with 35mm but 28mm *should* work for me and 35mm is only a crop away if needed. I do agree that Leica may have cost themselves but sales but I see the logic of keeping the camera small and differentiating from the current RX1 and possible RX2.

 

We can dream of a converter (similar to the Fuji X100) that moves the 28mm towards 50mm :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say 28mm sucks 90% of the time. it is such a shame it is not 35mm

 

the crop is acceptable for the 35mm setting, but rather useless for the 50mm

 

a cropped 35mm from a 28mm lens just looks different then a full frame 35mm.

 

such a shame.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I must say 28mm sucks 90% of the time. it is such a shame it is not 35mm

 

the crop is acceptable for the 35mm setting, but rather useless for the 50mm

 

a cropped 35mm from a 28mm lens just looks different then a full frame 35mm.

 

such a shame.

the only crop i can accept will be on my next A7rII where with the 28mm f2 i can have a 35mm crop with more then 30 mp ;-)

sorry in 2015 a 15mp crop remind me 10 years ago market, mp are not all but sorry with 42mp even a 20.000 iso will look good printed on A3 ....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Given the comments from the cameras' designer that they chose 28mm simply because that allowed for a more compact lens size I'm wondering why size was such an important factor for them, given that it's never going to be a pocketable camera. Would a 35 or 50 have been that much bigger?

 

Alternatively they could have gone for a 40mm pancake style lens, although it would have been a stop slower most probably at say f2.8. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...