28mm?

[Kevin_B1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

After reading lots about the Q and really fancy one I decided today to go out with my 109 set to 28mm and occasionally 35mm and I have to say I struggled with this limitation.

 

I think I need to have several more trips out working like this to ensure I don't make an expensive mistake.

 

Do people who have the Q find this or do you soon adjust to the lens length?

 

Regards

Kevin

[ramosa]

Personally, I think 28mm is very different than 35mm. I'm at home with 35 or 50, but don't think 28 would ever work for me, especially as a fixed lens. IMHO 28 is a hard FoV to shoot with (at least in terms of street photography). My experience with one (as well as common impression of others' work with them) normally brings to mind Capa's classic quote: "If your pictures aren't good enough, you aren't close enough."

[Belle123]

I am with ya there on 28.  Took me awhile to convince myself would be OK with it.  The camera will make you want to get a whole lot closer to your subjects if you usually shoot 35 or 50.  I keep getting closer and closer and never seems to be close enough sometimes!   But growing on me.  But the day they come out with a Q35 or Q50, I will be on the wait list!!!  You bet!  

[KLManhattan]

I've worked with a 35mm on the Sony RX1R, a 16mm (23mm) on a Fuji X-T1, and now the 28mm on the Q and I love the 28mm.  I do mostly landscapes and street photography and the 28mm suits me perfectly.  If you take pictures with an iPhone then 28mm should work fine.

[icqcq]

The 28mm has been my standard lens since moving to rangefinders fifteen years ago... it captures what I think of as my normal perspective on the world. I've never worked with a 35mm, as it seems an orphan focal length. 50mm is a short tele/portrait lens, and the 90 is my secondary. 28 for a normal view of the world, 90 for the details that catch my eye.

 

As to working with it... yes, Uncle Bob was right: you're not close enough. Keep moving in.

 

Also: pack your foreground. It's not unusual for me to shoot in a crowd with it, filling the sides with 'non-subject' people: they populate it, they provide context, but the true subject is a little further off, framed by the fillers.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[viramati]

It's all personal and I prefer 28mm especially for street work

[millsart]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The worlds most popular camera, the iPhone is about 29mm equivalent, and most "kit" zooms are commonly 28-70ish equivalent, and most users, (or at least my own usage when looking at EXIF focal length data) results in the zoom being shot at the wide end that majority of the time. 

 

As such, 28mm is a pretty common/popular FoV most people will have had some familiarity with shooting.   Doesn't mean it needs to be everyone's favorite but we've all likely used it a fair bit over the years if you've ever taken a picture with a smart phone or ever had a standard zoom lens on a CaNikon, Fuji, Sony etc camera.

[@McLeica]

It's all personal and I prefer 28mm especially for street work

 

Yup, me too. Great for a wide range of photography too. I never got 35mm and just couldn't make it work. 50mm is now my only other focal length I use when I want to tighten in on a subject.

 

28mm is a forgiving focal length for street shooting, great for providing optional context for your shots, but it really rocks perspective when you get in close without making your subject look like a circus clown. 

[otto.f]

Personally, I think 28mm is very different than 35mm. I'm at home with 35 or 50, but don't think 28 would ever work for me, especially as a fixed lens. IMHO 28 is a hard FoV to shoot with (at least in terms of street photography). My experience with one (as well as common impression of others' work with them) normally brings to mind Capa's classic quote: "If your pictures aren't good enough, you aren't close enough."

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/189479-irland-m9/

 

Here's a link to a very nice reportage, never mind the german language, it's about the images, nearly all done with a 28. I also had this doubt about the 28, but this one is convincing. Leica calls the 28 the new reporter/photojournalism FoV

[beauport]

Before purchasing the Q I had similar reservations about a 28mm fixed lens.  I decided to rent a Q for a week and doing that made all the difference.  I now enjoy the focal length and zoom more with my feet.  As others have said, it is personal and one should decide for themselves if the lens will work for them. 

[millsart]

You can always shoot the Q in 35mm crop mode as well.  Essentially your getting a 28mm f1.7 lens giving a 35mm equiv with a 15meg file.

 

That is as good, if not better (in terms of shallow DoF) as the likes of a Fuji X100 camera which has a 23mm f2.0 lens and a 16meg APS-C sensor.

 

I kind of like the crop frame lines as well for composition.

 

I think of the Q as a 28mm and a 35mm camera and you can switch the framing on the fly.

[michi_rishi]

I used to prefer 35mm lenses. Almost all cameras I have had over the years had about 12-16 megapixels at that focal length. The Q is great camera with a perfect 35 mm at 15 mpix. On top of that, it gives me a very nice frame with some extra space around. Just great to compose my scene.

While the 35mm is my all time favorite focal length, sometimes it just wasn't wide enough. Now I have a little extra when needed.

I have not used 50mm too much for now, I rather take one step closer. And evn if I'd use it, this still gives 8mpix. More than enough for most purposes.

[biglouis]

I too wondered about the 28mm to begin with but it is a lot easier to crop in (than out with a lens fixed at 35mm).

 

LouisB

[asimplefarmer]

I had the same problems you were thinking of: "can i stand a 28mm only camera?" You just really have to know how to work with 28mm and in my case, lots of DOF. Whats nice is the camera fixes the distortion as well, which helps.

 

Some examples of mine:

 

[katsanes]

Wow - pretty surprised to see some of these comments...  I have been a 35mm junkie for years, but I switched to 28mm without really skipping a beat.  I dare say I might even prefer it now!  I'm a street shooter, and I try to get close anyhow.  I enjoy the extra width just fine.

[Archiver]

28mm is fine with me; I've used 28mm cameras and lenses for years, and regardless of what other cameras I'm carrying, either a 28mm lens is in my pocket, or a camera like the Ricoh GR is with me.  28mm is a great general purpose focal length for me, as I like to be able to see context around subjects, and I like being able to capture scenes.  In fact, I like 24mm and 21mm about as much, for those reasons.

 

The Q allows you to use it as a 16mp 35mm aps-c equivalent using crop mode, so that's an option if you like 35mm.  Another aspect is that you can usually get closer, but you can't always step back further.  28mm is considerably different from 35 in that regard.

[mgrayson3]

For spontaneous landscapes, a 28mm is a great FoV. This is not from a Q, but from my previous walk around, M9 + 28 Cron:

 

 

--Matt

[Sprintmedley]

I know what you mean - I felt the same way about the 28mm. For myself, I see this camera as a street camera (quick shots of your surroundings and it's inhabitants - see attached shot in La Jolla CA two days ago). Sparingly i use the cropping function when I really need to quasi isolate a subject - have had nice results with both DNG and JPEG here.  The Q is a niche camera (this has been reiterated many times before but it is so true).  I have found 28mm is more appropriate for indoor scenes (churches, museums, coffee shop ambiance) than 35mm but certainly an improvement over the 50mm.  I will be walking the Camino in Portugal/Spain in two weeks and after having walked this long trek before with other cameras/lenses I have concluded that overall the 28mm is a perfect compromise for most situations. This is why I purchased the Q. That said - I keep a Lumix GX8 with a 14-140mm on standby for more isolated scenes.  Good luck.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[johnwolf]

The big issue I find with a 28 and wider is that the eye and brain tend to amplify objects of interest, but the camera sees everything neutrally. So you can see something relatively far off and find it engaging, but in the captured image it's just another small object at a distance.

 

You have to work around this by getting closer, isolating the subject in capture or post, or whatever else works. It's just a different way of working and takes time to master. Once you do, though, it's the 50mm focal length that will seem too limiting. 

 

John   

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica Q

[asimplefarmer]

The big issue I find with a 28 and wider is that the eye and brain tend to amplify objects of interest, but the camera sees everything neutrally. So you can see something relatively far off and find it engaging, but in the captured image it's just another small object at a distance.

 

You have to work around this by getting closer, isolating the subject in capture or post, or whatever else works. It's just a different way of working and takes time to master. Once you do, though, it's the 50mm focal length that will seem too limiting.

 

John

You make a very good point and it's very true. You sometimes have to pick and choose what you really want to shoot. For example I saw this mountain range in Death Valley with really interesting layers showing. The mountain looked like it had stripes and they way the sun was hitting it through the clouds looked amazing to my eye. I pulled over and tried to shoot it with the Q and it didn't translate to what I was seeing.