What focal length has been used here?

[raphael]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey,

 

I'd like to do some wide-angle portraits.

 

I found these photos and really love both the look and FOV.

 

Can you help me guessing the focal length?

 

https://flic.kr/p/URde7u

https://flic.kr/p/VZuu21

 

I'd imagine he used 28mm or 24mm, or even wider?

Maybe the 24mm Lux (because of the bokeh)?

Has anyone else here taken similar shots?

[ropo54]

Certainly not of the same caliber photo as the examples in your post, but this was taken fairly close up w a 21mm 1.8 voigtlander.

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!

[Advertisement]

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

[anickpick]

For his work he mostly uses a Canon with a 24mm 1.4 lens and a Leica with an old non-Leica 35mm 1.4 lens

Edited September 26, 2017 by anickpick

[raphael]

For his work he mostly uses a Canon with a 24mm 1.4 lens and a Leica with an old non-Leica 35mm 1.4 lens

 

At first glance these two images looked wider than 35mm to me. But now I'm confused, could be 35mm indeed.

 

There are only two lenses that come into question for non-Leica 35mm 1.4, namely the Voigtlander Nokton (which is not very sharp) and the Zeiss ZM Distagon.

 

Do you know more?

[01af]

There are only two lenses that come into question for non-Leica 35 mm 1:1.4, namely the Voigtländer Nokton 35 mm (which is not very sharp) and the Zeiss Distagon 35 mm ZM.

 

That's not the Zeiss Distagon 35 mm ZM's bokeh. Moreover, I don't think it's 35 mm in the first place. Looks more like 24 mm to me.

[NB23]

24 to me. 21 too wide, 28 too nornal

[raphael]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

24 to me. 21 too wide, 28 too nornal

 

Thank you.

 

What max aperture do you need to achieve this bokeh on a 24mm? f/1.4 or should f/3.8 enough?

Edited September 26, 2017 by vtckon

[anickpick]

André Josselin is quite a famous German photographer.

 

He mainly uses Sigma Art lenses on his Canon cameras: Sigma Art 24mm F1.4, 35mm F1.4 and 85mm F1.4.

 

He does own a Leica M and only uses an old non-Leica 35mm 1.4 lens that he bought in Hongkonk for 1/10th of the price of a Leica lens. He likes the rendering of this lens and thinks Leica lenses are way too expensive...

 

The one picture in the link to his flickr page was made with his Leica M.

Edited September 26, 2017 by anickpick

[raphael]

The one picture in the link to his flickr page was made with his Leica M.

 

Yea, and therefore must be taken with the 35mm f/1.4 lens, right?

[anickpick]

right

[2wk]

I was gona say, it looks like my VC 35mm Nokton 1.4. 

[Ko.Fe.]

35 1.4 CV is known to make buzzing in the busy background. But FOV in the images provided feels wider than 35, IMO. Could be fast 24. I owned CV 25 lens once.  

[raphael]

Could be fast 24.

 

How fast? 1.4? 2.8? 3.8?

[2wk]

It can produce busy bokeh sometimes under certain circumstances but most of the time I have had nice bokeh. Don't slam a lens you have never shot with. 

Just look up samples. 

 

These are not mine, just a quick flickr search... but no buzzing here.

 

000032590022 by Igor Harrier, on Flickr

 

Skate into the light by Luís Pedro, on Flickr

 

Untitled by Marc Manabat, on Flickr

 

Pike Place Market by Luis Andrei Muñoz, on Flickr

 

Anyway. It does look wide but Ive shot models in supermarkets and you can get that effect from a 35mm on full frame.

 

35 1.4 CV is known to make buzzing in the busy background. But FOV in the images provided feels wider than 35, IMO. Could be fast 24. I owned CV 25 lens once.  

 

[lct]

35 1.4 CV is known to make buzzing in the busy background. [...]

 

Not the SC version which suffers in turn from a lot of flare and from focus shift as well.

[Simon]

They are gorgeous shots indeed. Looks like a fast lens. My guess was 24 or 28 mm but probably 24.

 

So based on Anickpick’s info probably Sigma Art 24 1.4.

[raphael]

So based on Anickpick’s info probably Sigma Art 24 1.4.

They were shot on the Leica M 240 — no Sigma lens available for that.

[wattsy]

The one picture in the link to his flickr page was made with his Leica M.

Yea, and therefore must be taken with the 35mm f/1.4 lens, right?

 

 

Maybe the photographer tagged the photo incorrectly? FWIW, this one has been tagged Sigma.

 

Looking at the photo linked by the OP, my guess is that it is wider than 35mm and focussed closer than 0.7m so I'd be inclined to lean towards the Sigma 24. That said, I suppose it could be the 35/1.2 on a Leica. Perhaps the OP could ask the photographer?

Edited September 27, 2017 by wattsy

[raphael]

Possible. The picture you're referring to is also tagged with Leica AND Canon. Confusing!

 

I sent him a message asking for the lens some time ago, but he did not answer yet.

 

Don't understand why you wouldn't reveal the gear you used for a photo. Is this a sort of company secret?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[wattsy]

Possible. The picture you're referring to is also tagged with Leica AND Canon. Confusing!

 

These photos are probably tagged in batches and are probably not completely accurate.

 

 

Don't understand why you wouldn't reveal the gear you used for a photo. Is this a sort of company secret?

 

It might be in his case – I presume he makes his living from promoting lifestyle orientated brands on social media.

Edited September 27, 2017 by wattsy