Jump to content
RagingCANE

35 vs 28 + 50

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

How did you ‘miss a few landscape shots’ with a 35mm lens vs 28mm?

FWIW I think with a 35mm and 50mm lens and a rangefinder camera, the only limits are your imagination. 

‘Building a kit’ is just a feeble cover story for GAS. No one is building anything with lenses. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My 3 lenses for decades have been 28, 35 and 50. Like them all, as needed and the mood suits, and zooming with feet can sometimes help in a pinch.  I picked up a Tri-Elmar MATE (28-35-50) for a one lens travel option, but prefer the primes; probably will sell the MATE.

Jeff

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, jaapv said:

Actually using a 24 does not really necessitate using the EVF. With some experience the framing can be estimated using the whole viewfinder and some mental gymnastics.

Agree.  Have been previously using the 25 ZM Biogon and now have the 24 Elmarit.  Don't find any need for the add-on finder, can easily compose using the camera viewfinder.  I also used to carry the 50mm Summilux when traveling, but switched to a 35 Summarit as it is very compact, as is the Elmarit (without the hood).  I found I needed something slightly wider and can easily crop for the 50mm view.  Recently added the collapsible 90 Elmar, camera plus three compact lenses are easily carried.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have no EVF even with the 21mm. The M10 shows me the 28mm framelines and that is enough (for me anyway as I do not like to put something else on top of my M10). After some testshots you can make out how much more will be on the picture than the framelines you see. Or else you are surprised when looking at it on your PC 🤯. I have the Super-Elmar. 

Considering 28mm or 35mm today I would leave out the 35mm Summilux (when you have a 50mm) and leave it be with the 28mm Summicron. I think that the 2 angle of views are too near together. So I would (today) rather go for the 28mm and if necessary crop in post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, spydrxx said:

On the issue of architecture, just remember that the wider you go with your lens, the greater the potential to introduce a distorted perspective. I was basically a 35mm guy but I never had a problem with a 28mm, but definitely noticed with a 24 I was often keystoning in architectural shots. When I got a 15 for other work, I found it totally unsuitable for shots where architecture was an important component of the composition.

Very true. When I was considering shooting architecture for a living I used the Canon 24 and 17L tilt shift lenses. Mostly the 24. I’m not looking for that now, just something I can shoot wider with when I need to. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, monther said:

How did you ‘miss a few landscape shots’ with a 35mm lens vs 28mm?

FWIW I think with a 35mm and 50mm lens and a rangefinder camera, the only limits are your imagination. 

‘Building a kit’ is just a feeble cover story for GAS. No one is building anything with lenses. 

In London I missed two where I couldn’t get the right angle with the 35 so I pulled out my iPhone. Nothing critical but I find that there is a significant difference between 28 and 35. For this trip I’m forcing myself to use the 35 and get better at focusing with the M10 before I add more lenses. I didn’t bring my laptop either so I will just have to wait until I get home to be able to make the right decision. I do love that 35 1.4 though. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was taking architectural shots for one project in 2018. I switched to 28 from 35. I even wanted 21 for it. But I'm not into Google like map photos. I use 16mm sometimes and it is far from fisheye ugly distortions.

Why OP needs 1.4 lens for architecture?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

You are asking the great question in Leica rangefinder photography.   I have been lucky to have traveled the world with a 28mm f2.8 Elmarit and 90mm f4 Macro-Elmar.  I have appreciated this combination of equipment  as it has offered me mild wide-angle and telephoto perspectives at minimal bulk and weight.  If I am operating out of my own vehicle, without the need to have all my camera stuff with me all the time as in international travel, I go with 21mm f3.4, 35mm f1.4, 75mm f2.4 and the classic 135mm f4 Tele-Elmar.   Over the years I have stuck with these focal lengths combinations with an occasional replacement of new lenses with new/improved performance.  (What I have changed have the bodies M4>M6>M240>M10 with a sidetrack to a Leica Q.). 

Good luck with your search to your focal length choices.  jDD

Edited by jDD-m410
tense

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A set of 28 and 50 is a good choice and that is the way I started. I expanded my lens collection from this but could happily return if needed.

Regards,

Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ko.Fe. said:

I was taking architectural shots for one project in 2018. I switched to 28 from 35. I even wanted 21 for it. But I'm not into Google like map photos. I use 16mm sometimes and it is far from fisheye ugly distortions.

Why OP needs 1.4 lens for architecture?

 

I don’t need anything near 1.4 for Architecture. But if I only have one wide angle, ie. 28 over 35, then I want the speed also. And I don’t know much about the sharpness of the lenses yet so that’s why I’m here. It looks like a 28 2.8 Elmarit in the kit would give me the option and it’s a bargain for Leica. By all accounts I don’t think I’ll be disappointed with the sharpness. I’m learning a lot so thanks all for being so responsive. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

28-50 is a good, versatile kit, but I've come to prefer 24-50. Sometimes, 28 doesn't "feel" wide enough, but 24 always "feels" wide enough to me. The Elmar 24/3.8 is stellar, and compact. Maybe slightly less stellar (but barely so) is the Zeiss 25/2.8. 

35-90 is also a good combo, for my eyes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, RagingCANE said:

I don’t need anything near 1.4 for Architecture. But if I only have one wide angle, ie. 28 over 35, then I want the speed also. And I don’t know much about the sharpness of the lenses yet so that’s why I’m here. It looks like a 28 2.8 Elmarit in the kit would give me the option and it’s a bargain for Leica. By all accounts I don’t think I’ll be disappointed with the sharpness. I’m learning a lot so thanks all for being so responsive. 

28 2.8 is sharp since III. M10 has huge high ISO range.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, RagingCANE said:

I don’t need anything near 1.4 for Architecture. But if I only have one wide angle, ie. 28 over 35, then I want the speed also. And I don’t know much about the sharpness of the lenses yet so that’s why I’m here. It looks like a 28 2.8 Elmarit in the kit would give me the option and it’s a bargain for Leica. By all accounts I don’t think I’ll be disappointed with the sharpness. I’m learning a lot so thanks all for being so responsive. Leica now. The

Get that "sharpness" idea out of your head. You are with Leica now which means that it is a complete and utter non-issue.
 Nobody with Leica experience will have any quality concern about any Leica lens (or Zeiss for thar matter and even Voigtlánder) The only things you will see discussed is the lens character.
Choose the lens according to your needs, focal length, speed, enhanced APO correction,etc., and your wallet, of course. You will never be disappointed.
And remember, a faster lens is, in general, a less "sharp" lens than a slower one. (How I hate this word "sharpness". Optically it is devoid of any meaning, yet it is used to denote some kind of desirable qualityy... )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought my MP240 used at a Leica camera store. . The previous owner had upgraded to new M10. He also traded in 50 cron and 21 sem so I took them also.

I couldn't afford a 35 cron or lux so I order 28 Elmarit. I am happy with these lenses and when im traveling take all 3 and try to give them all equal time as I enjoy

the images from all 3 focal lengths ..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I prefer either:

28, 50, and 90; or

35 and 75 (to which I’m about to add a 135).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, RagingCANE said:

I don’t need anything near 1.4 for Architecture. But if I only have one wide angle, ie. 28 over 35, then I want the speed also. And I don’t know much about the sharpness of the lenses yet so that’s why I’m here. It looks like a 28 2.8 Elmarit in the kit would give me the option and it’s a bargain for Leica. By all accounts I don’t think I’ll be disappointed with the sharpness. I’m learning a lot so thanks all for being so responsive. 

Nobody needs a 28 1.4 lens. Speed with a 28 is a non-issue as you can hand hold at 1/30 or 1/15 and expect a reasonably sharp (non- blurry) photo.  At slower shutter speeds, use a tripod/monopod and you are set. 

I have the 28 Elmarit M ASPH (latest version) and it is outstanding, both in terms of image quality and portability. In use, its small size is a pure delight, and matches the M body proportions perfectly. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Mute-on said:

Nobody needs a 28 1.4 lens. 

 

Well, somebody “needs” a 28/1.4, otherwise they wouldn’t make it. Whether the “need” is real or perceived is a different question. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Mute-on said:

Nobody needs a 28 1.4 lens. Speed with a 28 is a non-issue as you can hand hold at 1/30 or 1/15 and expect a reasonably sharp (non- blurry) photo.  At slower shutter speeds, use a tripod/monopod and you are set. 

Consider the following:

I can scale focus a 28 at f/1.4 (at moderate distances) and still have enough depth of field to feel pretty confident that the result will be acceptable.   

Doing the same with a 50mm would require some serious skill.

Also, what if a faster shutter speed is required and high-ISO is not available (e.g. shooting film)?

I'm a strong proponent of ultra-fast wide-angle lenses (and ultra-slow normal/telephoto 😆)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ok, ok. I was being literal. Need is not analogous to want, desire, or preference. 

Personally, I don’t see the need for a 28 1.4. Of course everyone is entitled to their own preferences. 

Enjoy :)

 

Share this post


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.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy