28mm, 35mm, 50mm Lens Combination?

[erniethemilk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I currently have the 35mm & 50mm Summicrons I use frequently - more so the 35mm on my M10P

I’m wondering if anyone uses this same focal length combination along with a 28mm. I’d quite like wider at some point than the 35mm offers. 
 

Unsure if the 28mm is ‘too close’ to the 35mm to really notice much difference or if something such as a 24mm would be a better option. 

[pippy]

Difficult to say which lenses would suit you better, Ernie, but (FWIW) these days I usually have a 35mm and a 50mm 'mounted' and carry a 28mm as backup so my answer to your first question would be 'Yes'.

It might be that a 24mm suits you better. For the way I shoot there is easily enough difference between a 28mm and a 35mm. I must add that I hardly ever favour anything wider than 28 apart from in some very rare situations. For those times I use a 21mm. YMMV.

Good luck in your choice!

Philip.

Edited January 5, 2022 by pippy

[105012]

A ‘rule of thumb’ is to have approximately  2x between focal lengths, so 28 - 50 - 90 or 35 -75 etc.

Edited January 5, 2022 by 105012

[Hans-Dieter Gülicher]

I have bought the 28 mm (my first one), 35 mm and 75 mm Summicron for use with my M 10-R. But in the meantime I only take the new APO-Summicron asph. If needed I crop the files and I feel it`s well done.

Regards Hans

[Danner]

I went the same route. Started with the 35/50, then added the 28 for more reliable zone focusing while doing street photography.  Happy with the choice.

[Kreeshp]

+1 for the 28mm/50mm duo.

Started with a 50mm APO, then added a 24mm Elmar (too cheap to pass up), then added a 35mm black chrome (to round out the black chrome collection with the 50), then a 28mm Summaron matte black edition.

The Summaron 28mm is now my most used lens with the 50 APO right behind.  The Summaron’s compactness (I don’t use the hood) and depth of field when zone focussing have turned my camera into a point and shoot that rivals any autofocus rig.

I don’t use the 35mm as much anymore but I keep it in case I need a one lens setup.

[Kl@usW.]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Ernie, 35 and 50 are of course well established focal lengths.. and for a reason. 28 is different-but still quite close to your familiar angle... If you really want a new  experience, the 24   (  I had the Elmarit and now have the 3,8/24) is an excellent choice. But prompts the need for an external finder.    I suggest to try both... 

K. 

[BradS]

As with all meaningful questions, it kinda depends.

I'm personally not at all fond of the 35mm focal length and were it not for the existence of the fabulous Zeiss 35mm f/2.8 Biogon ZM,  I would not own any 35mm lenses.  The 35mm focal length is a frustrating compromise. It is neither normal nor wide. When I have the 35mm mounted, I constantly find myself wishing I had the 50mm or 28mm instead.  My Leica kit is complete with an M2 and the 28mm and 50mm lenses. I'd actually prefer 24mm but using an accessory view finder on a Leica is, for me, completely out of the question.

What I really want is a Zeiss ZM 50mm lens that is as good as the 35mm f/2.8 Biogon ZM and the same size as or smaller than the 28mm f/2.8 Biogon ZM. Then I'd just have the 28mm Biogon and the tiny but excellent (and as yet, non-existent) 50mm

 

Edited January 5, 2022 by BradS

[rsolomon]

I went with 21 SEM, 35, 75 crons 

Each an excellent lens with its own distinctive POV and experience. 

I suggest to establish a core and build out from it , In my case it’s the 35. I also recommend to be on the aggressive side - I think it’s more fun. 

[BradS]

...and, as for the OP's question, is the 28mm too close to the 35mm?  For me, no. They're totally different - 28mm is far more useful than 35mm....but again, it really depends on individual taste, skills, subject matter and working environment. 

Edited January 5, 2022 by BradS

[cpclee]

My lens combination is 28/2.8 ASPH, 35/1.4 ASPH FLE, 75/2 AA and I use them alongside each other all the time.  Despite being a little close to the 35, there are very good reasons I use the 28:

- The 28 gives enough of a different perspective / angle of view that the 35.  It places the photographer in a different relationship to the subject. 

- The 28 is very light and compact while the 35 is a little dense.  It's super fast to operate.

- The 28 focal length is more suited to hyperfocal distance shooting

- 28 is the widest framelines in the standard M finder.  Anything wider requires an external finder or EVF / live view.  That kind of makes 28mm the widest care-free wide angle for the M.

Hope this helps.

[Herr Barnack]

I think of the 35mm as the one lens "all around" solution.

The 28mm and the 50mm make a nice two lens kit.  These two focal lengths account for about 90% of my images.

Quote

... I’d quite like wider at some point than the 35mm offers...

If you want a wider view than the 35mm can give you, A nice three lens kit would be 21mm, 35mm and 50mm.

[cpclee]

Worth noting some of the most famous M shooters, including David Alan Harvey, shoot with these three focal lengths (28/35/50) in tandem.

http://shooterfiles.com/2016/01/master-profiles-david-alan-harvey/

[Dennis]

28+35+50 there are very close focal length, but as Pippy said, they have enough difference, to make the difference 🙂 

35 as "normal" lens and reference for storytelling.

Do you need a bit more context? Use the 28.

Do you need to select a smaller portion of a scene and be more selective? Use the 50 and voila.

Three different FL for three situations. It's the way a trinity works

 

[grahamc]

I have the same kit and love it, particularly the fact that 28mm you are still getting framelines.
 

I take the 28mm out when I might need a wider landscape shot or if I’m feeling brave and don’t mind getting close to subjects. For street application the wider zone focus depths are really great versus 35 and particularly 50.  
 

I guess it also depends what uses though, as it seems a classic street photography focal length, but if more landscape uses then I guess 24 or 21 would make more sense.  But it’s definitely noticeably different to the 35. 

[Jeff S]

The only M lenses I have are 28, 35 and 50mm, exclusively used with RF. Different enough to be different, even apart from rendering distinctions.  Over the years I have owned both 75 and 90mm, only to sell them after a bit.  
 

Jeff

[rsolomon]

6 hours ago, BradS said:

...and, as for the OP's question, is the 28mm too close to the 35mm?  For me, no. They're totally different - 28mm is far more useful than 35mm....but again, it really depends on individual taste, skills, subject matter and working environment. 

Exactly, for me they are too close. The 24 is a better choice IMO and does not require external viewfinder, just press into and look to the sides, I understand for those who wear glasses this can be an issue.  Shooting the 21, the external viewfinder is only important depending on subject and it is an awesome street shooter 

Edited January 5, 2022 by rsolomon

[Mute-on]

6 hours ago, Dennis said:

28+35+50 there are very close focal length, but as Pippy said, they have enough difference, to make the difference 🙂 

35 as "normal" lens and reference for storytelling.

Do you need a bit more context? Use the 28.

Do you need to select a smaller portion of a scene and be more selective? Use the 50 and voila.

Three different FL for three situations. It's the way a trinity works

 

This is my experience as well. Furthermore, as @grahamc observed, you get 28 framelines built in, but no wider. 
 

If you gravitate to wider focal lengths, as I do, using 28 and 35 in tandem is very rewarding. Naturally your objectives and surroundings will influence whether this is your experience. 

[RexGig0]

Personally, I do not think that 28mm and 35mm are too close, in focal length, or that 35mm and 50mm are too close, in focal length, so, I have roles for all three focal lengths. Rules do not usually trouble me. This does not mean that I always carry three lenses. I am more likely to bring just two, for the day, and it can be any two of these. Actually, once i get started, I am somewhat unlikely to change lenses. If I/we are traveling, I may well bring 4+ lenses, but for local shooting, two lenses are enough.

I really like my Zeiss 4,5/21mm Biogon-C, if using my Monochrom Type 246, so, is a fourth lens that is nice to have with me. This little Zeiss 21mm lens has a color shift effect, so, I do not use it on my M10. This one distorts so very little, so, might well be my only wide lens, for the day, and may even be the only one I use, for all of the images. 

 

 

 

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[shirubadanieru]

I just use the 35mm and 50mm, but used to have the 28mm. They are different enough that you can have all, or just one of them depending on your type of photography. Here’s how I used them:

50mm: General photography, but especially when I know I will be shooting people / portraits of friends, etc.

35mm: One lens kit, either when I’m traveling or I’m not sure if I’ll be shooting mostly street or other situations. I feel 35mm can do a bit of what a 50 and a 28 can do (i.e. depending on the 35mm you use, the bokeh is still great for portraits and no distortion either, but it can also do zone focusing for street much better than a 50mm would)

28mm: Purely zone focusing, when I know I want to use my leica as a point and shoot and will only be shooting street (i.e. mostly at F8 or F11, that’s why as a 28mm I think the summaron is good enough! That being said, at the end of the day I felt that the 35mm was good enough for zone focusing and it did the other things the 28mm is not great at (portraits / bokeh) so I got rid of the 28mm.