I didn’t expect this…

[Olaf_ZG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

By first Leica was the Q. Sold it when I stepped into the world of M but then last December rebought a Q2. I always said that 28mm is too wide for me, and that to me that’s a negative of the Q.

My main fl 50mm, and second the 35mm.

So I thought.

This weekend I shot a small reportage (didn’t do this for a long time) and I took my SL plus 35/135mm combo.

I was very surprised to find out that 35mm was too tight. Maybe 28mm is not that bad at all?

Back in the old days I shot weddings with the contax g1, with a 28/45/90 set, so may be this is why I unconsciously still am used to 28mm when telling stories…

[Advertisement]

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

[Casey Jefferson]

1 hour ago, Olaf_ZG said:

By first Leica was the Q. Sold it when I stepped into the world of M but then last December rebought a Q2. I always said that 28mm is too wide for me, and that to me that’s a negative of the Q.

My main fl 50mm, and second the 35mm.

So I thought.

This weekend I shot a small reportage (didn’t do this for a long time) and I took my SL plus 35/135mm combo.

I was very surprised to find out that 35mm was too tight. Maybe 28mm is not that bad at all?

Back in the old days I shot weddings with the contax g1, with a 28/45/90 set, so may be this is why I unconsciously still am used to 28mm when telling stories…

Long term 35mm shooter here, even thought 40mm (voigtlander 40/1.2) is the new 35mm as 35mm always felt neither this or that but eventually back to 35mm.

It only take 1 day of actually shooting with the Q2 during a trip to understood why Leica chosen this focal length. Moreover the deeper dof is what makes the 28mm more useful - larger aperture = lower ISO or faster shutter speed, compared to 35mm.

[Farrell Gallery]

It's what you train yourself to use. The 28 is perfect for everyday photography. 35 wouldn't be useful to me, especially in abandoned building interiors I like to shoot. 

[bobtodrick]

I think you soon get used to what you have available.

In the late 90's my personal work camera was a Hexar A/F with a 35mm lens, which I loved.

When the Q came out I immediately thought...wow, a digital Hexar.  Only thing I feared was the 28mm.  After using it (and loving it) for a couple years I had a chance to pick up a mint used Hexar that I thought would make me want to shoot film again (it didn't 🤣).

But what immediately hit me was how the 35mm wasn't wide enough!

[Marc B-C]

I have a totally non-scientific reason for this. I am convinced that as we get older the want for tighter lenses reduces. When we are young we want to zoom in as far as possible and ignore the periphery . My favourite lens was my Nikon 300mm f2.8. When we get older we prefer to stand back and take in the bigger picture. I love my 28mm Q2.

That theory applies to life too.

[fumigatus]

7 hours ago, Marc B-C said:

I have a totally non-scientific reason for this. I am convinced that as we get older the want for tighter lenses reduces. When we are young we want to zoom in as far as possible and ignore the periphery . My favourite lens was my Nikon 300mm f2.8. When we get older we prefer to stand back and take in the bigger picture. I love my 28mm Q2.

That theory applies to life too.

I like your theory Marc. But dont believe in it. My experience is that «older» people/grown ups very rarely are open-minded (enough). «This is how I’ve perceived it all my life. I dont care what the science says…». More people should try wide angel. Much needed these days. 

[AndreasG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

For decades 28mm is the standard lens for my M Leicas, film and digital, sometimes I use 18mm and 35mm. almost never 50 and above.

[roma]

Been going back and forth between a 28 and a 35 for years. The 35 makes me work harder - have to move my feet a lot. When I had a 50, it was even harder. 
For events, though, it’s hard to beat the 28. For everything else, I find the 35 to look more pleasing. 

[beewee]

For about 6 years, I shot the M8 with a 18/3.8 SEM with a 24mm equivalent field of view and then finally got an M10 + 24mm SEM and shot that for a number of years and I was very comfortable and happy with the 24mm focal length for documentary style adventure photography in the mountains. When I got 28m APO SL, going back to 28mm I definitely felt a bit constrained but after taking it out for 2 long days, I got a feel for 28mm. I imagine the same applies for those going from 28mm to 35mm or vice versa.

Over the years, because I shot 24mm for so long, I saw the world in 24mm and shooting at 24mm was very natural. When I then started shooting 28mm, the biggest thing I noticed was that I had to move farther away from my subject and I had to be more selective about the background. Now I look back at those photos and enjoy them equally as much as my 24mm images taken over the years. Each focal length has a different feel, neither better or worse. It’s all matter of learning how to visualize with a specific field of view and finding subjects that would work and positioning yourself to capture that subject in the best way possible.