Anyone looking forward to the new M 28mm f2 ASPH?

Have not heard much buzz about this lens except by Erwin P. I can't wait to actually use the full frame in my .72 (I don't wear glasses---yet). But, most (non Leica) pro photographers couldn't care less about a 28---Not wide enough. Brian Bower loves his 28 2.8, and a couple of other shooters whom I respect also use it. What about John C. and the rest of you faithful posters? Are you excited--couldn't care less--or somewhere in between? Thanks in advance!

I have a new 28/2.0 on order and am looking forward to its arrival.

Currently my wide angle usage is split between 35/1.4 pre-asph and a

cheap Kobalux 28/3.5 which is a very sharp lens.

Steve,

What other lenses have you been shooting with? Is this your first

step to wide? I ask as a longtime 50mm user who is intrigued by the

wider lenses but I never get any further than pushing the preview

lever.

Jim

Steve

 

<p>

 

Lens lengths go in cycles. Right now 28mm seems to be "out" 24mm

"in". I like the 28mm lens and find it very useful, just wide enough

to be very different from a 50 and yet not so wide that you are

plagued by endless foregrounds and wide angle distortion at the edge

of the frame.

I've shot wide (24 mm) with my old Nikon kit, but just 50 1.4 and 90

2.0 ASPH with my M6. I have an M3 that I've mucked around with using

its 35, but using the universal finder isn't my favorite thing to

do... So, I have had my eye on a slightly used 35 Summilux, but I

think a 28 will give me more of the "look" I need. At any rate, using

the preview lever seems to confirm this. I just need some

confirmation from real folks. One can read everything and still know

nothing (as they say)! Thanks!

I think the one thing about using fixed focal length lenses is that

there must be a good justification for the effort and time to change

the lens. If you are a 50mm guy, the 28mm would be pretty tempting.

But since Leica users like to gravitate around the 35mm focal length,

especially with the great models available, that silly little 7mm's

just don't seem worth it to me. Even in my SLR life, I've traveled

to many countries with only a 24, 35 and 105... just love that 35,

and the 24 is far enough away to make the effort worth it.

 

<p>

 

If I had just started into the Leica RF system, I would have some

choices to make... especially if Erwin's review is valid. If Leica

made a small 75mm f2.5... man, that would be a great combo... the 28

and 75.

To try and answer everybody, I am not really a wide angle guy. My

favouite and most used lenses on Leicas are 35mm and 50mm. I use the 28

when in close 'people' situations for my street photography. Yesterday,

Dec. 3, I was shooting a NFL game (Redskins/Giants) on a project that I

have been working on this fall for NFL Films which is sideline people

shots. I carried 3 Leica M's with 35/50/90 mounted and I had a 28 in my

bag but never used it.The 35 obviously let me get close to the subject

but still show the surrounding image. I use the 50 alot as a short

telephoto and I used the 90 because I wanted some tight facial

features. Also, I seldom use a 90mm but wanted to try and give a

different look for some of my shots. What focal length a photographer

uses is a matter of his/her style. Over the years of doing street

photography my keepers are shot with 50mm with 35mm being second and

28mm a very distant third.

 

<p>

 

Steve LeHuray

I've got one on order, and I'm pretty excited to try it out. On the

other hand...

 

<p>

 

When I was an SLR user I loved the 28, and didn't have the time of day

for a 35. Now that I'm shooting exclusively Leica M, I shoot with a

35 more often than not. I have the 24 Elmarit-M as well as a 24

Nikkor, but I've never found that focal length to fit my vision in

either the SLR or M incarnations. By the same token I also have a 28

Elmarit-M that I don't use as much as the 35. I so use it a lot more

than the 24, though. I believe the new Summicron coupled with either

the Hexar RF or a .58 M will lead me decisively back to this focal

length, though.

 

<p>

 

I also think a 75 Summicron ASPH would be an ideal partner with either

this lens or a 35.

My 28/2.8 (current version) has been staying home a lot since I

bought a Tri-Elmar, there's only 1 stop difference. The extra stop

of the Summicron might justify buying it.

I'm looking forward to seeing the 28 f2.8 on the used market at good

prices as people trade for the 28 f2. I shoot a lot of 28 with the

Tri-Elmar (geez, thats too big) and Kobalux 28 f3.5, but I've been

dying to get the 28 f2.8 for a long time.

I always preferred my 28 on my Leicas, and then got a 21 for my

Olympus, which completely superceeded the 28 for me. Then I dumped

everything. When it came time a couple of months ago to buy stuff, I

decided to split the difference and save money too, since I'm no

longer doing it for $$$, and bought a Voigtlander 25, which has

become my permanent "normal" lens, paired with the 50 in my pocket. My

decision was based partly on price, but also because I carry my camera

100% of the time on my arm under my jacket, and the 25 is really tiny.

 

<p>

 

I'd say you should do what's right for you. Different strokes for

different folks.

first a 35/2.8 summaron on a M3 then a 35/1.4 on a M4P, (what a

change), last year I got this 28/2.8 third gen, that I use with my M3

and a 28 finder, now insted of one camera I carry two the 35 and the

28, since my main lens has been 35, the 28 adds a lot without change

much on my prespective, I find very dificult to concentrate on

several lenses, I used to work with a 35 only.

I have use a 21 on my M3 when younger, but I´m old for that stuff.

I´m waiting for the oprtunity to put my hands on that new summicron.

28.