who uses a 28mm as a primary lens?

Discussion in 'Leica and Rangefinders' started by jonten 10, Feb 12, 2006.

  1. I know this has probably been asked before in one from or another.
    But I cant get thought all of the threats in this forum and I
    would perfer first hand info anyway. The reson I'm inquireing is
    about this is because i just had to try a 28mm lense for myself.

    It seemeed like a necessary step for me.

    For the record I went out and purchased a vc 28mm 1.9 ultron lense.
    and just for the record ,it seems to me like it isa well made produc.

    IM am not looking for approval, just wondering how many photographers
    think , like I d0 lately , that a 28mm lense is the ideal ,everyday
    focal lenth?

    Thanks inadvance.
     
  2. My brother used one for years. Way too wide as a standard for me.
     
  3. I have used 28mm as my every day lens for SLRs before I got my M6.

    I do like the general use of 28mm and while the focal length wasnt too
    comfortable on my M6 I opted for the 35mm focal length. I've grown used
    to a slight crop in the M6 while opening it up a little in the SLR to maybe let myself "see more".
     
  4. It depends on what subject you like to photograph. I use one as the primary in many
    situations and the 50mm Summicron as secondary. I also have a 1.9 Ultron, but the quality of
    the 50mm Leica never fails to please. If I had seen better commitment to digital from Leica
    four years ago, I would have bought the 28mm Leica lens. It was also cheaper then. Lack of
    conveyed strategy from leica.
     
  5. I just attached a 28mm lens to my nikon slr camera to use as one camera/one lens outfit for a while (after shooting exclusively with a 20mm lens on that camera for a month or two). That said, for years my favorite "normal" focal length in lenses has been the 35mm lens.
     
  6. i use it as a standard lens, though i can't say it's my primary lens. i use 28, 35, and 50mm
    about equally. gary winogrand and sam abell are the only photographers i can think of
    that use(d) it as their primary lens.
     
  7. "threats in this forum ...."

    yes, i luv the 28mm. I use it daily now..
     
  8. I use a 28 just about all of the time- about 99.5% of the past 900 rolls I have shot were with a 28.
    That lens you got? I still say that it is amazing.
     
  9. I use more the elmarit 28 with the Summicro 35 asf.
     
  10. 28 is really useful, great for buildings, groups, cities - but I am thinking of getting a wider
    lens, Elmarit 24 ASPH as main wideangle, just that little bit wider. I still like 50 as standard
    - really great for people.
     
  11. Andrea, 03:10 a.m. very cool!<p> be innovative: nothing is primary. everyday's different,
    maybe shoot 28, think 50. maybe make 50 look like 28. now 75 that's really special, but
    it's hard to make it look like a 28.
     
  12. Yes and no. I've probably taken more pictures with a 28 (or 24/25) than any other focal length but then most of my work is street photography and a lot of it is "from the hip" where you need the depth of field of a 28.

    However for "normal" photography I find I need little other than a good 50. I'm starting to think I should sell everything but my 28 and 50's (I'll keep my 21 and 40 as my future Leica MD "28" and "50"). But then everyone is different.
     
  13. The 28mm is very useful. There are times I have used it as a primary lens, particularly when working in tight quarters in narrow European streets. It's for that reason I like .58 finders.

    You must be very careful, though. There is an old adage that "If your pictures are not good enough, you are not close enough", and it goes double for work with wide angle lenses. The 28mm is just wide enough, with just enough distortion, that careless composition can ruin your shots.
     
  14. I would add that a 28 used for all of one's photography would become monotonous after a while. I know for a fact that I use the 28 and 50 in close partnership. Even Winogrand started with a 35, switched to a 28 when he got bored, and then switched back to a 35. When asked for his reasons for preferring one over the other, he just shrugged and said he would switch when he got bored.

    I would go to a city with tight streets and huge historic buildings and shoot away with a 28. When I looked at the shots, they would all look alike. Throw in a 50 and a 21 or 15 and shoot away. Then you get all kinds of variety. Then your 50 becomes like a short tele and your 15/21 becomes your wide.
     
  15. Depends on the application that I anticipate I'll be facing. The 28/2 ASPH goes with me to every wedding because the "getting ready" shots are always done in more cramped areas, and rangefinder wides have less distortion than SLR/DSLRs. If traveling with a 3 lens kit, it's a 28,50,90 ... with the 28 always with me for street and interior "tourist" shots. Have always had a 28, and used it quite a lot ... including the pre ASPH, and the 28/1.9 V/ C version
    00FFuW-28171184.jpg
     
  16. That 28/1.9 V/C lens shocked me first time I used it. Great performance wide open IMO.
    00FFuc-28171384.jpg
     
  17. My primary lens is a 24/2.8.
    I could probably live with a 28mm as an everyday lens.
     
  18. I'm with you, Marc. I have both the 28/1.9 VC Ultron and the 28/2 Summicron. I was going to get rid of the Ultron when I got the Summicron and never did. I like it way too much to trade it in.
     
  19. It's strange how we "see" different angles of view and not others. I've never been comfortable using a 28. I can never seem to "see" the framing until I'm actually looking through the finder. I first tried a LTM Nikkor when a friend bought one back in the early 60's and Nikon was closing them out for about $60. Ten years or so later I picked up a 28mm Summaron complete with case, finder, and hood at a yard sale for $50 and about never used it. Next I bought the 28mm Rokkor for the CLE and it mostly stayed unused. My most recent attempt was a first edition black paint Elmarit that I picked up out of an estate sale and I ended up swapping it for a 21/3.4 Super Angulon and an M2 body.

    My standard lens for over 40 years has been the 35/2. It's like I look at a scene and the 35mm frameline is already ingrained in my brain. No thought required! I guess it's what you get used to as much as anything. The f/5.6 and f/3.5 28's of years ago weren't as useful as a 35/2. Maybe if that f/.9 Ultron had been available back then I'd have favored the 28 focal length. It's certainly not the extra coverage that puts me off because I've shot many of my best photos with a LTM 19/3.5 Canon (it was stolen) and now my 15mm Heliar gets more use than 21mm Super Angulon.
     
  20. Fabulous shots Marc!!
     
  21. The strange thing about 28s and 35s is this. I don't think the 28 covers that much more than a 35. Enough to make a difference, but not a whopping amount. The big difference seems to be the perspective. There is a big difference in perspective going from a 35 to a 28 and back.
     
  22. I do, and was convinced to do so by an online interview with the White House photographer, who does also. Its appeal is its ability catch people in situ (crucial in the Oval Office....) while not distorting those in the foreground.

    Besides, I just love the perspective.
    Ray Hull


    <img src=http://d6d2h4gfvy8t8.cloudfront.net/2148914-lg.jpg>
     
  23. Thanks for all the replies.
    I asked this question because I too have at one time, mostly used
    a 35mm summicron for my everyday lense, but it seems that the
    framing became too obvious, too predictable, and I think a 28mm
    focal lenth can be more creative, and at the same time be used as
    a normal-wide angle lense without over exaggerating the picture.


    I will keep my 35mm just the same!
     
  24. 28 and 50 on two bodies are my chosen weapons in NYC.
    00FGX7-28187384.jpg
     
  25. 28mm has been my standard lens since I began taking photos 25 years ago and I love it as a focal length, so much more varied photography with regards to composition is possible IMHO.

    My early pics were all using an slr but I'm interested in any member experiences with 28mm on a m body as to whether the difference between what you see and what you get is ever a problem, particularly at close range.

    I generally like to get in close with a 28mm and when I do this, what is at the edge of the frame becomes more important to me. I used to have an M6 but sold it because I was disappointed with the difference between what I saw and what I got. I am umming about buying the 28mm summicron m and an m4-p or m7 as a carry everywhere camera but this niggling concern has always prevented me from doing it.
     
  26. You might consider getting a 28mm for use with a digital M. With the multiplier (1.3 or thereabouts) it will be the widest lens that doesn't require a separate finder. 28mm x 1.3 = 36.4mm
     
  27. Me personally, I love the 28mm length. I use it along with the 40mm length, both Voigtlanders. The 24mm has too much distortion for me. The 50mm just a bit too long. The 40 widens it up just right for me and the 28 is great for street and landscape shooting. When I use a wide angle I like the background larger than what shorter focal lengths provide.
     

Share This Page