Masters of 28mm

[Sanford]

<p>"Guys" can and is used to refer to both sexes in modern colloquial English. OK girl? BTW, I prefer to be referred to as "stud".</p>

[john_r._fulton_jr.]

<p>Jeeze, Jenny, right. I think there have been many worse conversations around here than this one about the little ole 28mm lens. I take it you're not a fan of the 28? Or was it something we said?</p>

[kparratt]

<p>It is quite understandable that Jenny Jaques is put off by the macho terminology. I am too. Edelstein's chauvinistic response may well rally the support of a mob in a cowboys' pub, as with his prowess on "modern colloquial English". So be it. However, were any of you to address a group of people on any subject, including photography, anywhere in the UK, Europe, Scandinavia or Australia and New Zealand, with "you guys", or other language equivalents, the response would be cool to say the least. A university student audience would let you know in no uncertain terms that it was unacceptable. There is also a decent slice of educated America who would know what I'm talking about. What many of you imagine as 'modern' in the US, is actually archaic in the modern civilised world. You are way behind the times on this one.</p>

[wayne_leung1]

<p>Hi Kevin, sorry but I'm not sure I agree with you. I am a university student in Australia and we do communicate in that way here in Australia and it's socially acceptable here. We even use 'you guys' when addressing a group of girls. I guess the culture might be a little different where you and Jenny live? Sorry that you feel offended.</p>

<p>Regards<br /> Wayne</p>

[georg_s1]

<p>Staying off-topic:<br>

english is not my first language, not even my second - so what's a proper term of address here at photo.net:<br>

- Hi everybody, ...<br>

- Ladies and gentlemen, ...<br>

- Dear fellow photographers, ...<br>

- Dear photo.netters, ...<br>

(assuming „Guys and gals” is out for now)<br>

It's a honest question.<br>

Kind regards, Georg!</p>

[g-man1]

28 and 35 have different perspectives.

Zooming with your feet is akin to cropping.

Not the same.

[kparratt]

<p>Thank you Wayne for the response. Well, I too am Australian, but save for a few visits, have been in Norway and the UK since 1992. I guess, from what you say, there has been a linguistic flip, a swing of the pendulum, because anything with roots in sexism was severely purged back then. Australia, I admit has it's own humour, and manner of speech. It is easily misunderstood. In my first years here as a foreigner, things I said often drew blank looks. But I won't go further off on a rant, just say thanks again for the clarification, and I stand corrected.</p>

[john_kwok]

<p>Hi Everyone,<br>

Am surprised no one has mentioned Magnum photographer Bruce Gilden, who has worked almost exclusively with a Leica M rangefinder camera and a 28mm lens for years. Until he opted to go wider, Lee Friedlander frequently used a 28mm lens (His favorite lens now is the Zeiss 20mm Biogon f4.5 ZM lens; I know this since I ran into him at a Foto Care holiday party last December and we started talking about our favorite optical tools.).</p>

[kbg32]

<p>William Klein. <br /> "" Klein employed a wide-angle lens (28mm), fast film, and novel framing and printing procedures to make images in a fragmented, anarchic mode that emphasized raw immediacy and highlighted the photographer\'s presence in the scene."</p>