testingname Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 But with a twist: here's what I do --> <a href="http://www.photographlink.com/ slideshow.php">http://www.photographlink.com/slideshow.php</a> <br><br> I have an FM3a and 50mm 1.8 AFD, and most of those were taken with that combo. I rented a 24mm AIS for a paying job and loved it. Overall it's great to get that breathing room in the frame. It was very well built and felt like it could last decades if treated right. <br><br> Can you recommend which wideangle you'd get if you took the photos I take? <br><br>Thanks, Matt Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tree Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 I'd go with the 24mm --- next to the 50/1.4 it's my favourite lense for travel and street work. I find that the 20 gives too much distortion, and while that can be a useful effect, and when I had one I used it so rarely I eventually sold it off. Of course once in a while I wish I still had it, but that feeling soon goes away. ;-) The 28mm isn't too bad, but it isn't wide enough, IMHO, to bother getting on a prime lense. I have a Sigma 28-70/2.8 DF aspherical EX which is pretty good, but the impact of an image taken at 28mm isn't enough from the 50mm to make it worth while. If price is an issue, I'm pretty sure the 20mm lens is considerably more expensive than the 24mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jason michael Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 The 24mm would be the next lens I would pickup in your situation. 20mm can be tricky and I've personally never liked the 28mm focal length save for in a zoom. If you are interested in used you might go for an AI rather than an AIS as the wideangle AI lenses have twice as much throw in the focusing so rather than rotate say 90 degrees they rotate 180 degrees. Some people like this, others do not. With the FM3A I don't worry about fast focusing so more precise focusing is the priority (thus the AI wideangles). I too have an FM3A and I'm got a nice little AI collection going. Cheers, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbq Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 24mm if you get an AFD, 28mm if you get an AIS. Reportedly the 28/2.8 AFD isn't isn't that great. Of course, with unlimited budget there's always the 28/1.4 or the 17-35/28. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frank uhlig Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 Matt, first off, your website is highly inconvenient: I clicked on it, on "next", again, and again: all I saw was the frame numbers going up. In a little while I noticed there was more stuff underneath my screen, so i found your really small pictures eventually, but all marred by a copyright logo across their face. ... Bad webdesign , sorry! Nice pics, if I could just see them ... Now to wide angles: You have the 50mm. I (3 decades ago) went from there to 28mm. And had a good education for that focal length. Now I have a 20mm and am still learning. That slow deliberate progression was what I needed. Maybe you can fly directly to a 14mm rectilinear, and all in between to 50mm. Who knows? So I suggest the 28mm, and no wider one for at least 3 years, so you can really appreciate these lenses. and can learn how to use them all ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ken_schroeder Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 I like the 24 f2.8 AIS. I bought it to use when my 35mm (f2.8) was to tight. As much as I like the 24, I would not be without the 35, especially for group work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
conrad_hoffman Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 My first thought was along Frank's line- the usual stepping stone from 50 is 28. OTOH, I find 28 isn't quite wide enough for many things I like to shoot. The 20 is a speciallized lens that requires both knowledge and restraint. You'd love it, but it's too great a jump if all you have is a 50. You rented a 24 and liked it, so go with that and no wider. The world is swimming with used 28s so fill in the blank later if you feel a need. Personally, I waited far too long before trying a 35- it's now my favorite lens and I use it more than the 50. Everybody is different- I don't think I've ever shot a "keeper" with anything longer than 105 in 30 years of shooting! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vgoklani Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 It really depends on what you like. Each person has their own tastes. I have a 28mm f/2.0 AIS and a 20mm f/2.8 AIS. btw, if you compare the quality of color on slide film between the 28mm f/2 and 28mm f/2.8, there is a BIG difference!! I think the same is true for the 24mm focal length (with regards to the f/2.0 and f/2.8 lenses). It's true that a 20mm lens is a specialized focal length, and in an ideal world, you should have all three focal lengths. There is a 10 degree difference between the 20 and 24 mm focal lengths, and a 10 degree difference between the 24 and 28 mm focal lengths. So I think you will either have to get both the 20 and 28mm lenses, or a 24mm lens. The 28mm just isn't wide enough by itself, and sometimes the 20mm is just crazy. But they work well together. The 24mm is a good compromise. But I would highly recommend the f/2.0 if you do get one. The difference pays for itself in terms of quality. -V- Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andre_noble4 Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 Matt, your web looked o.k. to me, pictures didn't comeout small, but full screen in fact. One suggestion is you possibly? need a "return to main page" buttton on each page. Pictures are very nice, but I didn't get the overall intent for web site. Is it a portfolio, business card, brochure?, etc... Main page possibly needs more developing, and more info about you as photographer. Nice pictures, though. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbq Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 By the way, what about the 35/2 AFD? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot_n Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 If you only have a 50mm lens, I would advise getting a 35mm (and possibly an 85mm) before getting a 24mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
david_h._hartman Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 Of course I can recommend which wide angle lens to get first. It�s simple, get a 24/2.8. It�s just as simple to recommend the second and third, a 20/2.8 and a 28/2.0. My favorite it the 20/2.8 but I think the 24/2.8 is more useful especially if it�s your only wide angle. You already rent that lens and know you like it so do it! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd peach seattle, washi Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 I've never liked the 28mm focal length (as others have said, a personal thing). I like the 24 a bunch, and the 20 is a 'problem solver' when you really need it. Consider a 24/2.0 AIS. Mine has a bit of a problem with 'veiling flare' into the light (I've never shot the 24/2.8) but the f/2 is a very handy available light lens. Shooting at f/2 @ 30 (or 15 if you're gutsy / lucky / good) opens up some territory. I find 24mm to be the 'peripheral vision you're strongly aware of'. Wider (17, 18, 20) is the stuff that that catches your eye and makes you turn your head. (IMO) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hayward Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 I have a 24mm Sigma 2.8 AF, a Nikon 28mm 2.8 AFD, a 50mm 1.8 AF, and a number of longer lenses. I've owned two zooms that started at 28 and one that started at 35mm, and I almost never used them at the wide end. When I got the 28mm prime (sort of by accident) I found I could take some cool shots with interesting perspectives and used it much more than I did as part of a zoom. I had been looking for a good used 20mm and when I saw the 24mm Sigma at a good price I bought it. I don't find the 24mm vs. 28mm perspectives to be that different, but the 24mm has much more distortion. (That could be Nikon vs. Sigma, though.) As a result, I decided to sell the 24mm and posted it for sale in the Photo.net classifieds. When I sell it, I'll buy the 20mm. If you look at my portfolio - there are a few taken with 28mm (Cocoa Beach, Widenagle #2) at last one with the 24mm (Shades) and a number taken with the 50mm for comparison. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
douglas_green1 Posted June 22, 2003 Share Posted June 22, 2003 I've never understood the widespread dislike of the 28mm lens. It's my favorite focal length, along with anything from 90-105mm. To me, 28mm is the only length that can be used in a manner that either DOES give an exaggerated wide perspective, or DOESN'T if you don't want it to. 24mm ALWAYS does, and 35mm just seems near normal to me. I think that the 28mm focal length is the most versatile one out there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbq Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 Douglas: maybe 28mm is not loved because it is too wide to be normal, yet not wide enough to be a super-wide. But that's also its strength in my opinion: it's wide enough that it's obviously not a "normal" lens, yet it's normal enough to not overly distort the subject. It's a lens that makes you think, that makes you work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lex_jenkins Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 Wildlife and sports photographers would probably say they can't get enough telephotos. I suspect the limiting factor is their budget. Since I often shoot in tight spaces I can't get enough wide angles. I'd have one of each if I could afford it. A 17 or 18, 20, 24, 28, 35, even a 45. And, no, I don't want a 17-35mm zoom. Have you checked out the size and weight of that lens? Ridiculous. Actually frightening. I'd get that thing only if I was still a photojournalist, in which case I'd probably consider it a must. The 24mm is a great compromise between the 20 and 28. Many of the benefits of the 20 without the alignment and leveling problems. A bit more breathing room than the 28, tho' with the risk of more distorted looking objects at the edges and corners depending on proximity. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
holyexposures Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 Of course it depends on your individual preferences...and it seems like you've already decided on the 24... FWIW, when i had this dilema a couple months ago, i decided on the 28 for i think it's more well-rounded, and the Nikon AF-D 28 2.8 focuses down to about 10". It's a wonderful all-round lens. I don't like having to change lenses often. I find that I can leave the 28 on most of the time, only puting on the 50 when I need more light into the glass, or tighter perspective. Your kilometrage may vary... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chuck_greene Posted June 23, 2003 Share Posted June 23, 2003 Matt, For a wide angle I suggest a 24mm since you already know you like it. However if I was going to reccommend a lens to you based on the photos in your slideshow that I like I would reccommend a telephoto lens. The photos in your slideshow that really grabbed me all isolated the subject to some degree (like frames 11, 19, 29, 39), and telephotos make it easier to isolate the subject. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tcb.photo Posted June 24, 2003 Share Posted June 24, 2003 Hi Matt I see you've gotten lots of great answers to your question. Here's one I didn't see, The older Nikon 20-35mf/2.8 D af lens. When i was looking in this focal length area I found this lens to be a sharp and contrasty as any of the primes. Better, in fact, than some. It has a legendary reputation for quality. It is a pro grad lens and will allow you to cover that focal length with greater quality than any other zoom. For your type of street photography, the versatility of the expanded Vocal length migh be useful. Just a thought to add to all the other good advice you've received. I usually prefer prime lens my self, but this isone exception I make Happy shooting Rob "Life really is just a series of photographs" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicholas_yu Posted June 26, 2003 Share Posted June 26, 2003 This is just my opinion, however the last trip that I took I opted to take only my 50mm f1.4 and a borrowed 20 AIS. I had a blast! I did not feel that 20 was 'too wide'. Like Phil says, if your gonna go wide... GO WIDE! Nick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now