View Full Version : 25 or 28 ?
back alley
03-02-2006, 13:22
i had planned, after selling off half of my canon gear, on buying the zm 28/2.8 lens.
the wider look has started to appeal to me more and i thought i had a few good shots from the canon 28.
but then talk turned to the 25/2.8 lens.
zeissfan speaks very highly of it and his blog has some very nice shots taken with it.
i started to wonder if the 25 was a better way to go, especially since my other zm lens is the 35.
25 & 35 or 28 & 35, which is a better combo?
would the 25 be 'better' for street shooting than a 28?
or would a 25 be harder to use on the move?
any discussion on this subject would help me in deciding.
thanks.
joe
billwheeler
03-02-2006, 15:28
From what I read about the new Zeiss lenses, the 25mm lens is supposed to be outstanding, one of the best if not THE best lens in the lineup, and would nicely compliment your 35mm lens. I'd go for the 25mm lens (or excellent 21mm lens!).
darkkavenger
03-02-2006, 15:37
my little finger says 25mm ... :)
Joe,
If you can "swing" it cost-wise, I would go with a 25/35 combo. I have a 28 CV for my Nikon system and like it. But I'd love a 25 instead.
Those 3mm make a "big" difference (espescially if you want to shoot both f/l's of the same subject).
back alley
03-02-2006, 15:41
any words of wisdom re. use of the wider lens.
i think the widest lens i ever owned was a 24 (tho i borrowed a 17-35 zoom once) and i recall lots of poor shots with it.
of course that was many moons ago and i was not then the shooter i am today. ;)
for once i am not too concerned about the cash. i sold enough gear last night to cover either lens + shade and maybe a domke 5xb bag.
Andrew Touchon
03-02-2006, 15:46
any words of wisdom re. use of the wider lens.
i think the widest lens i ever owned was a 24 (tho i borrowed a 17-35 zoom once) and i recall lots of poor shots with it.
of course that was many moons ago and i was not then the shooter i am today. ;)
for once i am not too concerned about the cash. i sold enough gear last night to cover either lens + shade and maybe a domke 5xb bag.
I would opt for the 25 since you already have the 35.
any words of wisdom re. use of the wider lens.
i think the widest lens i ever owned was a 24 (tho i borrowed a 17-35 zoom once) and i recall lots of poor shots with it.
of course that was many moons ago and i was not then the shooter i am today. ;)
for once i am not too concerned about the cash. i sold enough gear last night to cover either lens + shade and maybe a domke 5xb bag.
I have an 18-35 Quantary AF SLR lens. But I bought it for using on my D70 dSLR which has a lens factor of 1.5.
Never tried it on my SLRs at the widest - not quite a fisheye to be sure - but could get a bit "weird".
I think the 25 is about as low as I would go for general shooting - some might want 20 but not sure it would "work" for me given subject I like to shoot (such as builidings which already I have a conveging verticals problem at 35!).
Since you are CDN$ capable - buy the 25 and shoot it for a couple of weeks. You can always sell it (or trade in) for the 28 if you're not "satisfied".
back alley
03-02-2006, 15:50
...I think the 25 is about as low as I would go for general shooting...
maybe that's a better question...is the 25 too wide for general shooting?
joe
Joe,
I like the 35mm 25mm combo alot. Somehow I prefer the 35mm over 50mm and never warmed to 28mm lenses because the view is not that different from the 35mm that feet would not cover the difference. The 25mm will allow great shooting in tight spaces (backalleys?) and make for terrific landscape.
Ciao
Joerg
Huck Finn
03-02-2006, 15:53
Joe, Bill Wheeler is correct about the reputation of the 25. When I was in New York at the Zeiss Ikon exhibit, Erland Pettersson of Hasselblad told me that the 25/2.8 Biogon is the best lens in the line-up in terms of resolution, which seems to be consistent with their posting on the Zeiss website today. However, I understand your dilemma. You've got those nice 28 frame lines built in, so why not take advantage of them? Actually, I wonder if you can learn to use the 28 framess with the 25 as a guide.
Huck
...I think the 25 is about as low as I would go for general shooting...
maybe that's a better question...is the 25 too wide for general shooting?
joe
Your first statement is the correct one.
I don't think you'll regret going for the 25. As I said above, lower than that gets into "specialty" needs (IMHO). But I think that a kit with a 25 has a solid "foundation" lens. Your can top off at 85/90 or 105/135 depending on system and desire - but I don't think you'll ever regret having a 25 instead of a 28 at the bottom.
darkkavenger
03-02-2006, 16:03
The 25 should be nice in situations with huge crowds and scenic captures. I think it's a nice addition to your 35mm :)
Nikon Bob
03-02-2006, 16:13
Joe
With my Nikon FM2n my favourite set of lenses was 24/35/85. I used the 24 indoors a lot and for scenics. I am trying a 28 for it's closer focussing and less distortion in the corners. You really have to watch out for camera tilt when using the 24 and I think the 25 Zeiss would be the same as opposed to the 28mm FL. If you like wide I would vote with the others for the 25mm.
Nikon Bob
I really like the look of the photos I took when we were in NYC with my CV 21. The only criticism I have of them is a common fault/error that I made that day, I wasn't close enough to my subject. The super wide angle lens is an intimate tool. Sure, you capture a whole lot of environment in your photos, but you have to be real close to make it really work. I am sure that 25 is not as drastic as 21, but it is a step closer than the 28. I like the thought of the 25, would love the opportunity to use one. Think in terms of what you see with your eyes when you are in a group of people or walking the streets. You know the view of a 28mm lens, can you see wider than that? Is it more natural for you? I think I tend to see generally wide, 28 or wider, or focused on something specific, 50mm.
I like the 25mm field of view. I think that the 25/35 combo is the better choice over the 28/35. Lots of people on here use the CV 25/Bessa L combo for street shooting and love it, so I'm sure the ZM 25/ZI combo would be awesome as well.
One way of testing the waters is to beg, borrow or steal a 24 or 25mm viewfinder and walk around with it. I recently acquired a 24mm lens and it is all very new but I really like the focal length. I think a 25/35/50/90 kit would be just perfect...
You can use the 28mm without an external finder. In practice, this is a huge advantage. Personally, I find it extremely annoying to change both the lens and the finder while out shooting, but it really depends on your shooting style.
I wouldn't get hung up on which lens is considered optically superior. To risk repeating an old saw, most of the iconic street photographs we know were taken with lenses that are crap by today's standards. The best camera/lens combo is the one that becomes an extension of your body. To me, an external finder adds bulk and slightly increases the time needed to take a photo.
Just my 2c...
back alley
03-02-2006, 16:37
for the zi it's gonna be a 25 or 28 and the 35 kit for now along with a canon 50 in there.
i have been walking around here with the zi in hand and looking through the finder with the 28 fl popped up and there is not radically more room around those framelines.
i think i could live with a 25.
tho it does seem a shame to waste those built in 28 fl.
and i just realized that stephen at cq takes paypal. i might just help the economy tonight and spread the buying around california.
joe
I don't want to confuse things here (but I'm sure I will)... my conventional thinking used to be that 28 is close enough to 35 that the natural choice would be to go to 24/25. So on my SLRs, I skipped 28 and went to ... well, I went to 21 cuz there was a deal I just couldn't refuse. But years later (like last year), I got a couple of 28s for the kit and whaddya know, 28 IS different enough from 35 that I was really surprised. It's not just field of view, it's perspective, and drawing.
So now I DON'T have a 24/25 and so I can't comment on how different it looks/feels from a 28. All I know is that for ME, 21 is really comfortable as a wide lens, and I THINK a 24/25 would not give me a wide enough FOV and feel now that I am addicted to the 21. I consider 35 pretty normal for a lot of situations, 28 "wide-normal", and 21 wide. 42 is "longish-normal" and 50 is the close to "telephoto normal"/lens for isolating stuff and for presenting the eye's natural view without peripheral vision.
If I had this choice, I'd be in a real quandry because the 25 seems such a stellar lens. My suspicions is you won't be getting a 21 for the ZI, so 25 would be almost the default choice. And yes, 25 is a good street shooter. But that extra 3mm of FOV means taking more care in framing. Street shooting is about context, but too much context can reduce visual impact.
OK, I'll shut up and hope you're not more uncertain than before. :bang:
back alley
03-02-2006, 16:55
now you've done it earl...i'm gettin' a 50!
;)
ROTFLMAO!!! When in doubt ... punt!
Dissenting voice:
Move in small increments. Get the 28mm now. Your camera is framed for it, and it's not a radical difference from a 35. It gives you just that little extra ability to see around corners without looking like a funhouse mirror.
Add the 25mm when finances permit. In my book, that's a "Blue Moon" focal length. But then, I find a 40mm to be shortish.
Please take me with a grain of salt.
Why not a 25/40 combo ?
On the other hand, if you are using the Bessa R2 or 2A, 28 will not cost you another viewfinder (viewing the whole viewfinder).
back alley
03-02-2006, 17:04
all input appreciated.
i'm hoping for a pov different from mine to spark some insight/new thought to help with the decision.
joe
billwheeler
03-02-2006, 17:11
Certainly when it comes to camera equipment, nothing has to be forever. As another member pointed out, if you find out that you do not like the 25mm lens or using the auxiliary finder, you could sell it and purchase the 28mm lens. If you were to use zone focusing on the street, by the way, you could simply bring the auxiliary viewfinder to your eye when a picture presents itself, without having to look through the built-in viewfinder on the camera, frame, and shoot.
28mm and 35mm are kind of close in my opinion. I would get the 25.
By the way, I have the Voigtlander CV 25mm and it is so easy to zone focus and snap away. I really like this focal lens and think that the 25/35 combo is almost perfect (for my street shooting at least).
I find 25 to be a very "natural" focal length. To me, it seems to be about as much of a view as I normally take in with my field of vision, without moving my head. I do wear glasses, so that makes my field a view a bit smaller. That makes the 24/25mm a good fit with interiors and urban areas. I tend to only want to go wider (I've used 21 in RF and 17 in SLR) in architectural situations or to open up very constricted spaces.
There is a noticeable difference between 35-28-25. I think on a Zeiss Ikon it would be pretty easy to frame a 25 without always using a separate finder. If you use the framelines switch to see the difference between 35 and 28, then you can visualize adding about the same amount to the outside of the 28mm frameline.
Joe,
Get the ZM 28 AND the CV 25 ;)
Joe, 21/28/50. That's all I'll say.
Go with your gut/heart. You can't go wrong there. You can always sell the 25 if it is too wide and get the 28.
Joe,
Get the ZM25 and the CV 28! :)
If it was one or the other, I'd get the ZM 25.
VictorM.
03-02-2006, 17:35
If the choice is between 25 and 28, get the 25. My experience has taught me that doubling the focal length is ideal; i.e.: 21/40/85 or 25/50/100. You get the idea.
For me, the 28 is my goldilocks lens. I had a cv 25 (a little too wide) and a cv 35 (not quite wide enough), so I finally bought a cv 28 and it is just what I was looking for. So much, that now I feel like I might need a camera with 28 framelines (like the Ikon!). I'm using it on my Leica iiig with the CV 28/35 minifinder. With both sets of framelines in the same finder, I am constantly reminded why I am glad I have a 28.
Joe,
Since you're in a buying mood, why not go really different and try 21, 40, 75? I read
that Puts really liked the Zeiss 21 and you WILL get a 40 for your pristine CL and then go
all out and get the new 75 cron ASPH. Or maybe the CV 75 or the Zeiss 85.
Heh, heh! :D
And you won't have framelines for any of them (21, 40, 75)! A real test of skill.
Sell it all and buy into Contax mount RFs.
back alley
03-02-2006, 18:05
you guys are gettin' whacky!!
i just sent an email to stephen at cq re getting the 25.
i'll just wait for a reply now...
joe
As of late, I've been shooting a 28mm equivalent on a 645 camera and the 28 Hexanon M on a KH rangefinder. Seems significantly different than 35 to me. Never really have to worry about parallax with 35. 35 reads as intimate to me and 28 as expansive. With the 28's I will often correct distracting parallax with photoshop before printing. I love the extra wide view and strong perspective of the 28's and having the built in framelines is sweet. However fixing parallax on exposures with a 25 would be easy enough.
-s-
VictorM.
03-02-2006, 18:26
"you guys are gettin' whacky!!"
Moderator: this post is offensive! Please delete.
back alley
03-02-2006, 18:34
"you guys are gettin' whacky!!"
Moderator: this post is offensive! Please delete.
are you serious?
that was my best david letterman impression...;)
VictorM.
03-02-2006, 18:38
OK...I'll add a smiley: :confused:
Joe Brugger
03-02-2006, 18:40
Can you drag out a stack of your favorite prints and near-misses, to analyse which focal lengths you used and evaluate whether something wider would have been better for the moment?
The best reason to buy another lens is that photos are getting away from you. :)
With a CLE, I have 28/40/90 available but keep thinking about a 25 -- leave a 28 on there long enough and it feels like a normal.
There should be enough finder visible around the outside of the frame lines that an auxialiary finder isn't mandatory.
25 is about the level where you start getting into extreme tilts and dramatic perspective. Reflex cameras are nice for 20s and 24s if you need to see that before you shoot.
At the end of the day - what I want is for this darned contest to come to an end. My Nikkor 5.0cm has been on the Bessa R2S so long now that it's starting to fuse to the body! :eek:
Can't wait to start using my Nikkor 3.5cm and CV 28mm again.
Curses to you HCB!!! :D
Oh wait a minute - I get it now. They killed the pic upload so us late in the day folks cannot get into the contest! :mad:
Fix is in! Fix is in! :D
Joe,
For what it's worth I think you made the right choice. I had the 28/1.9 and 25/4; really liked using both - one with a bit of extra width, and one with a bit of extra speed. Some of my all time favourites are from the 25 though, so in the end I sold both and bought the 25/2.8 as a one lens compromise. Two CV 25mm shots attached just to show you not to be scared by that extra 3mm.
Tom
Hoot (and maybe others) make a good point about need for a separate finder with anything wider than 28mm. This is the widest I have with my RF. For my SLRs, I have down to 12mm rectilinear. I find this extremely useful for interiors, which I do a lot of for my work, but you really need to hold the camera vertical, or else be prepared to straighten things up in post.
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.