Is something wrong with 28mm FL?

[BobYIL]

These months what I note with the general interest in some preferred wide angles that people are talking primarily on some 35mm and 21mm lenses. Very few had mentioned about 28mm FL.. Is it phasing out?

I am aware of the fact that it has never been as popular as the 35mm FL however some great photographers come to mind who were using 28mm extensively. Salgado, for example.. Garry Winogrand, Sam Abell need to be mentioned.. Bruce Gilden too..

Both Summicron asphericals, 28/2 and 35/2 are great lenses; however I tend to believe as if for each 28mm one Leica is selling ten 35mm Summicrons.

I might be wrong, however this is what I found a little weird..

[filmfan]

You say that the 28mm lens has "never been as popular as the 35mm FL," yet you then find it "weird" that the less popular lens sells less than the more popular lens...

Personally, I find your question rather weird.

[sevo]

There has been a general tendency towards wider lenses in the past two or three decades (perhaps driven by wide-screen cinema and now TV formats), so that many now use 35mm as a "wide normal" - which reduced 28mm from "first strong wide in the series" to "not wide enough to warrant owning".

[tic]

I more often use 35 than the 50/28 combo. And I agree that for wide use 21 or wider is more spectacular. That said, if I had a Leica or ZI with 28mm framelines and and Elmarit 28, I would be very happy. I also note that the wide lens for Fuji X1 pro is 28mm equivalent.

For me one of the pros with 28mm is that its wide but still fairly free from the natural geometric distortion of wider focal lengths.

[mdarnton]

I think I said this a couple of weeks ago when the topic came up, but my go-to combination 35 years ago when I was a news photographer was 28/50. At the time, Leica didn't have a 24, I don't think, just a 21, and the 21 was my "special" wide lens for unusual situations. These days it's 24/50 on Nikons, the 50 is feeling a bit long, and my 20 gets no use at all. 24/35 would make sense, but I can't bring my self to depend on 35mm as my "long" lens. I'm thinking that one of those 14/2.8 Samyang lenses would be nice to have--I had a 15mm Voigtlander until about five years ago and it got a lot of use.

In my case, it's a change in my personal space--I stand a lot closer to things than I used to. Maybe everyone is. . . . we definitely are living in more "in your face" times, I think.

[Paul Luscher]

I shoot with both, but for street shooting , I tend to use to 35mm. 28mm often requires getting in too close for comfort in order to fill the frame, 35mm allows you to fill the frame without becoming an annoyance. Also, just enough depth of field to compensate for any minor focusing errors,and for zone focusing, as opposed to a 50mm.

[andersju]

I think it's like sevo said. I know many PJs use a 24mm as their standard wide lens - or even standard lens - these days. Notice how Nikon and Canon have fancy 24/1.4 and 35/1.4 lenses but no current 28/1.4. To me 24mm feels a bit too extreme for a standard wide, often used for cheap effect. 28mm feels just right for a wide-angle, and I'm glad Ricoh is still around with their GR cameras.

[furcafe]

Per others, 35 has become the "new 50" or normal, @ least for RF users. In the wider (no pun intended) photographic world, 24 has supplanted 28 as the most popular wide (mostly, IMHO, because so many people are shooting crop-factor dSLRs).

If Leica decides to upgrade the M8 & keep a crop-factor body in their lineup, that might boost popularity for the 28s.

[BobYIL]

Originally Posted by filmfan

You say that the 28mm lens has "never been as popular as the 35mm FL," yet you then find it "weird" that the less popular lens sells less than the more popular lens...

Personally, I find your question rather weird.

Before it was only 135 format, i.e. what FF is called today and apparently 35 was more popular than the 28.. With the new crop formats like the M8 and APS-C, the 28mm FL should mean different than what it used to do before, for it's not the coverage of 28mm anymore.. Capito?

[jsrockit]

On rangefinders it could be due to framelines... lack of framelines or them being to close to the edge of the VF for many people.

[Bob Michaels]

Then there are those who just do not care what is most popular with the rest of the world and use what works for us. That happens to be 28mm for me but I understand other people have other choices. My choice may be different in a few years, just as it was many years ago.

[VinceC]

My SLR photojournalism lenses were 24/50/85/180. When I discovered RFs in the late '80s there weren't any reasonably priced Nikon RF lenses in the 24/25mm range, and they anyway required a separate finder. So I settled for the 28mm and slowly grew to prefer it over all the other focal lengths for its ability to let you immerse yourself into a scene without showing much distortion. So then the superwide was a 21mm Biogon. But the lens always mounted on my SP or S3 is a 28mm, with the others in a bag. I only use the 35mm for lowlight work because of its speed. If I truly must carry only one lens, I go back and forth between 50 and 35mm. I just never warmed up to 35mm.

[KoNickon]

Originally Posted by filmfan

You say that the 28mm lens has "never been as popular as the 35mm FL," yet you then find it "weird" that the less popular lens sells less than the more popular lens...

Personally, I find your question rather weird.

Being snarky is not helpful. The point he's making is that a lot of excellent photographers use the 28mm focal length, so why is 35mm that much more popular? And the others have contributed thoughtful responses to the OP.

[David Hughes]

Originally Posted by jsrockit

On rangefinders it could be due to framelines... lack of framelines or them being to close to the edge of the VF for many people.

I'll second that and add that I wish I could afford a 28mm and VF for my M2. Although the 28mm, USSR made Orion is very nice and guessing works well for me.

Regards, David

[michaelbialecki]

I love the 28mm focal length........it used to be my primary lens......but that has changed ever since I bought the 35mm/1.2.....my 28mm lens is an Elmarit which is a little "slow" but I love it......

I use it often on my m6ttl but I do occasionally use it on my m2 and I use the whole finder as "frame lines", it works fine for me.....

cheers, michael

[zwarte_kat]

Originally Posted by andersju

28mm feels just right for a wide-angle, and I'm glad Ricoh is still around with their GR cameras.

Had to make sure this camera line was mentioned. The GRD is the camera that doesn't give a F about what people not worthy of it think about 28mm FOV. Now everybody who said bad things about 28mm go wash your mouth and send a letter of apology to Ricoh.

I once cursed my GRDIII, and have been tormented by nightmares about Ricoh discontinuing the GRD ever since, in which hordes of Japanese pro photographers are chasing me, shouting that it was all my fault.

I have also been seeing (what are hopefully) hallucinations of Ricoh employed ninjas, keeping an eye on me when I walk the streets of Tokyo. With the stealth capabilities of the GRD line, I am now convinced that Ricoh is a former ninja clan evolved to a camera company.

Then again, that 21mm conversion lens for the GRD is pretty neat. If they would release a 25mm (FOV) GRD with 1,6 crop sensor, then that would rock!

I think I saw something black moving outside my window. No, ninjas don't exist, or should I call the police? If they wou

[taylan]

Originally Posted by David Hughes

I'll second that and add that I wish I could afford a 28mm and VF for my M2. Although the 28mm, USSR made Orion is very nice and guessing works well for me.

Regards, David

I'll be third that I wish I could afford too . Actually 28mm is my favorite angle and the only lens I had being used with my SLR during 5 years before switch to my M2+cron 35 V1.

[Teuthida]

I never could get on with a 28. Seemed too wide, while the 35 seems wide but normal. Of course, this preference was developed while shooting film. the 28 on my m8 is just right.

[mfogiel]

I find the 28 to be a great lens for shooting in the street - if you can get close and compose, you get a lot of stuff in, if you want to be stealthy, you just shoot from the hip. I use both the Summicron 28 and the Ultron 28/1.9 (this one for landscape), as well as GR1 for shooting on the road.

Summicron 28

20105107 by mfogiel, on Flickr
Ultron 28/1.9

20102404 by mfogiel, on Flickr
Ricoh GR1

20120509 by mfogiel, on Flickr

[kanzlr]

Interesting that you prefer the ultron for landscapes, why that?

[back alley]

i recently sold my 28 and do not miss it.
much prefer a 21 and have just bought today another 25 to give it a try.
i really like the 21 (on the rd1, so a cropped sensor) as it forces me to get in close and really look at what's in the frame.

[kzphoto]

I have used a 28 and a 24mm in the past. I find the 24mm to be a bit more "liberating," personally. It makes composition a bit more dynamic/sweeping and it doesn't feel as restricted as a 28mm. When I shoot the 28mm I find that I want to put more things into the frame, rather than trying to use what available space I have.

I like a 28mm lens on a RF, but not on an SLR. I'll shoot a 24mm on an RF or an SLR. Different strokes for different folks / cameras, I suppose.

[mfogiel]

I like the Ultron 28/1.9 (not the 28/2) for its low contrast/high resolution rendering, which makes it an ideal B&W lens for extended grayscale - similar to DR Summicron or the Summaron. However, when I need a 28mm for shooting in low light, the Summicron is king, as it has no coma even wide open.

[FrankS]

I very much like the 28 on both SLR and RF. I have the Canon ltm 28 2.8 and 3.5.

[gavinlg]

Love the 28mm. Just bought a Contax biogon 28mm for my G1 in fact.