What's new
DPR Forum

Welcome to the Friendly Aisles!
DPRF is a spin-off of dpreview. We are a photography forum with people from all over the world freely sharing their knowledge and love of photography. Everybody is welcome, from beginners to the experienced professional. From smartphone to Medium Format.

DPRF is a community for everybody, every brand and every sensor format. Digital and film.
Enjoy this modern, easy to use software. Look also at our Reviews & Gallery!

Zeiss 35mm vs. Zeiss 28mm

G

Guest

I've owned a G1 for about 4 years, generally happy with it. I have a 35mm Planar and a 90mm. The 35mm, for me, is a wonderfully versatile lens, and I've found, when travelling, the 90 rarely gets taken out of the bag.

My question concerns the 28mm. I've found, on occasion, that the 35mm just isn't wide enough for photographing some architecture, cathedral ceilings, landscapes, that sort of thing. In most instances, yes, but sometimes, no. So, I'm thinking of buying a used 28mm. Any thoughts or comments on this lens? Is the field of view noticeably larger than the 35, or am I wasting my money for a minor difference? I love the 35, but I would really like something to capture 'large' scenes.

By the way, I live near Tokyo, and, just for everyone's info, I can pick up a used (mint) 28mm for about 26,000 yen (about $215 USD). Cheers.

Mark
 
Mark, the 28mm lens and the G make a great combination, and for me is a favorite for travel. For the purposes you describe, you will not waste your money but will be rewarded.
William
 
> [Is there a significant difference that you've noticed between the 28 and the 35? I guess what I'm getting at is will I like the 28 enough that my 35 will sit in the bag with my 90, or is the difference between the two not so huge? Many thanks!]
 
Mark, the difference depends on your photography. For me there IS a significant difference for inside shots (say cafe) and architecture (say narrow streets in Paris). It really depends on the "space" you operate in. For general use the 35mm may be better.
William
 
> William, many thanks! Your view is precisely the kind of feedback I was looking for. I've decided to pick up the 28 because it was precisely the kind of shot you mentioned that I had always found 'just out of range' of the 35. Mark
 
I think the ideal set of lenses for the G is the 28-45-90. I have the 45 & 90 and will get a 28 later this year. I had 35-50-90 Summicrons when I shot with Leica M4s, but I would use a 28 or 21 when I needed them. I feel the 28 is a better choice for the G since the 'normal' lens is 45mm rather than 50mm.

I shot the Chicago Auto Show one year with two M4s, one with negative color pushedto 1200, the other with HP-5 pushed to 1200. I used only a 21 Super Angulon and the 35 Summicron. Rangefinder cameras are great with lenses of these focal lengths.

I do use my 90 a lot - it is great for portraits.

Jim
 
My opinion (for what it is worth) is that the 35 and the 28 are pretty close together. I would prefer to have the 21, 35 and 90 as an ideal set.
28, 45 and 90 will also do the job but if you really a wide angle addict (like me) you will prefer the 21 over the 28.

Marc-paul
 
The choice of wide angle lenses seems to be a personal thing. I have never really liked 35mm, preferring to go with 28 or 24 on SLR cameras. I did have the 35 Summicron for my M4s, but I usually used a borrowed 21mm.

For the G2 I have the 28, 45,and 90. I will not get the 35, but my next lens will definately be the 21.

What counts is that what ever lens set you get produces the results you desire.

Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top