28mm+ 50mm/35mm

N

Nebular89

Messages
245
Edit My Images
No
Currently I have a Fuji XT2 with a 35mm f2, 50mm equivalent. I prefer primes and don’t like switching lenses. At the moment the majority of the photos I take are family holidays, days out in a documentary/candid style.
But love the 50mm but it’s too tight for indoors.
I can’t make up my mind between getting a 35mm and leaving it on the camera or getting a 28mm for indoors/tighter locations, cropping down to a 35mm when required and switching between the 50mm for outdoors.
I’d always been against the 28mm until I went away last year and was using my phone which I think is a 28mm equivalent and the 50mm on my camera. I got a lot of photos on both that I liked but I was switching between the 2 a lot. I can’t justify a second camera just for a 28mm lens.
 
At the root of your dilemma is the truth that you can never have everything, and that you can agonise too much.

On full frame (hence no confusing talk about 'equivalents'), I could live with a 35mm as my only lens. Or if I was to have a pairing, it would likely be a 50 and something in the 20's - a 24, 25 or 28mm. There will always be compromises, but simplicity is a virtue and one learns to go with the flow.
 
Last edited:
I tend to agree with the 35mm argument - however for 2 carry-round primes (I have zoom lenses also) on my Nikon Xf I use a 40mm and a 20mm.
 
I think things get confusing and even misleading when using FF terms or focal lengths on crop format cameras. I still struggle with APS-C and smaller format focal lengths so I think in 35mm FF terms and then translate everything back to the smaller format. It may sound even more confusing but it works for me.

I always raise an eyebrow when people talk about 50mm's on smaller formats as on APS-C 50mm x 1.5 = 75mm equivalent which is much tighter than 50mm on FF and that goes for 35 and 28mm too when used on smaller formats as... 50mm = 75mm on APS-C, 35mm = 52,5mm and 28mm = 42mm making none of there particularly wide and even 24mm = 36mm on APS-C so for equivalents we have to look considerably wider.

When looking at indoor shooting presumably in tighter spaces and when I guess still wanting to get more of a subject in and / or some context then
I think you're better off looking at (with the FF equivalent in brackets)

23mm (34.5mm)
18mm (27mm) or
16mm (24mm) or...
Maybe make the whole thing easier and buy a FF camera :D

But no. Don't listen to me about FF :D Go for a 16, 18 or 23mm APS-C lens and preferably a f1.4 or f1.8.
 
On a recent trip to Turkey on my FF body I took my 35mm, 50mm and 85mm lenses along with a GoPro. On each morning I would check the type of places where I was going to visit and based on that would put the appropriate lens on and not carry anything else.

So if it was a historic place then it would be the 35mm to have some of the scene. If it was the beach then I would look to shoot portraits and take the 85mm.

Never was I changing lenses on the actual day.

If I had to really really save weight then I would just take the 35mm.
 
droj said:
At the root of your dilemma is the truth that you can never have everything, and that you can agonise too much.

On full frame (hence no confusing talk about 'equivalents'), I could live with a 35mm as my only lens. Or if I was to have a pairing, it would likely be a 50 and something in the 20's - a 24, 25 or 28mm. There will always be compromises, but simplicity is a virtue and one learns to go with the flow.
Click to expand...
Yea that is the problem! I just ordered one of those cheap 7artisans 18mm pancake lenses for £50 so I’ll get a feel for the focal length. I also remembered that I have an old 35mm slr with a 35mm lens in the cupboard. I don’t use film anymore but I can at least look through the viewfinder and get an idea vs the 28mm.
If the difference is negligible then I’ll probably get a 28mm and just crop when required.
 
Stephen L said:
I tend to agree with the 35mm argument - however for 2 carry-round primes (I have zoom lenses also) on my Nikon Xf I use a 40mm and a 20mm.
Click to expand...
Try to avoid zoom lenses, as my original post probably shows I getting choice paralysis! It’s a lot easier for me to pick a focal length and go out with it. Probably why the 35mm appeals to me as a single lens
 
23mm (35mm equivalent) is my favourite focal length on Fuji - it probably isn't a coincidence that is also the focal length of the X100 series. Having the 23f2 almost permanently on my X-T2 was the main reason I bought an X100V, as I was getting the same thing in a smaller package. Rather than duplicating focal lengths, I swapped the 23f2 for a 35f1.4, which I use with my other Fuji bodies, but if I wanted only one lens it would be 23mm.
 
Nebular89 said:
the majority of the photos I take are family holidays, days out in a documentary/candid style.
Click to expand...

Ricoh GRiii - 28mm with in-camera 35mm & 50mm options? :)
 
Craikeybaby said:
23mm (35mm equivalent) is my favourite focal length on Fuji - it probably isn't a coincidence that is also the focal length of the X100 series. Having the 23f2 almost permanently on my X-T2 was the main reason I bought an X100V, as I was getting the same thing in a smaller package. Rather than duplicating focal lengths, I swapped the 23f2 for a 35f1.4, which I use with my other Fuji bodies, but if I wanted only one lens it would be 23mm.
Click to expand...
I did take the 23mm f2 to Disneyland as my only lens about 5 years ago and it worked well. I ended up selling it for the 35mm f2 but I’ve been more into the slightly wider side lately.
If I go with the 23mm f2 I’d probably trade the 35mm f2 and get a cheap ish zoom lens, 16-50 kind of thing. I don’t like zooms that much but I also do landscape a lot. I’ve always used primes before but a cheap zoom would be handy
 
Nebular89 said:
I did take the 23mm f2 to Disneyland as my only lens about 5 years ago and it worked well. I ended up selling it for the 35mm f2 but I’ve been more into the slightly wider side lately.
If I go with the 23mm f2 I’d probably trade the 35mm f2 and get a cheap ish zoom lens, 16-50 kind of thing. I don’t like zooms that much but I also do landscape a lot. I’ve always used primes before but a cheap zoom would be handy
Click to expand...

Be aware that cheap zooms might be f3.5-5.6 or something like that and those apertures can be limiting especially on a crop system. I know that f2.8 zooms are probably going to be bigger, heavier and more expensive but they do give you more flexibility both for light gathering and control of depth.
 
Nebular89 said:
Is there any merit to using a 28mm and just cropping to 35mm when required?
Click to expand...

Are you talking about a 28mm lens or a 18mm lens giving a FF equivalent FoV of about 28mm?

Remember that a 28mm lens on your APS-C camera is like a 42mm lens on FF. 18mm would make more sense to me on APS-C is you are looking to get a wider FoV for indoor use.
 
I don't think there's a lot wrong with cropping but I suppose we are throwing away image size and possibly introducing additional magnification and that can have a real effect. A lot will hang on how the picture is going to be viewed. If it's mostly going to be viewed on a screen or as a print at a more or less normal viewing distance then perhaps even a heavy crop can still work well enough.

For example I'm happy enough with a 100% crop ending up as 1,000 to 1,500 pixels wide from a picture which starts out 6,000 pixels wide. I find a crop like that still looks ok viewed on a screen at a "normal" viewing distance.
 
woof woof said:
Are you talking about a 28mm lens or a 18mm lens giving a FF equivalent FoV of about 28mm?

Remember that a 28mm lens on your APS-C camera is like a 42mm lens on FF. 18mm would make more sense to me on APS-C is you are looking to get a wider FoV for indoor use.
Click to expand...
Yes I’m talking equivalents, so I’m looking at either 28mm or 35mm on full frame
 
I have settled on 28/50 combo for my prime usage, I sold my 35 prime lens as it didn't get any use.

I could use crop modes on the 28mm and use it as a 35mm, but that rarely happens - I prefer the 28mm look.
 
Nebular89 said:
Is there any merit to using a 28mm and just cropping to 35mm when required?
Click to expand...

It's a LOT easier than using a 35 and stitching to get a wider FoV!
 
If I'm going out with one prime it's always the 16mm F2.8. I'm guessing it's not a popular choice, but it works for me.

I had the 27mm pancake for many years, and it was a great lens IMO, but for how my eye works I would often be frustrated with it's lack of width.
 
dancook said:
I have settled on 28/50 combo for my prime usage, I sold my 35 prime lens as it didn't get any use.

I could use crop modes on the 28mm and use it as a 35mm, but that rarely happens - I prefer the 28mm look.
Click to expand...
That’s what I’m considering. I had a 35mm 5 years ago. I sold it because I missed the 50mm but that’s too tight unless I’m in a pretty open area, beach etc.

The other reason to get the 35mm is that cropped to a square it’s the same as an 80mm on 6x6 medium format. I used a TLR a lot a few years and miss having that look. Being able to to do that in camera would be nice
 
Nod said:
It's a LOT easier than using a 35 and stitching to get a wider FoV!
Click to expand...
Yea. Feel like it’s a head vs heart question lol. Head says 28mm, the crop is minimal to get to 35mm and I did sell the 35mm a few years ago.
 
Nebular89 said:
I did take the 23mm f2 to Disneyland as my only lens about 5 years ago and it worked well. I ended up selling it for the 35mm f2 but I’ve been more into the slightly wider side lately.
If I go with the 23mm f2 I’d probably trade the 35mm f2 and get a cheap ish zoom lens, 16-50 kind of thing. I don’t like zooms that much but I also do landscape a lot. I’ve always used primes before but a cheap zoom would be handy
Click to expand...
Even the cheap Fuji zooms are pretty decent. The 18-55 "kit" lens is my main lens for landscapes etc.
 
My go to is the A7Riii and 35GM - no question about it. I do have the 24GM and FE85 but the 85mm probably gets used in second place.

I also picked up an X100f at the beginning of this year which gets a lot of use :)

My film camera has always ran with 28mm and 50mm but only a week ago I managed to finally pick up a UK based Yashica ML35/2.8 ......

I think you know where my focal length preferences sit :)
 
LeeRatters said:
My go to is the A7Riii and 35GM - no question about it. I do have the 24GM and FE85 but the 85mm probably gets used in second place.

I also picked up an X100f at the beginning of this year which gets a lot of use :)

My film camera has always ran with 28mm and 50mm but only a week ago I managed to finally pick up a UK based Yashica ML35/2.8 ......

I think you know where my focal length preferences sit :)
Click to expand...
I am leaning towards the 35mm coupled with a cheap zoom. I’ve got that cheap 7artisans lens on the way so I can play around with 28mm
 
I wouldn't go cheap on the zoom. Not tried the short XC zoom but have had both the XC and XF mid range - the XF is well worth the extra IMO.
 
I was using 28 and 50 until recently. The main uses being family and documentary. The 50 was my favourite, but a bit tight for indoors. I got some great shots with the 28, but found it too wide to take out on its own. Have switched to just using a 35 and it seems to be working well so far. Less worry about which lens to use in a given situation. I keep a small 85 on hand if I know I’ll be doing more formal portraits.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top