What is a 28mm lens good for?

AdClem · Nov 14, 2008

eddym said:
Well, you know what they say about opinions, but I'll offer mine anyway...
A 28mm lens has never pleased me. It's too wide for a normal and too long for a wide angle. I like a 35mm for a short normal, and a 24mm for a wide angle. For environmental portraits, I like the 35.
But we each have our own perspective, so shoot what pleases you.

Eddy, you dared to say what I was thinking. I've always thought the 28mm is neither fish nor fowl. Maybe the failing's on my part.

Stan160 · Nov 14, 2008

I'm another who has never been entirely comfortable with 28mm, even less so with 35mm.

I find 24mm and 50mm suits me well as a 2 lens kit, the only thing missing is that the 50mm often feels a little short. An 85mm is on the wish list for next year.

Ian

Sirius Glass · Nov 14, 2008

Use the 28mm lens for the interiors of buildings! Stand in the corner, hold the camera level => great photo of the room!

Steve

Tim Gray · Nov 14, 2008

I really like 28mm. It's great for people photos as long as your 3-4 feet away. Even closer is of course fine, but girlfriends tend to not like what it does to their noses and foreheads. It really goes great with a 50mm lens in my mind.

I find the close focussing limitations of 28mm on a rangefinder (.7m) keeps me mostly out of the danger zone of while photographing people. On SLR, I get myself into trouble more.

Paul Jenkin · Nov 14, 2008

It's a great prime lens - wide enough to cover most situations without too much distortion. I have a 24mm/f2.8 (which is a bit wider than I really like) but I carry it with my F100, 50mm/f1.8 and 85mm/f1.8. They come everywhere with me - quite compact and superb quality. It's a great start to a very useful all-round kit.

TheFlyingCamera · Nov 14, 2008

I had only 2 lenses for my Contax G1 when I went to Argentina - a 28mm and a 45mm. They both saw equal duty, and I wouldn't have been able to get a lot of shots I wanted without either one. I avoided doing portrait-y type work with the 28, unless it was a group shot or an environmental type portrait (street performer, etc). Having a relatively fast 28mm (f 2.8) meant I could get shallow depth of field to focus attention on my subject while still showing the environment around it. Because I like doing portrait type work of single individuals, I would find it rather limiting to have only a 28mm, but I know you like to shoot street-type work, so the 28mm is a good fit for you.

Polybun · Nov 14, 2008

JBrunner said:
http://www.jasonbrunner.com/gpan.html

Canon AE-1 28mm XP2

Heh, that man is giving you a look of "boy, if you come any closer with that camera, i'm going to shove it where the sun don't shine."

Uncle Bill · Nov 14, 2008

Big fan of the 28mm lens

I have become a big fan of the 28mm lens on a 35mm camera, comes down you can shoot in tight quarters and not have too much in the way of distortion. Downside regardless of brand, fast 28mm lenses are expensive.

Sirius Glass · Nov 14, 2008

Uncle Bill said:
Downside regardless of brand, fast 28mm lenses are expensive.

Not any more due to the D*****l Revolution.

Steve

Markok765 · Nov 14, 2008

Uncle Bill said:
I have become a big fan of the 28mm lens on a 35mm camera, comes down you can shoot in tight quarters and not have too much in the way of distortion. Downside regardless of brand, fast 28mm lenses are expensive.

My 28mm F2.8 lens was only $160, as I recall.

TheFlyingCamera · Nov 14, 2008

Marko- for 28mm, F2.8 is not all that fast. F2.0 and faster are considered fast lenses for 28mm. Canon makes an f1.8 28mm, and Nikon has an f2 28mm. When you get into the even wider lenses (24mm), both companies have an f 1.4 lens as well as the f 2.8 lens.

Tim Gray · Nov 14, 2008

Yeah, the Canon 28/1.8 isn't the best lens ever, but its not all that expensive. Nikon's 28/1.4 is, as is Leica's 28/2.

Polybun · Nov 15, 2008

oh a 28mm, thats just, good for nothing, nothing at all, companies sold those to fool people, yea, yea fool them. and umm, they are worth allot less than a real lens like a 50mm or a zoom, you should just give it to me for safe keeping. I'll find a use for it, i think, but you know a 28mm is pretty darn worthless, thats why you are going to give it to me, yea...

panastasia · Nov 15, 2008

Chaplain Jeff said:
Hello,

What CAN'T you do with the 28mm???

I recently acquired the 28mm I've always wanted - the Rokkor 28mm, f/2.0. It's supposed to be great - as I hear the Kiron version is also.

Jeff M

The MC Rokkor 28mm f/2.5 (not a typo - a special lens from the Minolta advanced systems division - hard to find) and the MC Rokkor 85 f/1.7 were my most used lenses for years. I gave them away not realizing their value today, especially the 85; they were top shelf for image quality. I now have a Canon AE-1 w/28 -100 zoom as a replacement.

A 28mm is good for photographing groups of people if you crop the ends of the frame where the distortion is noticeable (elongated heads and wide bodies)

I prefer MF for most of my work now but will occasionally use the 35mm camera for action shots. I miss the faster lenses for night photography - I wish I kept them.

Paul

narsuitus · Nov 15, 2008

For me, the 28mm lens is good when the 24mm is too wide and the 35mm is not wide enough.

Specifically, I find it very useful for scenic shots (landscapes, cityscapes, seascapes, etc.), interior and exterior architectural shots (especially the 28mm perspective control lens), large group portraits, and macro photography (mounted backwards on a bellows unit).

Ralph Javins · Nov 18, 2008

Good morning, Marko;

I think we are talking about opinions here. It is possible that I can speak with some credibility as one who has almost all of the lens local lengths that Minolta made for their manual focus SLR cameras. Some of the focal lengths have more than one maximum aperture rating.

The 28 mm length is a fine lens for interiors, landscapes, places where you do not have room to back up, and where the 35 mm is just not wide enough. Hold the camera level and watch the perspective. It is one of my most often used lenses in the wide angle series. In low light, I can use the f 2.0 version and do a reasonable job of focusing.

For head and shoulders, and for facial portraits, I prefer to use an 85 mm or 100 mm lens. I have also used a Vivitar 90 mm Series One lens here. The Tamron 90 mm SP is probably similar. The perspective is pleasing with any of these. The 135 mm is not bad if you work carefully.

The point where I depart from most people is the "normal" lens. Here I prefer a 58 mm focal length. The perspective that I get through the view finder of both Minolta and Nikon is the same when I take my eye away from the view finder with a 58 mm lens. When I look up, everything is in the same place as when I was looking through the view finder. For me, a 58 mm lens is a true "normal" lens.

Marko, at the start of my comment, I referred to opinions. As suggested, this is my opinion; that is all it is. The real question still remains: What looks good to you?

DaveOttawa · Nov 18, 2008

Markok765 said:
I'm longing for a 50mm for my nikon, and until then I'll have to use the 28mm full time. I'm wondering what subjects/situations you think this lens is good for?
The main bad subject for this lens is a head and shoulders portrait, I think.

Not sure if the link has already been posted in this thread but this article may help:

USES AND APPLICATIONS OF 35mm LENSES
By Mike Johnston

http://photo.net/columns/mjohnston/column57/index.html

I just put an example in my APUG gallery:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

and here's another:
(there was a url link here which no longer exists)

applesanity · Nov 19, 2008

For me the 28mm is the widest possible lens I can go before size and proportion distortions become too evident. 35mm isn't wide enough, and 24 is when things look distorted enough such that viewer is immediately aware of, "hey! wide angle!"

Be careful of the temptation of so many lame or boring wide angle pictures, ahem, snapshots out there - don't try to include everything in your frame just because you're holding a wide angle. A wide angle means you have to get in even closer, like what Robert Capa says. When you think you're close enough, then scoot forward another 1 or two feet.

That being said, one should probably not use anything shorter than 50mm for head and shoulders shots. It can be done with 28mm, but put your model to the side instead of the center. Personally for me, I avoid doing head and shoulders with anything less than 85mm. Unless you really like showing everyone how big your model's nose is.

Suzie Place · Nov 20, 2008

28mm lens

It will make a woman's narrow arse look wider and more pleasing. Very useful in some situations.

Sirius Glass · Nov 20, 2008

Suzie Place said:
It will make a woman's narrow arse look wider and more pleasing. Very useful in some situations.

It will make a woman's large arse look wider . Very useful in situations where you want to emphasis the Junk-in-the-Trunk or Crisco-in-the-Can.

Steve

What is a 28mm lens good for?

AdClem

Stan160

Sirius Glass

Tim Gray

Paul Jenkin

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

Polybun

Uncle Bill

Attachments

Sirius Glass

Markok765

TheFlyingCamera

Membership Council

Tim Gray

Polybun

panastasia

narsuitus

Ralph Javins

DaveOttawa

applesanity

Suzie Place

Sirius Glass

What is a 28mm lens good for?

Membership Council

Polybun

Attachments

Membership Council

Polybun

Privacy & Transparency

Privacy & Transparency