Elijah wrote:
Rocked this wedding with @DJ R@ himself.
Perhaps one of my favorite weddings of all time during my wedding career. The 28E was just a bonus
Actually, the 28E was more than a bonus.
shooting the wedding party on a 9' deep dock, off a little boat house
due to rain, we are shooting here b/c the giant 70 year old oak tree above the dock is providing a gigantic canopy.
the 35 would not have worked b/c E was literally "back to the wall" for most of the group shots!
this image is not from the 28
but you can see how close the house is to the pond. we were under that tree, shooting for an hour during cocktail hour, with the 28 x 2 working double duty!
that's right I said dooty.
the 20 would have provided too much distortion, the 24? don't own one now!
the 35 was too long.
the 28 was a slam dunk!
The 28 looks great! For those (like me) more comfortable with a 35mm, the sad thing is that there is nothing at that focal length with the color rendition, sharpness, and bokeh of the 28 1.4e. To me, at least, and this is what I have covering that FL:
Nikon 28-70 2.8G
Sigma 35 1.4 art
Sigma 24-35 2 art
Zeiss 2/35 zf.2
Zeiss 1.4/35 zf.2
Nikon 35 1.4 ais.
designdog wrote:
The 28 looks great! For those (like me) more comfortable with a 35mm, the sad thing is that there is nothing at that focal length with the color rendition, sharpness, and bokeh of the 28 1.4e. To me, at least, and this is what I have covering that FL:
Nikon 28-70 2.8G
Sigma 35 1.4 art
Sigma 24-35 2 art
Zeiss 2/35 zf.2
Zeiss 1.4/35 zf.2
Nikon 35 1.4 ais.
So, after using the lens for the last week or so, I feel like it's safe to say this is easily the best wide-angle I've ever used. Literally nothing bad to say about it at all, in terms of quality. Bokeh is killer for such a wide lens, it's super sharp, distortion is well managed, handles flare well, AF is very sure-footed.
As much as it makes an almost perfect combo with the 58, I still don't think it's going to replace the 35/1.4 *for me.* The 35 has been my go-to for so long, I just can't quit it. And, with the 28, I still need one wider lens (like the 20G, which I have.)
Kind of thinking about using the 28E money to pick up the 105E... Kinda painful to think about that, though, as the 28 will be killer on the D850; and it's a lens I've waited/asked for for years... :/
So what you're saying is - you love the lens. But 20/35/58/105 seems to make more sense on paper for you. And I agree with that. Soo you're going to return it before your 30 day trial is up?
The problem that I see is, as bodies all get more MP, you'll want these new and sharp lenses, either E FL or sigma art.
I'm going to stick with the 28. I hope they soon add a 50 1.4e. Because after editing a recent wedding - the 28e/58/105e/70-200e. were the workhorses - we need a sharper mid range! All images shot wide open were sharp except the 58. The 58 needed f2 to hang in there with the rest of the gang.
Perhaps the 50 1.8 would fit in better .
35 1.4 is a great lens. I imagine there will be a 35 1.4e at some point. But not for at least 4-5 years.
I'm sitting on 20/28e/50/58/85/70-200e fully knowing that I need to sell off a prime or two. Just can't make up my mind. And not in a hurry at all.
Thinking 20/28/58 and 70-200. Or 20/28/50/85 and 70-200.
So, after using the lens for the last week or so, I feel like it's safe to say this is easily the best wide-angle I've ever used. Literally nothing bad to say about it at all, in terms of quality. Bokeh is killer for such a wide lens, it's super sharp, distortion is well managed, handles flare well, AF is very sure-footed.
As much as it makes an almost perfect combo with the 58, I still don't think it's going to replace the 35/1.4 *for me.* The 35 has been my go-to for so long, I just can't quit it. And, with the 28, I still need one wider lens (like the 20G, which I have.)
Kind of thinking about using the 28E money to pick up the 105E... Kinda painful to think about that, though, as the 28 will be killer on the D850; and it's a lens I've waited/asked for for years... :/ ...Show more →
Dj R wrote:
So what you're saying is - you love the lens. But 20/35/58/105 seems to make more sense on paper for you.
Pretty much, yeah. I'll probably go back to 24/1.4 (Sigma this time, I had the 24/1.4G a while ago), 35/1.4, 58/1.4, and add the 105/1.4. It doesn't help that I was just looking through some old work with the 24, and in the right scenarios it just has a bit of extra drama.
But yeah, the 28E is stellar, and I think it'll keep up beautifully on the D850 (which I know I'm going to "need" two of, so gotta save for that too.)
---------------------------------------------
Elijah wrote:
Flynn, you're a quitter
Hahah, basically. Anyone that knows me knows I rotate gear a lot ... I just get bored, and like trying new things. Makes you keep your vision fresh. But I also rebuy my favorites a lot, and I can see adding the 28E and my much-missed GFX back in the next year or two (kinda sad I didn't get to try the 28 on the GFX ...)
Also those shots above are a great example of why 28mm is a great focal length: wide without stretching people quite as much.
. 
You may have a problem.
