Steve Spencer wrote:
David, have you ever tried the Laowa 25 f/2.8 super high magnification (2.5X - 5X) macro? I have been curious about that lens for awhile. We might have several of these wide angle macros to compare before long. Obviously comparing the Tamron or the Sigma at .5X to the Laowa is a bit like comparing apples to oranges, but still I would love to see what each of these lenses do.
No I haven't. I've considered it - I use the Canon MP-E for 2-5x macro. I'm not entirely sure that the angle of view of the Laowa is what you'd expect from it's focal length, given that it has a much longer working distance than you would expect from a 25mm, so is it really wide angle, as you would expect from the FL? I don't really understand what happens with these designs. Something to read up on.
Strangely, the new Apple Silicon is more exciting to me than these lenses lately, and I've never been a Mac user. Why can't these companies learn from the like of Apple that on the day of the announcement, we can actually buy the actual items instead of more sitting here and speculating more.
That 24 would have been an instant if it was a 28. A close-up WA does give a very unique look, great for urban travel as the main/only lens.
hiepphotog wrote:
Strangely, the new Apple Silicon is more exciting to me than these lenses lately, and I've never been a Mac user. Why can't these companies learn from the like of Apple that on the day of the announcement, we can actually buy the actual items instead of more sitting here and speculating more.
That 24 would have been an instant if it was a 28. A close-up WA does give a very unique look, great for urban travel as the main/only lens.
The fun thing about the ongoing speculation is that it's like obsessing over which subcompact car has more leg room, all while dismissing midsize cars and SUV's as being "unpractically large".
hiepphotog wrote:
Strangely, the new Apple Silicon is more exciting to me than these lenses lately, and I've never been a Mac user. Why can't these companies learn from the like of Apple that on the day of the announcement, we can actually buy the actual items instead of more sitting here and speculating more.
That 24 would have been an instant if it was a 28. A close-up WA does give a very unique look, great for urban travel as the main/only lens.
28mm is evil. No one wants to make it. I got tired of begging.
I believe it would be your only lens. It's the most used focal length in the world. (phones)
hiepphotog wrote:
Strangely, the new Apple Silicon is more exciting to me than these lenses lately, and I've never been a Mac user. Why can't these companies learn from the like of Apple that on the day of the announcement, we can actually buy the actual items instead of more sitting here and speculating more.
That 24 would have been an instant if it was a 28. A close-up WA does give a very unique look, great for urban travel as the main/only lens.
If there was no speculation...this place would be very quiet.
hiepphotog wrote:
Strangely, the new Apple Silicon is more exciting to me than these lenses lately, and I've never been a Mac user. Why can't these companies learn from the like of Apple that on the day of the announcement, we can actually buy the actual items instead of more sitting here and speculating more.
That 24 would have been an instant if it was a 28. A close-up WA does give a very unique look, great for urban travel as the main/only lens.
Apple's habit of making products available immediately after launch is awesome. I wish it were emulated. I do like speculating, though, but that's what rumours are for. Drop a hint or two, maybe a leak to SAR, let the forums go crazy with speculation, then announce and release. As for Apple's silicon, I'll be more excited if the 16" gets a mini-LED display to go with it.
Also, add me to the list of people who would buy a 28mm. Maybe as this line fills out we'll see one from Sigma.
chez wrote:
There are 28mm options...just use what best fits your needs. It's like when the A7r came out...not the best camera by far, but people made do with it.
Huh? There's literally one 28mm, an f/2 with mediocre performance. There's no 28mm in G, GM, Loxia, Batis, nor from Sigma, Tamron, or Voigtlander.
timerickson wrote:
Huh? There's literally one 28mm, an f/2 with mediocre performance. There's no 28mm in G, GM, Loxia, Batis, nor from Sigma, Tamron, or Voigtlander.
Options plural would imply choice.
You are forgetting the Sigma 28 1.4...quite spectacular lens by most reviews.
While that's true, it's basically a unibody DSLR+adapter design isn't it? There's also the FE Plus Sony optimized 7A 28, but you have to adapt from M and there's no lens communication.
I'm not sure there is more than one mirrorless design native E mount option, the FE 28/2.
I adapt for 28mm coverage, it really does seem as though there is a lack of choice.
-Tim
chez wrote:
You are forgetting the Sigma 28 1.4...quite spectacular lens by most reviews.
chez wrote:
You are forgetting the Sigma 28 1.4...quite spectacular lens by most reviews.
Yes, but that's a SLR lens adapted to mirrorless...Sigma does make an E-mount version but it's just the same exact lens with an extension tube glued to it.
We are lacking 28mm lenses for mirrorless. Sony has the vanilla 28/2 which is good but not great (Also actually wider than 28mm). There is also the 7artisans 28/1.4 MF lens.
My last 28mm was the Zeiss 28/2 ZF adapted to Sony. Quite good even for landscapes but the corners needed f/8-11.
DavidBM wrote:
No I haven't. I've considered it - I use the Canon MP-E for 2-5x macro. I'm not entirely sure that the angle of view of the Laowa is what you'd expect from it's focal length, given that it has a much longer working distance than you would expect from a 25mm, so is it really wide angle, as you would expect from the FL? I don't really understand what happens with these designs. Something to read up on.
The Laowa 25/2.8 sounds like it’s designed as a reverse mounted wide angle, much the same way as reverse mounting a manual focus Nikon F-mount wide angle with Nikon’s reverse ring BR2A. Of course the Laowa lens will be further optimized like e.g. the Olympus OM Zuiko 20/2 and 38/2.8 bellow lenses made for high magnification.
bjornthun wrote:
The Laowa 25/2.8 sounds like it’s designed as a reverse mounted wide angle, much the same way as reverse mounting a manual focus Nikon F-mount wide angle with Nikon’s reverse ring BR2A. Of course the Laowa lens will be further optimized like e.g. the Olympus OM Zuiko 20/2 and 38/2.8 bellow lenses made for high magnification.
Likely so, but in my relatively limited experience reverse mounting alone doesn’t increase working distance as much as the Laowa over expectations for a 25. But I haven’t reversed a lens this short.
DavidBM wrote:
Likely so, but in my relatively limited experience reverse mounting alone doesn’t increase working distance as much as the Laowa over expectations for a 25. But I haven’t reversed a lens this short.
Way OT, but here goes
Working distance is 40-45mm depending on magnification, quite in line with the back focal distance of a DSLR wide angle. This is very much in line with how a dedicated bellow lens behaves, I think. Laowa likely employs all the tricks in the book here. https://www.laowalenses.ca/product/25mm-ultra-macro/
Fred Miranda wrote:
We are lacking 28mm lenses for mirrorless.
+1
24mm seems to have become the "new 28mm". Even in other mfr / format, the 28mm (equiv) is frequently relegated to pancake lens design.
Whereas 28mm historically had stronger SLR offerings, recent mirrorless offerings seem to go 24mm - 35mm, jumping over 28mm. Oddly, this doesn't seem to be a brand preference, rather industry wide. Not sure I've understood why the 28mm has seen such a significantly decline. I find it to be a very useful lens ... whereas the same lens can be mounted on different bodies to achieve, moderate WA on FF and short, normal on APS-C (42mm equiv).
24mm seems to have become the "new 28mm". Even in other mfr / format, the 28mm (equiv) is frequently relegated to pancake lens design.
Whereas 28mm historically had stronger SLR offerings, recent mirrorless offerings seem to go 24mm - 35mm, jumping over 28mm. Oddly, this doesn't seem to be a brand preference, rather industry wide. Not sure I've understood why the 28mm has seen such a significantly decline. I find it to be a very useful lens ... whereas the same lens can be mounted on different bodies to achieve, moderate WA on FF and short, normal on APS-C (42mm equiv).
A common thought is that most smartphones cameras have typically been 28mm equivalent, so maybe camera makers think they need to make sure that their wide lens doesn’t look similar in AOV.
DavidBM wrote:
A common thought is that most smartphones cameras have typically been 28mm equivalent, so maybe camera makers think they need to make sure that their wide lens doesn’t look similar in AOV.
I think this too.
With computation photography and increasing flexability, IQ of cameras phones and the lower expectations of 95% of the population compared to the FM’ers, I do wonder if cameras makers want to avoid that direct competition.
I highly doubt it has anything to do with direct competition from phones...they have bigger fish to worry about from the phone market. It just might be not as much need for a 28mm as we all think. Maybe the majority of photographers are happy with a wide angle like say a 24mm or a 20mm and then a traditional 35mm lens...skipping the need for a 28mm altogether.
RustyBug wrote:
24mm seems to have become the "new 28mm".
This is true, and now seen with standard zooms. The old ranges of 28-70 and 28-85 (my personal fav) has become 24-70 and 24-105. Now 28mm is a FL you zoom past on the way to more respectable destinations.
