old-gregg wrote:
If you clicked on the title, I suspect you understand what I mean.
Where are the high quality 28mm lenses? Competent photograhers are fully aware that 35mm and 24mm are equally idiotic focal length choices. We all know that the 28-50-85mm triplet is the holy grail of meaningful photography.
AFAIK, no interesting images were ever created with 24 and 35mm focal length lenses. Only 28mm and 50mm lenses mattered.
<Trimmed>
Umm, sorry, I had to trim the colorful metaphors and hyperbole to try and keep this more civil. Calling people happy with the current status quo incompetent and idiotic and their images un-interesting isn't going to make you a lot of friends, heh heh. Any who...Your lack of response thus far to the other replies makes me wonder if you are just trolling this subject, lobbing the bomb and sitting back to see if any fireworks ensue, but I'll hope for the best for now and reply.
I'm going back a ways to a time when I flirted with the Leica CL & Minolta variant of the time, and the holy trinity combo was 28mm, 50mm, and 90mm... and if you were a Pentax fan, the 43mm "normal" choice at one time had us thinking that was more ideal than 50mm because 43mm was considered to be closer to what the human perception of a normal or natural field of view was on full frame... but I get your point. You like what you like. Nothing wrong with that.
I "think" 28mm was the big mover and shaker for the wide end back in the day mostly because of the limitations of lens makers to make a decent quality, corrected, sharp to the corners WA, not because there was any magic associated with 28mm field of view per say.
24mm gives a much more useful field of view (well, in my opinion anyway) for cramped interiors and can still be easily cropped to 28mm with all the pixels we have to spare in modern times. And a modern 24mm is probably MUCH better corrected than any 28mm was back in the day, so we are not trading off horrible distortions and vignette to get to that 24mm... heck, even many of the cheap and cheerful Chinese lenses are good enough in that respect, that we don't even have to worry that there is no in-camera profile correction for some of these 3rd part lenses because they are pretty good right out of the box. It is a different age.
So to respond to your plea for a boycott or help sending a message to Sony... well, I don't think you are going to get much of a ground swell to do as you say. Maybe you would be better off attending one of the big shows and talking to people in the Sony booth about your concerns, hopefully using some restraint when it comes to the colorful metaphors and language so as to better get your point across.
I know that probably won't make you feel much better, but it's all I've got.
What old-gregg has stumbled on is the greatest cover up in digital photography, the so-called full frame sensor is actually 89.1% the size of 35mm film area. Hence the proliferation of 24mm and 25mm lenses in a range where we should be getting a 28mm. In fact many of the "new" favorite focal lengths like 75mm are the result of this discrepancy. Photographers fall in love with these "new" lens ranges because subconsciously they recognize them as producing the same images as our beloved traditional film lenses. It's time we banded together and demand a true full frame sensor and proper lenses to boot!
chez wrote:
Nope, was not directed at you at all…just a general comment about the constant whining about lack of equipment in an era where we never had it so good.
As a side, my wife has advanced Parkinson’s which has severely limited our travels. I right now sit on the Big Island Hawaii, house / dog sitting with my gear with me but have not taken any real images as I must take care of my wife… I know a little bit of what you must be going through.
My mother-in-law also has Parkinson's. Going on about 25 years now. It's really, really tough, especially for the caretaker (my father-in-law). Obviously, the person with PD is most impacted, but I know how it goes. I totally empathize with your situation.
Erictator wrote:
I "think" 28mm was the big mover and shaker for the wide end back in the day mostly because of the limitations of lens makers to make a decent quality, corrected, sharp to the corners WA, not because there was any magic associated with 28mm field of view per say.
I love both 24mm and 28mm about the same. However, it would just make sense to have 28mm options that are as good as 24mm options. Come on Sigma ... a 28mm i-Series lens ... you can do it!
I do think there is a bit of magic associated with the 28mm field of view (but I think there's magic in every field of view). In my opinion, 28mm is the widest wide angle lens that still looks natural. I know "natural" is subjective. As I see it, 24mm introduces some stretching and weirdness, while 28mm still looks fully normal and realistic. 24mm crosses a border into wide-land, so to speak. So, for me, 28mm has a special place, a hero quality of its own. Of course I still find 24mm to be ultra-useful and great.
Too bad there's no way to have different focal lengths in one lens. That would be cool. Maybe you could cut a rectangular hole in some cardboard and tape it in front of a 24mm lens to make the framing smaller? Probably better to just paint around the edges of your camera sensor. Try that and let us know how it works for you.
I think the people who really like the perspective 28mm provides, want more choices. I mean that's what this thread is about....and there have been other threads like this, popping up every few months (or longer maybe).
I think those people that prefer other perspectives, like 24/25mm or 35mm....don't maybe understand the desire of the other group. Which kind of makes sense since they don't share that preference.
All normal kind of preferences stuff. We all have preferences, no matter if they seem odd to each other.
Where it does get kind of weird is when the people who don't have a preference for the 28mm perspective, kind of jump in and well......I don't know how to say it, so I won't. Then it kind of makes the people who like the 28mm perspective, kind of defensive, etc.
Everyone that loves 24/25mm and 35mm, great for you. I enjoy using those FLs as well. But I find the goldilocks is 28mm for me (for similar reasons NJPhotographer mentioned).
I'm not going to be focal length shamed into changing my preferences and what I'd like to see. And I won't focal length shame you if you prefer other focal lengths (like 24/25mm and 35mm).
But there are definitely less choices in 28mm for native E mount glass than there are for 24/25mm and 35mm. I believe that is a fact.
Shoot what you like, want what you want....let others do the same.
jeffbuzz wrote:
Too bad there's no way to have different focal lengths in one lens. That would be cool. Maybe you could cut a rectangular hole in some cardboard and tape it in front of a 24mm lens to make the framing smaller? Probably better to just paint around the edges of your camera sensor. Try that and let us know how it works for you.
Other than the more obvious reference to a zoom, that I think you are implying....there have been lenses in the past that are not zooms but have more than one focal length.
For example the Leica WATE/MATE. The MATE included 28, 35 and 50.
This lens is 28mm and looks great, I have thought about trying it myself.
I had the Sigma 28mm (F-mount) and just had it adapted.
Definitely has its fans here, no doubt. Doesn't look like it was optimized for the Sony sensor stack, but if you like the results from the lens and how it performs, then who cares.
I picked one up....playing around with it a bit. Not sure it will displace other lenses I have. But I have been toying with having my a7R III think sensor stack modded by Kolari.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I considered them, but their lenses seem large for what they are so I am less excited…
We will see. Their 85 f/2 EVO is only 340g, so I don't think it is large for what it is. So we will see as they fill out this line, but I think part of the point of the new EVO line is that they won't be big. I don't think the Air lenses are that big for what they are either. The Pro and LAB lenses are big for what they are, but I think with Viltrox the price is always low, but the size it seems varies with the line.
If you're going 24 and 35, why would you carry a 50? Just skip to the 75 or 85. When I'm carrying 28 and 50, I'd rather have a 100 on the long end. I like more space between my mid and short tele.
I don't think your plan is going to have the desired results. I think you're more likely to make Sony direct and all the other retailers rethink their return policies, and that wouldn't be good for any of us.
Steve Spencer wrote:
We will see. Their 85 f/2 EVO is only 340g, so I don't think it is large for what it is. So we will see as they fill out this line, but I think part of the point of the new EVO line is that they won't be big. I don't think the Air lenses are that big for what they are either. The Pro and LAB lenses are big for what they are, but I think with Viltrox the price is always low, but the size it seems varies with the line.
You are right.
I just checked the specs of the other AF 75-85mm f1.8 — f2 lenses.
In my brain, I was using the Sammy 75mm as the reference while it’s the outlier
I love 28mm and it is my favorite wide focal length. The Nikon 28 1.4e is one of the GOAT lenses. I've been back to using Sony lately, and ordered the 28-45 1.8 zoom but returned it because maybe I had a dud copy, but the sharpness was not great wide open. The test charts and reviews suggested better. I would love to see a 28mm GM, but it does seem to be a neglected focal length these days. I always feel like 35mm is too tight to be a wide angle and 24 starts to introduce noticeable distortion. 28mm includes so much environment without distractingly distorting the subject. I love it and would love to see it get more attention.
Erictator wrote:
Umm, sorry, I had to trim the colorful metaphors and hyperbole to try and keep this more civil. Calling people happy with the current status quo incompetent and idiotic and their images un-interesting isn't going to make you a lot of friends, heh heh. Any who...Your lack of response thus far to the other replies makes me wonder if you are just trolling this subject, lobbing the bomb and sitting back to see if any fireworks ensue, but I'll hope for the best for now and reply.
I'm going back a ways to a time when I flirted with the Leica CL & Minolta variant of the time, and the holy trinity combo was 28mm, 50mm, and 90mm... and if you were a Pentax fan, the 43mm "normal" choice at one time had us thinking that was more ideal than 50mm because 43mm was considered to be closer to what the human perception of a normal or natural field of view was on full frame... but I get your point. You like what you like. Nothing wrong with that.
I "think" 28mm was the big mover and shaker for the wide end back in the day mostly because of the limitations of lens makers to make a decent quality, corrected, sharp to the corners WA, not because there was any magic associated with 28mm field of view per say.
24mm gives a much more useful field of view (well, in my opinion anyway) for cramped interiors and can still be easily cropped to 28mm with all the pixels we have to spare in modern times. And a modern 24mm is probably MUCH better corrected than any 28mm was back in the day, so we are not trading off horrible distortions and vignette to get to that 24mm... heck, even many of the cheap and cheerful Chinese lenses are good enough in that respect, that we don't even have to worry that there is no in-camera profile correction for some of these 3rd part lenses because they are pretty good right out of the box. It is a different age.
So to respond to your plea for a boycott or help sending a message to Sony... well, I don't think you are going to get much of a ground swell to do as you say. Maybe you would be better off attending one of the big shows and talking to people in the Sony booth about your concerns, hopefully using some restraint when it comes to the colorful metaphors and language so as to better get your point across.
I know that probably won't make you feel much better, but it's all I've got.
I agree with you. There is no need for people to rant and deride other views as it undermines their cause. I'm still awaiting a Sony 500/4 and some tilt-shift lenses, but it's not in my lifetimes.
Back to the topic... I had a 28/2 Nikkor (pre-AI) in the 70s, a Fuji GSW690III (65mm, i.e., 28mm equivalent), a Contax G 28, and others over the years. But I moved on to the wider and or longer lenses in the digital age. 28mm is not the most desirable prime in 2025, but a few options are available. I prefer 24mm over 28mm.
