Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 69,732   Posts: 1,515,268   Online: 804
      
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 32

Thread: 24 or 28 mm?

  1. #21

    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    128
    Hey folks, Mr. OP doesn't yet have a 28.

    I'm in the camp that feels there is a pronounced difference between 28 and 24. Perspective distortion, I've long believed, becomes much more apparent with 24. I'll add the sweeping statement that as one goes wider, say from 35 to 15, an increasing amount of care (skill!) must be used to create a pleasing image. Hand a 35 to anyone and they've got a good chance of making a decent image. Give them a 20 and they'll be quite challenged. I've witnessed the same in highly unscientific field-testing...as in, 'here, take this (my camera) and go make some photos' while attending social functions. I enjoy W-I-D-E more than the average shooter (owning wide, super, ultra, etc.) yet I find 28 to be oh-so-pleasing for a variety of situations. A final, hands-down word on recommended MF models: Nikon 28/2 or 28/2.8 AIS, both of which are superior to Nikon's AF offering.

    I also appreciate Matrix Metering but w/ a non-CPU lens such as the two MF models I noted above, only Center Weight and Spot metering are available on the F100. Both metering methods have their attributes, esp spot -metering...may be a good opportunity to refine your metering technique?
    Last edited by Aja B; 11-01-2011 at 05:36 PM. Click to view previous post history.

  2. #22

    Join Date
    May 2011
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    235
    I shoot with the 24mm f/1.4G on my F100's and it is absolutely incredible.


    When photographing people, I use it for wedding receptions or environmental portraits. These were shot with the Kodak BW400CN @ ISO 200 and f/1.4:





    But it's not just for people either, it also makes an INSANE landscape lens.
    Watch out! it's digital: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mrmeeke...ream/lightbox/

  3. #23
    Pumalite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Here & Now
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,078
    Have both. I have them in MF and AF. f/2.8 is better than f/2
    " A loving and caring heart is the beginning of all knowledge " ~ Thomas Carlyle ~

  4. #24
    fmajor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Colorado
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    259
    I think Goldfarb is onto something with the 24mm being the beginning of truly wide lenses whist 28mm is a really wide 'normal' focal length.

    I have a 24mm, 28mm, 35mm and multiple 50mm's and i *rarely* use the 28mm. If i'm going after landscape i'm using my 24mm. If i'm walking/traveling i choose the 35mm or 50mm. The 28mm just sits in 'nowhere land' (i'd sell it, but for the $30-$50 i'd get it's not worth selling). Yes, i 'foot-zoom' and can change whats in the frame by backing up/getting closer, but the 'look' of the 28mm vs the 35mm is just *different* and i prefer the 35mm.

    Between the 24mm and the 28mm - there's no comparison. They have a *very* different FOV and all of what that entails in a given frame - it's not as simple as backing up/getting closer.

  5. #25
    2F/2F's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    8,008
    Images
    4
    Quote Originally Posted by F/1.4 View Post
    I shoot with the 24mm f/1.4G on my F100's and it is absolutely incredible.


    When photographing people, I use it for wedding receptions or environmental portraits. These were shot with the Kodak BW400CN @ ISO 200 and f/1.4:





    But it's not just for people either, it also makes an INSANE landscape lens.
    Watch out! it's digital: http://www.flickr.com/photos/mrmeeke...ream/lightbox/
    Perfect case in point of why I prefer 28mm. I'd crop all of those pix a bit if they were my own. They are relatively small subjects within the frame, and there is a vast array of interesting lawn chairs and back yard in the background. But get any closer, and the subjects warp even more than they already are. It is a personal choice, obviously, and I don't mean to say that it is anything but, but rather to explain why I would choose 28.
    2F/2F

    "Truth and love are my law and worship. Form and conscience are my manifestation and guide. Nature and peace are my shelter and companions. Order is my attitude. Beauty and perfection are my attack."

    - Rob Tyner (1944 - 1991)

  6. #26
    Pumalite's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Here & Now
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,078
    Bad use of 24mm or 28mm. They are for "In Your Face" shots. Unless you want to shoot the interior of a yatch or a small room.
    " A loving and caring heart is the beginning of all knowledge " ~ Thomas Carlyle ~

  7. #27
    jali's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Jakarta
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    13
    I prefer 28 than 24 for Nikkor. It's cheaper and less distorted, but if you think money isn't a problem, go for 24.

  8. #28
    mrred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Montreal, Canada
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    652
    Images
    4
    You evil people.....got gas........

  9. #29
    Ralph Javins's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Latte Land, Washington
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    832
    Good morning, Stephen;

    As David Goldfarb and others have mentioned, there really are some differences between the 24mm and 28mm lenses. I also feel that the 28mm is my limit with just taking a lens out, putting it onto the camera, and shooting. I do prefer the 24mm lens for interior shots of rooms. And, the 24mm lens is were I start to feel that I am using a wide angle lens, and I need to start watching the horizon and other lines for signs of curvature. If I drop down to a 21mm or a 20mm lens, then I know that this is a wide angle lens, and I really need to watch which way the lines and things are going. To me, the 21mm and shorter lenses really are special purpose lenses; even my 17mm "Rectilinear" lens must be handled with great care. The 16mm is where "special effects" hold sway.

    For me, the 28mm lenses are very good lenses for all kinds of "normal" things; landscapes, general scenes, et cetera. The 24mm lens is my preference for interiors, and it comes in handy for wide landscapes with careful use. What this probably comes down to is; I think you need both.
    Enjoy;

    Ralph Javins, Latte Land, Washington

    When they ask you; "How many Mega Pixels you got in your camera?"
    just tell them; "I use activated silver bromide crystals tor my image storage media."

  10. #30

    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    4
    i have both. you have to get in closer.

Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin