Ugly Hedgehog - Photography Forum
Home Active Topics Newest Pictures Search Login Register
Main Photography Discussion
24 vs 28 mm
Page <prev 2 of 2
May 30, 2019 15:33:15   #
Bill P
 
i have shot street photos allover several continents, with a 28. I've owned both 24 and 28mm lenses, and I would never do that with a 24. For me, I can deal with the wide angle perspective distortion without a lot of PS work, but with a 24 its always THERE.

For you it could be different. Bu ti do own a 24-85 lens because it's a great lens overall, and that's what is in fashion for camera manufacturers to produce. Great lens,, have used it at 24 but not very often. So you need to consider all ends of the zoom.

Reply
May 30, 2019 17:38:37   #
par4fore Loc: Bay Shore N.Y.
 
Don Wills wrote:
I bought a RX 100 m1 a few years ago and love it. Now I’m thinking of upgrading to the m3. The 3 provides an articulated rear screen and a built in nd filter, which are nice but not enough for me to spend the additional money. The one upgrade that may make a difference is the lens on the 3 zooms out to 24mm equivalent vs 28 mm on the 1. I shoot mainly landscape. Is the extra field of view worth it? Money is an issue. Any advise on buying good used if I decide to upgrade?


24!!!!!!! No question!!!!

Reply
May 30, 2019 18:40:55   #
Bridges Loc: Memphis, Charleston SC, now Nazareth PA
 
Don Wills wrote:
I bought a RX 100 m1 a few years ago and love it. Now I’m thinking of upgrading to the m3. The 3 provides an articulated rear screen and a built in nd filter, which are nice but not enough for me to spend the additional money. The one upgrade that may make a difference is the lens on the 3 zooms out to 24mm equivalent vs 28 mm on the 1. I shoot mainly landscape. Is the extra field of view worth it? Money is an issue. Any advise on buying good used if I decide to upgrade?


When I was a film shooter my favorite lens was the 24mm. You'd be amazed how 4mm makes a big difference. In fact, I also have a 14-24 and use it in place of a 16-35 which I also have. Just 2mm makes a huge difference on the wide end.

Reply
 
 
May 30, 2019 19:26:48   #
zug55 Loc: Naivasha, Kenya, and Austin, Texas
 
Bill P wrote:
i have shot street photos allover several continents, with a 28. I've owned both 24 and 28mm lenses, and I would never do that with a 24.

You make a good point--if I had to pick one prime lens for street photography it would be a 28mm (over 24mm). I used just a Sony 28mm lens for a day in a city in Germany, and the results were great.

If you frame this question in the context of a zoom lens the answer is different. I would still much prefer a 24-xx zoom lens over a 28-xx zoom lens. If I use a zoom lens I want versatility, and here those 4mm matter. My Sony 24-105 gives me the versatility I want on trips.

Reply
May 30, 2019 22:51:29   #
Toment Loc: FL, IL
 
24 is wider
If you need wide 24 is better by far.
Have fun!

Reply
Jun 1, 2019 16:15:45   #
texashill Loc: Texas Hill Country
 
Don Wills wrote:
I bought a RX 100 m1 a few years ago and love it. Now I’m thinking of upgrading to the m3. The 3 provides an articulated rear screen and a built in nd filter, which are nice but not enough for me to spend the additional money. The one upgrade that may make a difference is the lens on the 3 zooms out to 24mm equivalent vs 28 mm on the 1. I shoot mainly landscape. Is the extra field of view worth it? Money is an issue. Any advise on buying good used if I decide to upgrade?


I am only a real estate agent and not an expert photographer but in my opinion 35 mm or greater is best for exterior photography. For interior shots of small rooms, 24 mm is much better than 28 mm.

Reply
Jun 1, 2019 17:29:07   #
Bill P
 
texashill wrote:
I am only a real estate agent and not an expert photographer but in my opinion 35 mm or greater is best for exterior photography. For interior shots of small rooms, 24 mm is much better than 28 mm.


A 24 might be adequate in some situations, but on film I used an 18mm for interiors. In digital, I used the wide end of my 17-35.

But all in all, there is no one lens for any situation. Not to repeat myself, but the idea that ALL landscapes MUST be shot with a 24 or 28 is fallacious. I have shot some fine landscapes with a 135. For interiors, anything from a 50 to a fisheye might be best. There are some interiors where 35 is too long, and some where a 24 is way too wide.

Reply
 
 
Jun 1, 2019 17:42:44   #
Kingman
 
Bill P wrote:
A 24 might be adequate in some situations, but on film I used an 18mm for interiors. In digital, I used the wide end of my 17-35.

But all in all, there is no one lens for any situation. Not to repeat myself, but the idea that ALL landscapes MUST be shot with a 24 or 28 is fallacious. I have shot some fine landscapes with a 135. For interiors, anything from a 50 to a fisheye might be best. There are some interiors where 35 is too long, and some where a 24 is way too wide.


Absolutely correct. The right lens is also sometimes what you have at the time. For interiors and real estate shots I recently been using a 12mm for FF. Works very well for cramp spaces. For interior shots I will pack the prime 12mm & 20mm as well as the 24-70mm zoom so that I am covered. If things get really crazy I have a 180 fisheye for my cropped camera and a 360 degree VR camera that works surprisingly well for interiors (or landscapes).

Reply
Page <prev 2 of 2
If you want to reply, then register here. Registration is free and your account is created instantly, so you can post right away.
Main Photography Discussion
UglyHedgehog.com - Forum
Copyright 2011-2024 Ugly Hedgehog, Inc.