/p/ - Photography » Thread #3120795

[77 / 15 / ?]

218KiB, 1200x1080, D3S_7081-1200.jpg

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO

Wide angle primes

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 01:09:16 No.3120795 View View Reply Original Report

Quoted By: >>3120812 >>3120905 >>3120956 >>3120994 >>3120996 >>3121000 >>3121271

20, 24 or 28?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 01:14:06 No.3120798 Report

Quoted By: >>3121441

>20mm
too wide
>24
perfect
>28
just buy a 35mm already

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 01:17:09 No.3120799 Report

Quoted By: >>3120879

24mm if you're on crop
20mm if you're on FF

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 01:23:16 No.3120805 Report

Quoted By:

14.

Unless we're not talking about ultrawides too. Then 20 for w i d e and 35 for general use.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 01:46:40 No.3120812 Report

Quoted By: >>3120910 >>3121588

>>3120795
20, 28, 40, 58

24, 35, 50, 75 is for gays

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 02:28:41 No.3120819 Report

Quoted By: >>3120823 >>3120831

How wide is the 24 compared to the 28? I don't want a 35.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 02:36:17 No.3120823 Report

Quoted By:

>>3120819

It's 8 degrees wider. Visibly wider. The further you move away from normal focal length, the more one millimeter of difference makes. 24 is wider than 28, 20 is much wider than 24, 16 is much wider than 20, 14 is noticeably wider than 15.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 03:03:48 No.3120831 Report

Quoted By: >>3120833

>>3120819
24mm is comically wide to me which limits it for general use. Personally I find it strange to use it outside of the "wide angle architecture and landscapes" realm. It's true that 28mm is close to 35mm but it's still good for general usage even if it's wide. For reference, most cellphone cameras especially iphones have lenses that are close, if not, 28mm. So millions of people walk around with 28mm lenses and take billions of pictures. It's a great general use focal length while being a little wider to make it more distinctive compared to a 35mm.

If you only have one lens I think 35mm is a great choice. Personally I'm a two-lens person, 28mm and 50mm. If I had to choose a single focal length I'd choose either 28 or 50 over 35.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 03:06:08 No.3120833 Report

Quoted By:

>>3120831
I intend to use it as a walk around lens anyways. I'm sold on the 28.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 05:00:46 No.3120879 Report

Quoted By: >>3121517

>>3120799
What?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 05:40:28 No.3120883 Report

Quoted By:

What would complement my 50mm better?
A 20, 24, or 28?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 05:43:01 No.3120884 Report

Quoted By:

I generally walk around with 28/50 or 35/85

I do own a 24, though its a stop slower than the 28, and the focusing doesn't feel as nice. if I were to get it CLA'd I might carry it more.

I also own a 20, which I generally only bring if I know I'll be shooting very wide. I generally shoot portraits, so the 20 isn't worth carrying too often.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 07:11:29 No.3120905 Report

Quoted By: >>3120925

>>3120795

28, 40, 90

All you will ever need.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 07:19:46 No.3120910 Report

Quoted By:

>>3120812
I have a 10-24mm telephoto (not a prime lens I know) for those special shots. (I don't play with it as much as my 35, 45, and 50mm) But if I was to get a prime wide angle, it would be for astro-photography or landscapes and would have to be a f1.8 at a minimum - maybe a 20 or a 24mm. I would have to try it out. The lens that came with the camera is a 18-50mm or something like that, and I don't really like it so much. I rarely use it.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 07:37:28 No.3120918 Report

Quoted By:

Just get a zoom you cuck

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 07:49:53 No.3120925 Report

Quoted By: >>3120929

>>3120905
How do you feel about 130 instead of 90?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 07:56:03 No.3120929 Report

Quoted By: >>3120933

>>3120925

Loses flexibility by being a tad bit too long.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 08:04:02 No.3120933 Report

Quoted By: >>3120935

>>3120929
Hm, what do you mean by flexibility?
What do you use your 90 for other than portraits?

I'm stuck between a 90 or a zoom. I'd like to take portraits, but I mainly shoot birds

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 08:06:01 No.3120935 Report

Quoted By:

>>3120933

My 90 doubles as a macro lens, but I rarely use it for that.

I meant that you can't use it in some smaller spaces. I find myself always feeling cramped with a 135.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 08:06:46 No.3120936 Report

Quoted By:

28mm is the best for general use, although it sucks for portraits. For w i d e I like 21mm equivalent.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 09:05:03 No.3120956 Report

Quoted By:

>>3120795
24mm

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 12:25:03 No.3120994 Report

Quoted By:

>>3120795
28mm I guess because the focal lenght I use the most on my crop camera is 18mm.

!kurwaRB7YU

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO images.png, 3KiB, 207x244

!kurwaRB7YU Wed 26 Jul 2017 12:29:03 No.3120996 Report

Quoted By: >>3120999

>>3120795
>making up problems

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 12:39:43 No.3120999 Report

Quoted By: >>3121002

>>3120996
Kurwa, if I come to Poland do you want to walk around and take snapshits in abandoned places?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 12:43:39 No.3121000 Report

Quoted By: >>3121012

>>3120795
The more important question is what are you using the lens for?

If you are doing landscapes and want to fit as much in as possible then 20mm. If you are doing street photography get a 28mm.

!kurwaRB7YU

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO polend2.jpg, 3MiB, 3438x2248

!kurwaRB7YU Wed 26 Jul 2017 12:56:01 No.3121002 Report

Quoted By: >>3121005

>>3120999
only if we use our UWA primes, triples-sama. I'd love to take foreigners to places where scrap metal looters and drunken scum hangs out between police patrols and do show and tell on how cool places went to shit. Just give me a heads up in advance to figure out the logistics/plan out which places to visit.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 13:17:13 No.3121005 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121002
TY Kurwa-kun, I might visit my grandparents in Kielce, but I also can accommodate a few days of fucking about.

And yeah, might just use my normal/portrait lenses to highlight local bydlo.

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO B007979-R1-02-34A.jpg, 324KiB, 1818x1228

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 13:42:30 No.3121012 Report

Quoted By: >>3121013 >>3121017 >>3121192

>>3121000
nice trips, but why is 28mm good for street in your opinion?

I shot a roll of portra 160 with my 28 2.8 and so far I found:

pros:
>deep depth of field makes focusing easier
>infinite focus occurs at 10 meters onwards
nice for fitting a lot into the frame

cons:
>difficult to isolate subject
>even if you think you're really close, the subject ends up looking about a mile away
>horrendous distortion when shooting portrait

pic related, one of my missed shots. thought I was way closer than this! I feel ashamed.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 13:46:43 No.3121013 Report

Quoted By: >>3121016

>>3121012
Where is that? Looks like New Zealand

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO pie man.jpg, 522KiB, 1200x810

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 13:54:16 No.3121016 Report

Quoted By: >>3121125 >>3121192

>>3121013
close, it's Melbourne, Australia

also, sorry I didn't resize the damn thing. here, have another missed shot

my hands shake too much for 1/125th second but I can't focus accurately wide open at faster speeds. I guess I should just get some faster film.

anyway I'll keep trying with this lens

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 13:58:09 No.3121017 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121012
>but why is 28mm good for street in your opinion?

28mm is not too wide, you don't have to get so close to what you are shooting. Personally I think it is the best focal length for street photgraphy, the field of view is not to wide and not to short. It is the sweet spot for capturing things going on in the streets.

I carry a 18mm, 28mm and 135mm around and mainly do street photography and landscapes.

I am not a pro though, just another anon with a camera.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 18:16:09 No.3121125 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121016
did you shake or did you miss the focus on this one? Train yourself with a DSLR to shoot at least with 1/60. 1/125 is no excuse to have a blurry image.

Don't put much force when holding the camera and after exhaling hold your breathe press the shutter gently till it fires the camer without jerking it, just like a gun.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 18:30:01 No.3121130 Report

Quoted By:

16 if you want a wide lens, lower than that some stuff like vigneting becomes a bit of a problem
you can get away with 12 if it's a very good lens
for general use, 28mm is GOAT

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Capture d’écran 2017-07-2 (...).png, 136KiB, 833x542

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 18:30:58 No.3121131 Report

Quoted By: >>3121140 >>3121164 >>3121427 >>3121647

Is this meme worht the price?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 1326116399905.jpg, 22KiB, 140x147

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 18:52:23 No.3121140 Report

Quoted By: >>3121147 >>3121151

>>3121131
Is any lens truly worth that much money? Unless you are a professional photographer with a enthusiast level camera then most likley not.

Pretty sure you can get a lens for half the price that is 90% as good.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 19:06:06 No.3121147 Report

Quoted By: >>3121151

>>3121140
This.

There are diminishing returns with everything. At $1,843 that price:value ratio is beyond atrocious.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 19:10:56 No.3121151 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121140
>>3121147
Keep in mind it is a MF lens. With todays technology this price isn't an excuse.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 19:42:28 No.3121164 Report

Quoted By: >>3121271

>>3121131
There's adaptable film glass in the 21mm f/3.5-ish range around for far cheaper. Bet the difference in quality isn't worth 1½ kilosmackers.

vosh !35mmF/4Qi6

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO hp5+04-03-2017-028.jpg, 326KiB, 1000x667

vosh !35mmF/4Qi6 Wed 26 Jul 2017 20:48:10 No.3121192 Report

Quoted By: >>3121208

Usually shooting 35mm, I sometimes switch to 21mm and in those situations I'm happy I got it.

>>3121012
>>3121016
This is 21mm, you have to get closer.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 21:12:49 No.3121208 Report

Quoted By: >>3121214

>>3121192
>This is 21mm, you have to get closer.
Yeah, I bet you were like 1 foot away from here when you took that. If you are doing street photography sometimes you don't want to have to get that close.

vosh !35mmF/4Qi6

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO Bild004_Neg.Nr.3A.jpg, 327KiB, 1000x667

vosh !35mmF/4Qi6 Wed 26 Jul 2017 21:18:19 No.3121214 Report

Quoted By: >>3121693

>>3121208
Don't remember exactly, but I think I wasn't that close. Got the impression that the closer you get, the less people think you're taking a photo of them.
Took that shot the day I got and tested it, but haven't used it that often since then.
Also, I have to admit I'm having trouble filling the frame sometimes.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 26 Jul 2017 22:54:38 No.3121271 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121164
You can get this >>3120795 for 250 bucks.

You wouldn't even tell the difference. ZEISS pop® micro-contrast is a meme. Normal people won't see a damn difference.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 03:19:21 No.3121427 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121131
The Milvus series is nice, but I can't justify the price jump for the Z at the front over a similar lens from the Sigma Art line at $500 cheaper and f/1.4 that is comparably sharp in almost every situation. The Milvus is great for video work since it does have smoother focus, but for a photo, or hybrid use lens, you'd be better off saving a few bucks and checking out some other options with AF and IS features.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 03:56:46 No.3121441 Report

Quoted By: >>3121515 >>3121546 >>3121558

>>3120798
on aps-c:

>20mm
not wide enough, might as well get an ultrawide zoom in this territory anyway because most people rarely go that wide and then you at least have versatility (this is true for FF as well)

>24
not wide enough, still too much distortion for people

>28
perfect

>35
shit

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 06:54:53 No.3121515 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121441
18mm is fine on crop just as 28 is fine on FF. If you need to shoot wider than that for whatever reason just buy a ultrawide zoom.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 07:23:51 No.3121517 Report

Quoted By: >>3121644

>>3120879
full frame or crop sensor. if its for a 35mm don't worry about it, if its digital know that some cameras have smaller sensors and thus crop down the original lensed image by about a quarter.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 08:42:51 No.3121546 Report

Quoted By: >>3121555

>>3121441
What would 28mm (APS-C) be on M43?
I'm too retarded to do math.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 09:23:32 No.3121555 Report

Quoted By: >>3121556 >>3121558 >>3121582

>>3121546
Use a calculator bro
APS-C: 28*1.6=44.8
M43: 28*2=56

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 09:25:23 No.3121556 Report

Quoted By: >>3121558

>>3121555
Forgot Nikon/Sony/etc APS-C: 28*1.5=42

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 09:30:24 No.3121558 Report

Quoted By: >>3121572

>>3121555
>>3121556
Ah, that's where I went wrong.
I assumed
>>3121441
was talking about APS-C lengths when he said "on aps-c".
But I guess he was still using fullframe lengths.

So 10, 12, 14, 17 for me?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 09:54:13 No.3121572 Report

Quoted By: >>3121579 >>3121585

>>3121558
Focal length of a lens is what it is, it does not change between systems. 20mm lens has focal length of 20mm, no matter which camera it is mounted on or which system it is made for. The crop factor however changes the angle of view (or field of view) by wasting some of the image circle that the lens is projecting. No one ever talks about "apsc focal lengths" or "m43 focal lengths" but usually refers to 35mm (full frame) format equivalent focal lengths for claritys sake.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 10:35:23 No.3121579 Report

Quoted By: >>3121581

>>3121572
>is what it is

I hate this redundant saying.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 10:44:20 No.3121581 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121579
Are you that bored?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 10:51:52 No.3121582 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121555
>1.6
>DR is shit
>noise performance is shit
Stay cucked canoncuks. Even sonygers have better sensors.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 11:23:38 No.3121585 Report

Quoted By: >>3121593 >>3121596 >>3121609

>>3121572
Wait, hold on.

So, you know that rule of thumb where it's
>use 1/x shutter speed to minimize blur from hands shaking
with 'x' being your focal length?

I have an Olympus 25mm f/1.8, and have been using using 1/50 instead of 1/25 as a minimum shutter speed because I thought I had to include crop factor.

Have I been doing it like a fool this whole time? Is a shutter speed of 1/25 perfectly fine?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 5735ee079b723_jim.thumb.jpg.f553 (...).jpg, 50KiB, 1000x419

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 11:31:34 No.3121588 Report

Quoted By: >>3123685

>>3120812
>20, 28, 40, 58

hmm, I think I've seen those somewhere.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 11:42:34 No.3121593 Report

Quoted By: >>3121600

>>3121585
The rule of thumb comes from the film era, so it obviously refers to 35mm eqv focal length. So you've been doing it correctly. It has more to do with field of view than exact focal length, it's just easier to understand focal lengths than degrees and angles. It also depends on how good your camera handling technique is.

Catsby !RqPRxvq4p6

Catsby !RqPRxvq4p6 Thu 27 Jul 2017 11:45:58 No.3121596 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121585
In theory you should add the crop factor, but of course this is only a general guide line and not Truth(c).
The best thing to do will be to test it out for yourself instead of thinking anonymous retards will give you a better answer than your own empirical research.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 11:53:23 No.3121600 Report

Quoted By: >>3121693

>>3121593
Ah, OK. That's good to know.

Are there any videos of said camera handling techniques you'd recommend? I've watched a few and I only picked up holding my breath on exhale and leaning against shit.

Some people say to use your arm as a tripod and I really have no idea what they mean.

!P3141593qY

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO DSC_0406.jpg, 550KiB, 1536x2048

!P3141593qY Thu 27 Jul 2017 12:22:24 No.3121606 Report

Quoted By:

I just got this baby

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 12:27:20 No.3121609 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121585
I can do 1/15 on my 80mm TLR. Where's your god now?

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 13:45:12 No.3121644 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121517
the crop factor gives you a longer effective focal length (some people will nitpick that term, you know what i fucking mean)
24mm on crop (1.5 crop factor) gives about 35mm equiv
20mm on full frame (1 crop factor) gives 20mm
i think you had them backwards

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20170223-DSC_3548.jpg, 483KiB, 1200x1200

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 13:49:53 No.3121647 Report

Quoted By: >>3121722

>>3121131
Just get a Rokinon. Comparable optics at a quarter of the price.

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 15:24:54 No.3121693 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121214
>Don't remember exactly, but I think I wasn't that close. Got the impression that the closer you get, the less people think you're taking a photo of them.
Because, with a wide angle, you're generally not pointing directly at them. I've stood one step away from people I was shooting without them realizing it was actually them I was taking a picture of.

>>3121600
>Some people say to use your arm as a tripod and I really have no idea what they mean.
>find stable surface
>rest elbow on surface
>hold camera in hand connected to elbow through forearm
>take pictures

Anonymous

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 16:06:28 No.3121722 Report

Quoted By: >>3121817

>>3121647
did you crop it horizontaly or vertically do you still have the full image?

Anonymous

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 20170223-DSC_3548-2.jpg, 510KiB, 1200x801

Anonymous Thu 27 Jul 2017 20:09:27 No.3121817 Report

Quoted By:

>>3121722
Cropped horizontally. There is some distortion toward the far edges, but it's sharp enough that you can crop in pretty tight and still get detail.

!kurwaRB7YU

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO 2017-07-28 17.59.57.jpg, 1MiB, 1337x1114

!kurwaRB7YU Fri 28 Jul 2017 16:01:08 No.3122314 Report

Quoted By: >>3122434 >>3122814

How wide is too wide, /p/?

Anonymous

Anonymous Fri 28 Jul 2017 18:44:18 No.3122434 Report

Quoted By:

>>3122314
pretty fucking gay hat senpai

!P3141593qY

View Same Google ImgOps iqdb SauceNAO _MG_9359_lift_selfi.jpg, 263KiB, 1000x667

!P3141593qY Sat 29 Jul 2017 08:45:49 No.3122814 Report

Quoted By: >>3123847

>>3122314
gay hats general

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 30 Jul 2017 20:34:13 No.3123685 Report

Quoted By: >>3123743

>>3121588
what lenses are these?

Anonymous

Anonymous Sun 30 Jul 2017 22:01:14 No.3123743 Report

Quoted By:

>>3123685
Voigtländer.

Anonymous

Anonymous Mon 31 Jul 2017 02:01:30 No.3123847 Report

Quoted By: >>3123916

>>3122814
You look thin is that the lens distortion?

!P3141593qY

!P3141593qY Mon 31 Jul 2017 04:41:07 No.3123916 Report

Quoted By:

>>3123847
The combination of both

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 02 Aug 2017 13:11:06 No.3125626 Report

Quoted By: >>3125893

I've just bought a 28mm 2.8 nikkor AIs did I do good?

What do I do now?

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 02 Aug 2017 22:46:39 No.3125893 Report

Quoted By:

>>3125626
>What do I do now?
Take pictures.

Anonymous

Anonymous Wed 02 Aug 2017 23:30:45 No.3125924 Report

Quoted By:

24mm purely for sentimental reasons. Being a poor vidfag who wanted a relatively cheap wide prime I went with the Olympus Zuiko 24 2.8 and that thing hardly ever came off my t2i.

Also eventually got a Tamron 17 3.5, which didn't use nearly as much and lacked that certain magic the zuiko had, but fuck yeah ultra wide.

Anonymous

Anonymous Sat 05 Aug 2017 13:53:34 No.3127508 Report

Quoted By:

28 is good for landscapes without being too wide.

Capcode	All Only User Posts Only Verified Posts Only Moderator Posts Only Manager Posts Only Admin Posts Only Developer Posts Only Founder Posts
Show Posts	All Only With Images Only Without Images Only Spoiler Images Only Non-Spoiler Images
Deleted Posts	All Only Deleted Posts Only Non-Deleted Posts
Ghost Posts	All Only Ghost Posts Only Non-Ghost Posts
Post Type	All Only Sticky Threads Only Opening Posts Only Reply Posts
Results	All Grouped By Threads
Order	Latest Posts First Oldest Posts First

On these archives

Your latest searches

Wide angle primes