UKC

what is your goldilocks/most often used focal length?

i'm looking for a small/pancake prime lens for oly omd 4/3, but cant decide - quite a few options in the 14-20 (28-40mm) range. panasonic a bit sharper but olympus have metal body hmm..

In reply to malk:

I think 28 if your picking one to do landscape and street. (If I were having one for each it would be a 24 and 35) hence one in the middle. I was just looking at my fave pics this morning and a good majority were taken at 28mm.

In reply to George Fisher:

yes, 28-35 would prob be my sweet spot, so veering away from the panny 20/1.7 to the 14/2.5 (although some CA issues that aren't corrected for in oly cameras- think i need to do more research..)

In reply to malk:

I have been really pleased with the Olympus 17mm f2.8 on my Olympus E-PL5. Compact and really sharp - a bit wide at times but I just have to get closer.

In reply to malk:

Ricoh GR1v 28mm film camera, they are so good they hold their price. Oh and i may be prepared to sell mine !!!!

In reply to malk:

Panny 20mm F/1.7 is great all-rounder, but can result in banding in some occasions.

I now have 12-40mm F/2.8, so much happier with a zoom lens again as I have been using different primes for most of the time last for the last decade (both for work and personal use).

In reply to malk:

(Since we're talking various crop factors here, all focal lengths are full-frame equivalent)

I shoot landscape and street, and have used a variety of focal lengths. For a while I used a 41mm pancake, but I eventually realised it was too wide in comparison with how I visualised the scene – I always ended up cropping. Now I use either 28mm or 50mm depending on the subject. Preference is 50mm for street and 28mm for landscape. I wouldn't be without a prime at both focal lengths.

In reply to malk:

20mm for landscape
50mm for street
only have the 50mm at the moment would love to have a 21mm ziess with full frame nNikon but going to have to wait a while for that

In reply to malk:

28mm here on digital - but 35mm on film for street photos.

In reply to malk:

Panny 20 is great unless you want to use it in the dark - the fly by wire focusing is absolutely unhelpful then. I changed to the Oly 17 f1.8 for that reason and it's good for street and environmental portraiture - the extra width over the panny helps.

In reply to malk:

I tend to use 50ish equivalent for people (35mm * 1.5) and as wide as I can afford for landscapes. Sometimes longer focal lengths are good for getting single mountains from a distance but it depends a lot on individual hills and circumstances.

In reply to jethro kiernan:

How are you getting on with that 50 btw?

In reply to malk:

14mm (28mm full frame equivalent) is my most-used length, but I guess it depends on your style. I'm sure there are shooters who prefer using a long lens most of the time. If I could afford it, I'd get a 12mm prime (24mm equiv) but probably no wider.
When I started, using 35mm film, I just used a 50mm prime for everything, which gave me some nice results. I got pretty used to it.
Anthony

In reply to ashaughnessy:

Its all a bit how long is a piece of string

For me the 20mm f1.7 Panny whould be too narrow (40mm equivalant)

If you have plenty of resolution then 28mm is perfect as its wide enough for landscapes. You can then crop back to 35mm equivalent fairly easily

In reply to John Clinch (Ampthill):

i do love my omd but not sure the weenie 4/3 16Mp sensor would take much cropping?
i'm pretty sure my smaller sony alpha outperforms the oly in image quality- important for landscapes..
will prob keep but not upgrade to mk 2 versions- APS-C for me..

ps wonder if Ken Rockwell/Blue Straggler ever upgraded from 6Mp -they always argued it was more than enough..

In reply to ashaughnessy:


same for me -just got used to what came with the camera. my first additional lens was a telephoto

i'm tempted by the samyang 12mm f2 4/3 - rather large (i wanted a pancake), but great for IQ and astro and can be used on sony with adapter?

In reply to malk:

Street photography, eh? Can't say I'm a photy, but I don't remember hearing this term. How long has it been current? It's an invitation for harassment claims, if you ask me. Or do you only snap the tarmac/cobbles?

In reply to malk:


I recall computer reviews from the time I bought my first one, along the lines of: "The massive 40 MB hard drive is more than ample, and the generous 2MB of RAM helps things zip along nicely." That said, as long as technology keeps improving we're never going to laugh the longest, let alone have the last laugh.

In reply to felt:

It's been around for a long time - the likes of Lee Friedlander and Gary Winogrand were considered street photographers. I agree that it is a bit of a minefield litigation-wise nowadays, but the bigger problem I have with it is that there's a lot of truly *terrible* street photography out there. A lot falls into the category of 'if I make it black and white that makes it into an interesting shot, right?'

In reply to Tall Clare:

Thanks, Clare.


That's the ruined factory/rusting machine banana skin too!

In reply to felt:


Of which I'm as guilty as the next person!

In reply to Tall Clare:

I did my best to resist going "(cough, cough)".

In reply to felt:

Fortunately I've pretty much stopped taking photographs.

Aaanyway - apologies to the OP for the slight derailment.

In reply to Tall Clare:


Isn't that true of landscape too? That Ansel Adams fellow got away with murder. As for action shots, those Abrahams would have been lucky to get votes in double digits on UKC.

In reply to Tall Clare:

found something better to do? do you think what's the point, nobody ever going to look at them?
i think felt has swapped photos for family/felt(bike)/food..

In reply to felt:


when i get too close and they complain, i just say i'm a photojournalist..

In reply to malk:





Only you will know what you do with your prints. But I get plenty of cropping on a 12mp D90 and a 20Mp RX100. Although the RX100 doesn't necessarily have more resolution

My 6Mp did really great 18 by 12 inch prints. I have yet to print that large from my newer cameras but feel sure that even cropped from 28mm FOV to 35mm I'd still get a really good 18 by 12 inch print

In reality most of my photos go online or in an 8 by 10 photo book. So except for high iso shots IQ is never an issue.

Out of interest what do you do with your shots?

PS Imaging resource do a handy print size estimator in their reviews. They recon that the sensor you have is good for 36 by 24 inch at base iso. That leaves room for cropping unless you have alot of wall space to fill

http://www.imaging-resource.com/PRODS/omd-em5/omd-em5A5.HTM