@TorbjornLunde I got the 35mm f2 and the 50mm f2. I also have a couple of old manual lenses I use with an adapter which are a holdover from when I was actually using screw-mount film bodies 20 years ago. But those are a bit too clunky to be fun TBH.
The f2s are both great, seem to handle everything I throw at them. The 35mm is obviously a tad more versatile, though. I'm planning eventually to get the 23mm f2 for wider shots.
@baldur Interesting! I got the 23mm f2 myself. In my previous system I had a 50mm fullframe equivalent. I convinced myself that I needed a 35mm ff.eqv.
And it certainly is flexible (and produces good results)! But I really miss having a slightly narrower FOV. The 50mm (35mm APS-C) FOV tended to get me really beautifully composed shots. So I am considering getting that one down the line (when I can afford it).
But at the same time it seems to close to the 23mm, you know?
Yeah. I hear you. My interest in the 23mm is mostly driven by a desire to take wider (but not too wide) landscape photos when I'm visiting back home in Iceland.
So, I'll probably get a better sense whether 23mm actually makes sense for me when I go back this July. I might decide against it if the 35mm does the job well enough.
Might make sense, like you say, to get a completely different type of lens instead.
@baldur Interestingly I only had a 50mm (full frame) for years and it really pushed me to consider perspective/"crops" of landscapes I wouldn't have otherwise.
Camera Talk Show more
@baldur Interesting! I got the 23mm f2 myself. In my previous system I had a 50mm fullframe equivalent. I convinced myself that I needed a 35mm ff.eqv.
And it certainly is flexible (and produces good results)! But I really miss having a slightly narrower FOV. The 50mm (35mm APS-C) FOV tended to get me really beautifully composed shots. So I am considering getting that one down the line (when I can afford it).
But at the same time it seems to close to the 23mm, you know?