I would think the answer will be your needs related to your photography style. I only have 45mm G lens and it is OK for my need. I might get a 90mm G lens later, but to my current need it is a nice-to-have, not a must.
>=20 >=20 >=20 > [the Hologon 16/8 because you rarely need to focus it and it has the fixe= d F/8 > so all needed is to concentrate on composition and have G2 to do the mete= ring. > Quality is certainly the best among the wide angle lenses. ] >=20 >=20 >=20
If I would have only one lens, I would prefer the 45, because it is versatile. But I love the 21, the little brother of the Hasselblad SWC. The 28 is a necessity if I have to use the TLA 200 in the wideangel range. I own a 90 too, but I use it seldom. That's why I like to go close to my motifs. I don't compare the lenses due to their quality, they all are very fine.
> IMHO, the most versatile G lens is the 35mm/f2- it is not as spectacular as some of the other lenses but a good overall performer- once you get used to it and overcome some of the prejudice relative to this focal length, you will also understand why 35mm is/was standard issue for photo-journalism.
> I have a na=EFve lens/optics question. Suppose I shoot a subject up close w= ith a 28mm lens, say, and then move away and shoot the same subject with a 90mm, taking care to keep subject size and dof the same in both images (can I do this?), how will the images differ, if at all? I am not asking about differ= ences in lens quality, rather about the appearance of the final image. Thanks for comments.
The 21. While it's a little more challenging to use because of the external finder, the results from this little lens can be spectacular. It's the first very wide angle lens I've owned and I have to say that it has been very enjoyable learning how to take advantage of the unique perspective such a wide lens offers.
I also find myself using the zoom a good deal, in large part due to the convenience. Fortunately the results are up to par with what I expect from a G lens. The 21 + zoom make a fine travel combo.
This is a very interisting test. At a given size of your subject and a given aperture, you will get the same dof with all lenses. The only changing thing is the relation among the foreground and the background. With a tele lens, everything comes closer together.
Bernard, this is difficult to explain in words, but easy to see in pictures. So, I went searching for something on the net that would give you an answer in pictures. The different focal lengths will each give you a different level of compression. It's not *really* a perspective change, although you might think so at first glance. Think of this as the squashed-ness of the items in your photograph, behind and in front of your subject. It's easier to show in pictures... you'll see it on this site. (This isn't my site) I hope this helps.
> All the G lenses are of equivalent quality in terms of optical quality so the decision must be based on practicality and the type of subject normally shot. As someone who tends to take photos while travelling or on holiday - for me the choice must be a toss up between the Biogon 28 > and the Planar 35. The Biogon is more versative but the Planar is the faster lens. At the moment the Biogon is the favourite since I remain amazed at the lack of distortion despite the wide-angle perspective which makes it usable for portraits. My least used lens is the Sonnar 90 > simply because it the most cumbersome to carry. When I do use it, the results are always incredible.
Hi just to add to the posting about prespective,prespective is a function of viewpoint not focal length if you take two photographs from the same viewpoint with differant focal length lenses and enlarge an area of the one taken with the shorter focal the prespective will be identical. the assumption that it is a function of focal length springs from the fact that normaly to maintain image size you move viewpoint.
45mm planar. the 90 is not fast enough, the 28 is sharp but boring and the 21 is fun but somewhat hard to compose with. the planar is a pretty damn fine optic, easily up there (at f2.8 and above) with a summicron, which is a pretty fine glass in its own right.
This is a difficult question to answer, because my favorite lens depends on the kind of photography that I happen to be doing at any given time. For portraits, the 90mm is absolutely fantastic. I think that this may be the most underappreciated lens in the entire G lineup. For general shooting and landscapes, I use the 45mm most often.