You are half my age, Tobis, and I have been taking pictures beginning on my Kodak Brownie since 1968, but I find your perspective very refreshing. I too will never part with my Q2 (it is my technological muse and artistic partner), but it is complemented by my Nikon collection which of course includes 35, 40, 50, 55mm and many other focal lengths. I do love the images from the Z 50mm 1.8S, but also the images from its far less expensive little brother, the Z 40mm 2.0 (about a $200 lens that looks funny/cool on the huge Z9 and takes some very fun pics). These lenses really are paintbrushes in our hands and it is so damn fun. Of course, it is easier for me than for pros, because it is only a hobby for me, so I don't have any pressure to produce anything. I can take a whole day of sh*t photos because I forgot to change a setting back to zero and who cares. But most days I get one or two keepers that make me smile. And at the end of the day, if one is a hobbiest, this is a great expressive outlet for us - a way to keep our minds occupied, interested, intrigued and challenged. All the best to you in your journey.
I also use taking photos as an excuse to catch my breath on a steep climb, it's a great solution haha! Lovely video, I love the 40mm focal length and it suited the environment you were in very well
I discovered 40mm on my Leica m240 and I really love it. I never liked 50mm ( too narrow), I used a lot the 35mm but true that 40mm brings a little more bokeh particularly with a very fast lens. I now use the voigtlander 40mm f1.2 on my Nikon Zf ( I don’t t like Sony) and it’s a dream.
38-40mm lenses were popular in 60s & 70s’ range finder cameras. I’ve never used that focal length since shifted to SLR. However I got a used one for my 5dsr lately. It is so familiar when looking through the viewer. frankly, I like its angle than the 50mm.
40mm to 42mm range has been around for a very long time actually. Just seems like more people are realizing/remembering how good it really is. My next favorite is 35mm but mostly prefer 40/42, never did like 50mm much - it's more of a portrait lens, imho (50mm was WAY over done by many probably because it was really easy and cheaper to make, and came as a kit with a lot of film cameras). Have been using the Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM on a few different cameras since 2012 (or whenever it came out) currently lives on my Canon EOS - 1n film camera, great little lens.
I am proud to say that I have shot with a 40mm for 10 years now. I started to love that focal length when I bought the Canon EF 40mm f2.8 (pancake) for my Canon 6D in 2014. Shot some of my best street photographs with that combo. I then recommended it to a friend who also loved the lens. Since then I also bought the 27mm f2.8 for my Fuji system, an old Leica 40mm f2 for my M6 and the Sigma 40mm f.1.4 for my Canon system. :D
It seems like you were way ahead of the game! I actually went on a hunt to see if those old chunky Sigma 40mm f/1.4 lenses were still around for Sony. Seems they have been discontinued for a while.
@@TobisTings Yes. A lot of Sigma DSLR getting discontinued - sadly. The Sigma 40mm 1.4 is a heavy beast, but it is (optically) probably the best Sigma lens -> razor sharp from edge to edge at f1.4. I have used mine for two weddings already and love it.
Yep, that Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM is a great little lens, I'm currently using mine on a Canon EOS - 1n film body. I plan on getting the FE 40mm f/2.5 G, for my Sony.
Great video and beautiful pictures! I do love my viltrox 27mm f1.2 pro on my X-T5, I mainly use it for portraits and weddings. After working professionally for over 20 years on Apsc I finally decided to try full frame. I ordered the Nikon ZF and the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2. I kind of get inspired to shoot more vertical, i tend to shoot more horizontal.
I love my A7 IV, and have all three compact G lenses, the 35, 50, and 85mm fast GM lenses, and adapt my old Minolta lenses manual shooting. I usually shoot using Picture Profile film simulations and run with some minor, if any, Light edits in LR to the SOOC JPEGs. Have the Q2 Reporter and Monochrom, both of which I use regularly. I recently picked up the Nikon ZF, and even at only 24 megapixels, the photos are fantastic. Special color science, which makes even the raw files almost perfect SOOC. Reminds me of the Q2. I do, however, manually set the kelvin temperature for WB. Dropped a couple of hundred dollars on an e to z mount adapter with the right contacts, and all of my Sony lenses work flawlessly on the Nikon. Might be something worth considering 🤙
I am still going with my 28mm Vivitar 2.8 for landscape film shooting and my Miranda 50mm F1.8 for portrait-type stuff. Inexpensive lenses, but they are sharp. The 40 will certainly give you more field of view. Nice shots. I would have liked to have seen a horizontal landscape of the house at 7:51 - you have the leading lines of the path, the tree to the left and the house on the right. You probably would have had to back up a bit to fit it all in, however.
I do love my oly 20mm 1.4 (40mm equivalent) For me the 3 sweet spots to cover my bases as a people/street/documentary photographer: 18mm, 40mm, 90mm If I have these 3, I can shoot anything. BUT if I just wanna take 2 lenses, 30mm and 60mm work best (but I have a 50mm no 60mm, close enough)
Looking through photos of a trip to Paris last night, I was struck by how tight the images were. I think giving yourself a bit of crop room will result in better images.
I started shooting on my Sony A7 in 2014 with a Voigtlander 40/1.4 Classic M (and a Leitz Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8) - followed by a 40/1.2 E mount. It is a great focal length imo I change the CV40/1.2 with the 35GM on the A7Riii depending if I need all the AF features - can crop with no issues anyway now from 35mm
the diagonal of a 35mm sensor is 41mm, that means the 41mm is the natural view. that's why you like the 40. the first prime nikon ever made was a 40. i think i m not 100% sure.
I ended up owning that focal length as consequence of finding 33 or 35 too tight. I own the Fujifilm 18mm1.4 wr and love it but sometimes find it too wide. Never got used to the 35mm with my beloved Mitakon 35mm0.95 so I landed in the middle with a Viltrox 27mm1.2 and in spite of loving everything on this lens (except the weight), I find the 27mm a beautiful focal length to shoot but when supported by the 18mm. On my photography style that I would consider street/documentary, going with a 40mm (alone) seems a bit too restrictive sometimes at least to me. It’s hard to tell a story with just 40mm. Even if in the past (and present days) we had great photographers on 50mm, I watch those pictures more of showing a person in a place than showing a place with the person. That’s where the 18mm and 23mm (on crop) take their place, to create a history based on the surrounding making it perfect for travel photography or street photography where some place uniqueness has a meaning. Can be the busy street markets of Asia or some skyscrapers of NY. So 27mm(40mm FF) is the narrow a can go on primes as 18mm(28mm FF) is the widest I can go in the opposite direction. I’m getting used to the 27mm more and more but I’ve forced myself to this focal length trying to complement the 18mm because I find the alternative (and my comfort zone) of 23mm too close to 18mm, I took the chance of the amazing glass and aperture of f/1.2 from Viltrox and is a great lens.
How can you discuss which focal length looks natural when you don't mention the view size (print or display) and viewing distance? (Do you REALLY understand this, or just recite half of a theory?)
44 is too tight 28 ...too wide 35 ha ha 😮😂..... It's why I'm getting X100Vi 35 is me I shoot professionally a lot with GFX 100s ii..... My play camera is my x-five, but I'm selling that to get an X100Vi as I shot twenty three a lot on my XT5
Yes, everyone seems to love that focal length these days (GR3x and Q3 43). And If you mostly shoot short landscape and portraits, the 43mm would work fine. Though for street or urban images I can’t live without that 28mm. Cropping up to 50mm is actually adequate on the Q3 and when I need longer focal lengths I use my Sony A7rV with longer lenses. But if money were no object, I’d own the Q3 43.
You are half my age, Tobis, and I have been taking pictures beginning on my Kodak Brownie since 1968, but I find your perspective very refreshing. I too will never part with my Q2 (it is my technological muse and artistic partner), but it is complemented by my Nikon collection which of course includes 35, 40, 50, 55mm and many other focal lengths. I do love the images from the Z 50mm 1.8S, but also the images from its far less expensive little brother, the Z 40mm 2.0 (about a $200 lens that looks funny/cool on the huge Z9 and takes some very fun pics). These lenses really are paintbrushes in our hands and it is so damn fun. Of course, it is easier for me than for pros, because it is only a hobby for me, so I don't have any pressure to produce anything. I can take a whole day of sh*t photos because I forgot to change a setting back to zero and who cares. But most days I get one or two keepers that make me smile. And at the end of the day, if one is a hobbiest, this is a great expressive outlet for us - a way to keep our minds occupied, interested, intrigued and challenged. All the best to you in your journey.
I also use taking photos as an excuse to catch my breath on a steep climb, it's a great solution haha! Lovely video, I love the 40mm focal length and it suited the environment you were in very well
I discovered 40mm on my Leica m240 and I really love it. I never liked 50mm ( too narrow), I used a lot the 35mm but true that 40mm brings a little more bokeh particularly with a very fast lens. I now use the voigtlander 40mm f1.2 on my Nikon Zf ( I don’t t like Sony) and it’s a dream.
38-40mm lenses were popular in 60s & 70s’ range finder cameras. I’ve never used that focal length since shifted to SLR. However I got a used one for my 5dsr lately. It is so familiar when looking through the viewer. frankly, I like its angle than the 50mm.
40mm to 42mm range has been around for a very long time actually. Just seems like more people are realizing/remembering how good it really is. My next favorite is 35mm but mostly prefer 40/42, never did like 50mm much - it's more of a portrait lens, imho (50mm was WAY over done by many probably because it was really easy and cheaper to make, and came as a kit with a lot of film cameras). Have been using the Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM on a few different cameras since 2012 (or whenever it came out) currently lives on my Canon EOS - 1n film camera, great little lens.
I am proud to say that I have shot with a 40mm for 10 years now. I started to love that focal length when I bought the Canon EF 40mm f2.8 (pancake) for my Canon 6D in 2014. Shot some of my best street photographs with that combo. I then recommended it to a friend who also loved the lens. Since then I also bought the 27mm f2.8 for my Fuji system, an old Leica 40mm f2 for my M6 and the Sigma 40mm f.1.4 for my Canon system. :D
It seems like you were way ahead of the game! I actually went on a hunt to see if those old chunky Sigma 40mm f/1.4 lenses were still around for Sony. Seems they have been discontinued for a while.
@@TobisTings Yes. A lot of Sigma DSLR getting discontinued - sadly. The Sigma 40mm 1.4 is a heavy beast, but it is (optically) probably the best Sigma lens -> razor sharp from edge to edge at f1.4. I have used mine for two weddings already and love it.
Why proud?
Yep, that Canon EF 40mm f/2.8 STM is a great little lens, I'm currently using mine on a Canon EOS - 1n film body. I plan on getting the FE 40mm f/2.5 G, for my Sony.
😮
Great video and beautiful pictures! I do love my viltrox 27mm f1.2 pro on my X-T5, I mainly use it for portraits and weddings. After working professionally for over 20 years on Apsc I finally decided to try full frame. I ordered the Nikon ZF and the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2. I kind of get inspired to shoot more vertical, i tend to shoot more horizontal.
I love my A7 IV, and have all three compact G lenses, the 35, 50, and 85mm fast GM lenses, and adapt my old Minolta lenses manual shooting. I usually shoot using Picture Profile film simulations and run with some minor, if any, Light edits in LR to the SOOC JPEGs. Have the Q2 Reporter and Monochrom, both of which I use regularly. I recently picked up the Nikon ZF, and even at only 24 megapixels, the photos are fantastic. Special color science, which makes even the raw files almost perfect SOOC. Reminds me of the Q2. I do, however, manually set the kelvin temperature for WB. Dropped a couple of hundred dollars on an e to z mount adapter with the right contacts, and all of my Sony lenses work flawlessly on the Nikon. Might be something worth considering 🤙
I am still going with my 28mm Vivitar 2.8 for landscape film shooting and my Miranda 50mm F1.8 for portrait-type stuff. Inexpensive lenses, but they are sharp. The 40 will certainly give you more field of view. Nice shots. I would have liked to have seen a horizontal landscape of the house at 7:51 - you have the leading lines of the path, the tree to the left and the house on the right. You probably would have had to back up a bit to fit it all in, however.
Beautiful images. A lovely walk and conversation.
I do love my oly 20mm 1.4 (40mm equivalent)
For me the 3 sweet spots to cover my bases as a people/street/documentary photographer: 18mm, 40mm, 90mm
If I have these 3, I can shoot anything.
BUT if I just wanna take 2 lenses, 30mm and 60mm work best (but I have a 50mm no 60mm, close enough)
Looking through photos of a trip to Paris last night, I was struck by how tight the images were. I think giving yourself a bit of crop room will result in better images.
I started shooting on my Sony A7 in 2014 with a Voigtlander 40/1.4 Classic M (and a Leitz Tele-Elmarit 90/2.8) - followed by a 40/1.2 E mount. It is a great focal length imo I change the CV40/1.2 with the 35GM on the A7Riii depending if I need all the AF features - can crop with no issues anyway now from 35mm
It’s an old focal length which is being rediscovered by the new generation.
the diagonal of a 35mm sensor is 41mm, that means the 41mm is the natural view. that's why you like the 40.
the first prime nikon ever made was a 40. i think i m not 100% sure.
I ended up owning that focal length as consequence of finding 33 or 35 too tight. I own the Fujifilm 18mm1.4 wr and love it but sometimes find it too wide. Never got used to the 35mm with my beloved Mitakon 35mm0.95 so I landed in the middle with a Viltrox 27mm1.2 and in spite of loving everything on this lens (except the weight), I find the 27mm a beautiful focal length to shoot but when supported by the 18mm. On my photography style that I would consider street/documentary, going with a 40mm (alone) seems a bit too restrictive sometimes at least to me. It’s hard to tell a story with just 40mm. Even if in the past (and present days) we had great photographers on 50mm, I watch those pictures more of showing a person in a place than showing a place with the person. That’s where the 18mm and 23mm (on crop) take their place, to create a history based on the surrounding making it perfect for travel photography or street photography where some place uniqueness has a meaning. Can be the busy street markets of Asia or some skyscrapers of NY. So 27mm(40mm FF) is the narrow a can go on primes as 18mm(28mm FF) is the widest I can go in the opposite direction. I’m getting used to the 27mm more and more but I’ve forced myself to this focal length trying to complement the 18mm because I find the alternative (and my comfort zone) of 23mm too close to 18mm, I took the chance of the amazing glass and aperture of f/1.2 from Viltrox and is a great lens.
35 all the way, but I do have an 85mm on my Christmas list.
Got an 85mm lens coming in too Can't wait! :)
I’m actually really loving shots from an 85mm
I want the 43 too but the price doesn’t justify the focus system and other things (coming from mirrorless experience) maybe im just poor lol
I don't believe this myth that there is a correct focal length. I would never buy a camera without interchangeable zoom lenses.
How can you discuss which focal length looks natural when you don't mention the view size (print or display) and viewing distance? (Do you REALLY understand this, or just recite half of a theory?)
Because perspective doesn’t change, no matter the medium or viewing distance.
Close one of your eyes:
40mm
44 is too tight
28 ...too wide
35 ha ha 😮😂.....
It's why I'm getting X100Vi
35 is me
I shoot professionally a lot with GFX 100s ii..... My play camera is my x-five, but I'm selling that to get an X100Vi as I shot twenty three a lot on my XT5
I prefer 35 but I guess I’m not “everyone”
Wow
43 doesn't suit me..if I need 43 I'll crop my 35
You can't widen an image though
Yes, everyone seems to love that focal length these days (GR3x and Q3 43). And If you mostly shoot short landscape and portraits, the 43mm would work fine. Though for street or urban images I can’t live without that 28mm. Cropping up to 50mm is actually adequate on the Q3 and when I need longer focal lengths I use my Sony A7rV with longer lenses. But if money were no object, I’d own the Q3 43.
I have my old crap Sony 28mm on my a7cr on crop mode making it roughly 42mm. No big whop
I guess that’s made in China for you. Funny that the brand only has wiki in Japanese and French.
She Sony 40mm f/2.5 is also made in China so that was not a deciding factor.
40 is not 43
Are you a german or something?
3:47
@@jg_jgjg Thanks. I heard that the topic was forbidden. We have to pretend now that 40 is 43.
Not at all.