Originally posted by dimxatzis Hi guys, I am considering 2 options. An 28 mm 2.8 or 35 mm 1.8. But I don't know if 35mm is a good option for landscapes.
I have done a fair amount of landscape work on 35mm film and have used a number of different focal lengths over the years, though with most being done with 28mm due to the nature of my usual subjects (big stuff, relatively close). Here are two examples taken from close to the same spot on different days with different cameras, one with 35mm focal length and the other with 28mm.
Kiev 4A, LZOS Jupiter-12 35mm f/2.8 Pentax SV, Super Takumar 28mm f/3.5
The area at the base of Multnomah Falls in the Columbia River Gorge is rather "tight" such that one has the choice of either going wide to catch the full drop or going a bit longer to concentrate on a portion of the scene. Note that even 28mm was not wide enough to grab the full scene to include the lower plunge pool, but going to 24mm might have been a tad too wide.
Steve