24mm as a boring wide angle

This summer treated me to two new lenses. Both are focal lengths I know well: 24mm and 90mm. The former is the exemplary Sony 24mm F1.4, which I bought used for about half its new price. Even at full price, this lens is worth every penny. It’s sharp corner to corner and beautifully built.

When reading reviews, I came across a few criticisms of the focal length itself—that 24mm is now “too normal”, given that it’s roughly the field of view of most smartphone main cameras. That might be true, but even the best phones don’t render like this lens. Of course, it depends on what you’re photographing.

I wanted to start this post with a photo from that lens, and I could have, but the first images I chose were actually from my 35mm F2.8 Zeiss.

Never mind. I’ve argued many times in favour of 35mm, and I still find it to be the perfect focal length. I also like 28mm, though the difference is subtle. 24mm, however, is definitely wider—and 20mm wider still. At 24mm, things aren’t too distorted, and it’s still possible to photograph people and places without perspective becoming strange.

It’s a fairly large lens, but just short enough to balance nicely on the camera. It feels like it’s simply going to get on with the job—and it does. The bokeh is beautiful, and the autofocus is instantaneous. I couldn’t ask for more from a lens (aside from it being half the size and weight).

I’m shooting with the A7CR, which reminds me fondly of my old NEX-7 from about fifteen years ago.

It’s funny—when I looked through my photos from the summer, most were taken with the 90mm. Most of my “keepers” came from a focal length I rarely use. But there are times when it’s clear: a 24mm shot can simply feel better. The 90mm has that “pro camera” look, but the 24mm often feels more natural.

So, there are some photos from the summer—taken at 24mm.
I’ll follow up this post with a look at the season through 90mm.

Thanks for dropping by!