Which focal length is best for street and travel photography: 28mm or 35mm? If you've been thinking about buying a compact camera but you're not sure if 28mm or 35mm suits your style better, hopefully, this article will help.
In March 2024, I took two compact classics with me to China for a week: the Ricoh GR III and the Fujifilm X100VI. I shot both cameras side by side during an 8-day trip. Although there doesn't seem to be a huge difference with the focal lengths, you'll see through the photos below just how much of a difference 7mm makes.
My Traditional Preference
I must confess that I've always been a 35mm guy—or so I thought. Before I bought the Ricoh GR III Diary Edition camera, I'd always loved 35mm-equivalent lenses. The wonderful Fujinon XF 35mm f/1.4 R lens for Fujifilm X Series is one of my all-time favorite lenses. I'm also a huge fanboy of the X100 line with its 35mm-equivalent focal length. Since the launch of the original X100 in 2010, I've owned every camera in the series apart from the X100S.
Ricoh GR III Versus Fujifilm X100VI
In March 2024, I impulsively bought the Fujifilm X100VI despite telling myself I wouldn't. A week later, I took it and the GR III on a trip to Beijing, Suzhou, and Shanghai.
I was looking forward to this match up, as I'd already come to the conclusion that the GR III was the perfect camera for street and travel photography. It was a lot of fun using both cameras, but I did get a little sick of swapping back and forth all the time.
Soon I'll write an article about which of these you should buy, but for now, we're just looking at how the difference in focal length affects different scenes.
Image Comparisons
In the photo comparisons below, the Ricoh 28mm image is on the left, and the Fujifilm 35mm image is on the right. When taking the comparison images, I tried to stay in the same spot for both photos so I could compare and contrast the shots.
Film Simulations
All images are JPGs, with only minor cropping and exposure corrections in Lightroom. The Ricoh shots used the camera's Positive Film simulation, and the Fujifilm shots used the new Reala Ace simulation. If you're keen to see how Reala Ace stacks up against four other color film sims, make sure you check out my Fstoppers article Reala Ace: How Does the X100VI’s New Film Simulation Compare?
Which Focal Length Is Best?
That's pretty much down to personal taste and the story you'd like to tell. The wider view of 28mm is ideal for street photography as it allows you to tell a more layered story, including more of your surroundings. The 35mm view can be better for focusing on a main subject in an image, with less distraction.
The 28mm vs 35mm choice also depends on which camera brand you want to shoot with, as the X100 line is strictly 35mm-equivalent focal length, unless you use the somewhat hefty wide and tele converters.
With Ricoh, you have the choice of 28mm equivalent lens on the GR III or 40mm with the GR IIIx. If you'd like to see example street and travel photos with the 40mm lens, make sure you check out my GR IIIx review and photos on Fstoppers. I'll be including all three cameras in an upcoming comparison article.
More Image Comparisons
If you'd like to see even more photo comparisons between the Ricoh GR III and the Fujifilm X100VI, make sure you check out the video at the top of this article where I compare more than 50 side-by-side images.
Conclusion
After spending a week shooting two compact classics side by side in China, I've gained a deeper appreciation for how these two focal lengths shape storytelling in street and travel photography.
I can't help but feel that for fast-moving travel and street photography, 28mm feels more natural for me. It excels at creating a sense of place and including more elements in the frame to build a richer narrative. However, this wider field of view demands careful composition to avoid clutter or distraction.
The 35mm focal length seems to shine more when isolating a subject is key. With a slightly narrower view, it helps simplify compositions and can lend immediacy. It's a much better choice for close-up portraits or if you want to focus attention on a specific detail.
Ultimately, the best focal length comes down to personal taste, shooting style, the story you want to tell, and which camera brand you like. Both have their strengths, and choosing one over the other depends on what resonates with you as a photographer.
Which is your pick for street and travel photography: 28mm or 35mm? Let me know in the comments.
The Ricoh colors are nicer, but 28mm looks too much like a phone picture. I like the slight compression of 35mm better.
Love the Ricoh colors! If you saw the photos in Lightroom (and not smaller versions here) you might appreciate the quality a bit more, thanks for reading!
Im confused on this, Ricoh is APS-C right?
If so, the lens on that is actually 18.3mm not 28mm but the lens in the Fujifilm is actually 35mm or 50mm equivalent on full frame
So it seem that in full frame equivalent you're testing 28mm against 50mm
The Fuji is a 23mm F2 lens, so a full frame 35mm equivalent.
Yes, correct :)
Neither is a full frame camera, so those are equivalent FF focal lengths :)
If I had the budget - I think the Leica Q43 is spot on, so somewhere around 40 to 50mm.
I shot 44 alot with my GFX and its a bit tight for me unless doing portraits.
A great all round focal length, but I'd want a wider lens with me too, or a wide angle converter for a fixed lens cam
When I was younger i was very much a 20 to 28 'wide" shooter
Now with wisdom 35mm to 40mm is my preferred.
44mm is too tight unless doing portraits.
35mm is my preferences plus you can always take 2 pics at 35 and stitch them for a wide shot. And likewise you can crop in a 28 to 35.
So just maybe it realky doesnt matter too much these days.
40mm.
You seem to be confusing APSC and FF a bit, calling both the x100vi and 35mm 1.4 as 35mm equivalent. It's a great lens but doesn't seem to belong to this discussion, unless you really meant the 23mm 1.4!
I agree with your conclusions, but I feel from the photos you have taken that many are situations ideally suited to 28mm, and then repeated with the 35mm equivalent. So the 35mm images as a result seem to lack something in the composition. The reverse is true with the more portrait orientated images.
I think if you approach a 35mm equivalent as a cropped 18mm image, you don't master that FL and vice versa.
So, using it this way, on the one hand you can always crop into the 28mm images to get to 35, even if you gain depth of field and lose compression compared to a native lens of that focal length.
I really enjoy 28mm.
But this is where buying the WCL converter for the x100vi is the best of both worlds. Some days I use the x100 mostly with the WCL mounted, but I've always got the opportunity to use it at 35mm when the location opens up. Plus it's f2 not f2.8, which is nice for both the 28mm and 35mm applications of the camera.
Which is why the GFX fixed lens camera is a mistake in my opinion, starting at 28mm, when a longer focal length with a wide angle converter could have made it far more versatile - even if adding cost and bulk.
It seems pretty clear to me that the Ricoh is the more versatile of the two AND it fits in your pocket.
I pretty much only carry my x100vi in my slim (not skinny!) jeans 🤷🏻
And in my back pocket is the tiny wide angle converter that gives me 28mm on demand. All at f2. Crop in the Ricoh to 35mm field of view and it's equivalent to f3.5. Quite a difference.
The one thing I don't like about that.Camera is the build quality.There's been a lot of problems with it.I also think it's probably the ugliest camera i've ever looked at. I held one in my hands once and it just is not an inspiring camera to hold.
I'd go for the GRIIIx (40mm EFL).