What about the 35-75 combo?

My usual two-lens combo is either 28+50 or 35+75. Both work well, though I try to guess which might be better for anticipated circumstances. Sometimes I'm even right (!) but both seem to offer useful flexibility.

...Mike
 
I own a 35, but I rarely use it; not that it isn't a great lens, but I just don't prefer this focal length as well as something wider or longer. My two lens kit of choice is 28 and 50 or 28 and 75, although I am rarely without the 21. Some say 50 and 75 are too close, but I use the same excuse that many of you use for the 35/50 combination: each is different enough to warrant both. I really like the 75 Summilux; what a beautiful rendition it gives. If someone wants a 35 Summicron ASPH, I probably can be talked into selling mine.
 
mfunnell said:
My usual two-lens combo is either 28+50 or 35+75. Both work well, though I try to guess which might be better for anticipated circumstances. Sometimes I'm even right (!) but both seem to offer useful flexibility.

...Mike
Click to expand...
Mine too. I use an MP with 28/2.8 & 50/1.4 or 35/1.4 & 75/2. It depends on the shooting situations you think you're going to get but my favorite is the 35/75 combo. To my eye the 35 is a normal lens so I use that lens for a one lens kit, and while the 50 is a mild telephoto the 75 seems to complement the 35 better. Both are excellent combinations though.
 
This has made me think... If we JUST talk 2 lens kits, then I think I usually end up as follows:

M7 - 40 & 90 - My M7 is a .85, so the 90 Elmarit-M is a good match. The 40 is the Nokton, so is a good balance of speed and focal length

M2 - 35 & 50 - The 50 in this case is the DR. The 35 may be a VC 2.5 or a Summaron 3.5

IIIc - 35 & 50 - A 3.5 collapsible Elmar, and the aforementioned Summaron.

If I go "trinity", then it varies to:

M7 - 35, 50, 75 - the VC as before, and the VC 75 joining a 2.8 Elmar-M

M2 - 35, 50, 90 - of course. In this case the 90 would be the collapsible

IIIc - 35, 50, 90 - An Elmar rounds out this set.

The "orphans" in the above are my VC15mm and 28mm. To me they are "specialist" lenses - too wide for normal use.

Finally, one lens would be:

M7 - 40mm Nokton
M2 - 50mm DR Summicron
IIIc - 50mm 3.5 Elmar

...And those last three are what I usually carry.

Regards,

Bill
 
I haven't warmed to the 35/75 combo. While I like the 35 focal length, I haven't found a use yet for the 75 that could not also be covered by a 50, and I find the 50 to be a more versitile focal length. For example, I have found the 75 to be a difficult lens to use when doing street shots; the 50, in contrast, works well for me in that department. I should give my 75 (a vc) another try, though, before deciding whether to sell it.
 
Don´t own a 75mm lens for rf, but do use two primes - 24mm and 50mm - with my dslr. Because of the crop of 1,5 they give a field of view as 35mm and 75mm on a Leica or Zeiss Ikon.

Since I do have the dslr for about a year I became quite pleased with this focal lenghts - even like 35mm though I never liked to use my 35mm on the rf before that.

It´s quite a versatile combination, though I prefer 85mm or 90mm lenses.

Thomas
 
With my M8, my current preference for documentary work - generally in lowlight - is a 75 lux and 35/1.2 nokton (which is likely to be replaced by the new 35/1.4 nokton). I take along a 28 hexanon and CV15 for the occasional wide shot, but those are pretty rare. I could get by with just the 35 and 75 and be quite happy.
 
When I started out many years ago, I used only a 35 and a 90. It was a bit of a challenge, but it forced me to find a way to make every shot work at one of those focal lengths. As the 75 is less restricting than 90, I think 35/75 would work as well or better than 35/90.
 
It's my standard. Two bodies, two lenses: 35/1.4 and 75/2.

I also have 15-21-28-50-90-135 but I doubt that all if them together get as much use as 35+75.

My wife prefers 50 on her camera and a 90 in her pocket; 18 or 21 as #3 (16-18-21 when we can afford it).

Mind you, that's on a real Leica. On the M8 I use the 50 a lot.

Cheers,

R.
 
Bingley said:
I haven't warmed to the 35/75 combo. While I like the 35 focal length, I haven't found a use yet for the 75 that could not also be covered by a 50, and I find the 50 to be a more versitile focal length. For example, I have found the 75 to be a difficult lens to use when doing street shots; the 50, in contrast, works well for me in that department. I should give my 75 (a vc) another try, though, before deciding whether to sell it.
Click to expand...

Exactly like Steve. I tried the 75 FL and it wasn't for me, which is a shame really because all three 75's on offer are great lenses. Use of hyperfocal was very impractical for street photography while getting the focus right for portraits at closest distance is quite a challenge (what was good enough for the 50 is suddenly not good enough for the 75). I have now resigned to the fact that I 'll use longer lenses with an SLR, and 35 +50 is what I am using on rangefinders.
 
Roger Hicks said:
It's my standard. Two bodies, two lenses: 35/1.4 and 75/2.

I also have 15-21-28-50-90-135 but I doubt that all if them together get as much use as 35+75.

My wife prefers 50 on her camera and a 90 in her pocket; 18 or 21 as #3 (16-18-21 when we can afford it).

Mind you, that's on a real Leica. On the M8 I use the 50 a lot.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Roger, have you done a comparison between your 75 Summicron and the new 75 Summarit? (I may have missed it if you did.)

I very much like the 75 on a RF, and would like to replace my CV at some point.
 
Since I have already the C Sonnar 50mm and a Nikon AIS 24mmf2 (I am thinking of getting an adapter, it is such a nice lens) and then getting a 90mm. Any suggestions? I was thinking of looking for a Leica "thin" tele elmarit 90mm f2.8?
This would give me a 24-50-90 combo.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom