35 or 50?

[gho]

35 mm. Why? I like to add some context in the shots and 50 mm detach me a bit too much from the scene. Of course this only counts for what I feel when photographing. If I were into taking pictures of some beautiful animals without disturbing their presence, I would surely prefer a strong tele, but that is not what I am after.

 

[raid]

I join no group. Both focal lengths sre great for me. I used to put down tne 35mm lens, but now i accept it as a good focal length. The 50mm lens needs no excuse. It is what Leica and Contax photogrsphy was all about.

 

[Lax Jought]

I used to put down tne 35mm lens, but now i accept it as a good focal length.

Why did you used to put down the 35mm?

 

[raid]

Why did you used to put down the 35mm?

I felt tnat only a 50m lens would do and that 35mm was not wide and not normal, so it was an odd focal length.

 

[Lax Jought]

ah I think I know what you mean. It's sort of an in-between focal length, between a really wide angle and the standard 50.

 

[raid]

Yes, this is what I meant. I preferred for many years a 24mm lens as my wide angle lens, and a 50mm lens as my normal lens.

 

[dave lackey]

Really like the 35 cron, but if I could only have one, it would be the 50. Very much a people and portrait photographer and I like the way the 50 treats faces better than the 35.

Best,
-Tim

Personally, I have little use for the 35mm or anything wider in portraits. I hate the distortion.

I am, however, finding other uses for the 35mm but it is not a lens I would choose for what I do. Only a 50 will do for most of my work, especially documentaries. Portraits for me work better with teles. A 90..105..135...200. Just wish I had one but will continue using my SLR and zoom until I can get a prime and it will most likely be a Leica R lens.

My granddaughter with a 50mm Nikkor 1.4:

Friends w/ 200mm:

YMMV but that is just me.:angel:

 

[jawarden]

My granddaughter with a 50mm Nikkor 1.4:

That's a great shot, Dave.

 

[J.S.]

It has always been a 50 mm for me. A few years back, I thought I should try the 35, and it was ok, at least it was easier to fit into a bicycle bag), but the 50 is my preference.

www.judithsteiner.com

 

[alexnotalex]

easy, 50, no hedging.

the images of memories in my brain are all at 50mm FOV.

so when I shoot, they look like my memories.

 

[Sam Kanga]

"35 or 50?"

I would have to say - "Yes"

 

[FTography]

Interesting points raised here and there. Again, I guess, it has been proven that 35/50 is a natural and popular dual lens choice. Of the two, I would be inclined to lean towards a 35mm as I prefer the flexibility, intimacy with the subject(s) and - as others have mentioned before - often lack the space or time to step back.
If I had to pick any one focal length, though, it would be a 40mm. It offers a nice compromise of natural presentation and versatility. I also found it refreshing that its rendering deviates from the excessively used 35mm and 50mm perspective.

To that end, I am both glad and surprised to see, that there is so much praise for this 'odd' 40mm focal length that has been 'neglected' by Leica for quite some time now. Both concerning newer lens designs and cameras with 40mm frame lines.

 

[andreios]

The 35 (early Summilux) is the only lens I have for my M2, but I really would prefer a 50.. Maybe one day..

 

[Michel.Roth]

I choose 50mm. Firstly because this was my only lense... and I'm more portraitist then street photographer. then i've got 28mm for landscapes and even then I continued shoot landscapes on 50mm and honestly I never shoot 35mm, so my opinion could not be complet... and now, couple months ago I bougth 5cm summitar 1939! now I must say that for me 50mm is perfect focal length

 

[Range-rover]

I just got a 35mm f2.5 Nikkor for my S2, it's what I like on a rangefinder 50mm are
great but I keep going back to get everything in, so 35mm it is.

Range

 

[albygentle]

this thread would have been better with pictures from each to go with the posts.)