35/75 vs 28/50

[principe azul]

I feel that the 35/50 combo doesnt give me the versitality I want. [...] If only Zeiss could make me a 28/2...http://blog.alexanderkirkhoff.se

Nobody can answer for you, but it does help to read how other people resolved the problem of choosing focal lengths. And you'll probably change in a few years, anyway. Even Garry Winogrand did.

I used to shoot 35/50. Versatile, because the 35mm gives you twice the area of the 50mm, but it's not as dramatic as going from 18mm to 12mm.

I now have 25/35, but I don't use them as a pair, switching all the time. I have a normal speed 25 and a fast 35, so they kind of bracket the 28/2 that doesn't exist for under 2000GBP. There's overlap, but they're geared to different situations (and day and night). So there are clear uses for them, and I don't often take both with me. Again, the 25 gives twice the area of the 35.

When I shot 35/50, they were close in speed, and I think this was the frustration. For me, the problem wasn't having a sufficiently different field of view - six months of nothing but a 50 had taught me to use what I'd got - but having two lenses that did pretty much the same thing.

 

[Ken Ford]

I personally prefer 28 / 35 / 75...

 

[jbf]

Personally I've been using 35/50 combo for a few months and I have to sayt hat I've really gotten to enjoy the 50 focal length.

35 is nice too... however I realized that what I really wanted is a 28/50 combo personally.

50 lest you do very nice portraiture but also you can get a 35 length simply by taking a step back. You can get close to a 75 by taking a step forward (if you have a closer focus 50 lens). Whereas with a 28 you can have a nice wider angle shot for landscapes or whatever you need, but can also get a 35 range if you want by taking a step closer as well.

 

[Hephaestus]

I don't think speed needs to be critical, unless you need the speed for DOF effects.

Thist is the opinion of many good shooters, but I never found it to work out that well for me. With a f.1.4 lens I find that I can get away shooting 400asa film all the time- but even then I drop back to 1/15 of a second quite often. I could gain a stop or two in film, but I don't care for the added grain and it requires me to carry really severe ND filters when I go outside to shoot in the daylight (seeing as Leica tops out at 1/1000 s).

There are, however, people who are much more skilled at developing pushed film than I. If you have skill in the darkroom, you can certainly make up for a lot.

Ryan

 

[akptc]

Scott, you will clearly need a bigger camera bag, you know, for all the right lenses... 15mm CV, 21mm CV, 35/2 cron, 50/2 ZM, 75/2.5 CV,.... well, at least that's what I did and have the muscles to show for it 😀

 

[maddoc]

For me it was either 28/50 or 35. But recently I find the 21/35/50 combination more useful for my style of shooting. Anything longer than 50 doesn't work for me with a RF camera having a 0.72x VF. (M4-P and soon M4)

 

[Bingley]

As I have been assembling my LTM kit over the last couple of years, and road testing lenses, I find myself coming back to the 50 as the go-to lens. So my leanings are to the 28 or 35 + 50 combo. If I lean any further, I may have a CV 75 for sale.

 

[Artorius]

For film, I prefer the 28-40-90 combo. On the M8 I really like the 21-50 combo. Just my 2¢.

 

[alexz]

Speaking from personal experience, hence not sure how applicable it can be for others.
I used to shot a single 50mm FL for about a half year on my M6, found that FL to be quite convenient and very versitle for probably 80% of situations and my normal street lens. Then I took a plunge for 35mm lens (50mm lens found its permamnent home on my M3) and still making myself acquinted with 35mm on streets, but the more I do with one the more I like it, if not always for wider perspective, then for easier focusing thanks for larger DOF allowing scale focusing quite often. I found scale focusing can be paramount in many situations on streets where you are likely to raise the camera to your eye for a second or two just to compose without wasting time for precise focusing. For that alone I grew up to like my 35mm ASPH (along with its rect. hood of course 🙂 ).
So that I'd vote for 35mm//50mm combo, in particular on two separate bodies (and I ofetn carry both on me while on dedicated street session. 50mm is still preferable for street composition allowing keeping a comfortable distance from your subject, however 35mm goes in for quick shoots or wider view.

I did try my 90mm Elmarit for streets and admittedly found it quite useful as well, however figured the telephoto effect tends to "eat up" the dramma you're looking for on the streets and slow focusing impacts the fast passion of the street. However, makes it indispensable for dedicated portraiture.

Alex

 

[DaveSee]

Hello all, I am a photography student from sweden looking for advice regarding my choice of gear. I shoot mainly street and documentary but also portraits from time to time. I have the 35/2 ASPH, the Zeiss 50/2 and the Nokton 50/1.5. For bodies I have chosen the ZI and an M4-P. I feel great about my choices for bodies, the problem is the lenses. I feel that the 35/50 combo doesnt give me the versitality I want. I also feel that I (at least for now) want to limit myself to 2 lenses, one for each body. Hopefully this will trigger my imagination when it comes to composing rather then wasting time switching lenses. There is also the money factor... I used to shoot with the 35/90 combo but I never got along very well with the 90/2, too long, too big, too much job focusing correctly. I guess the reasonable choice for my kind of photography would be a 28/50 combo but then again, I really love that 35 ASPH... I would also lose one stop If not going down the Voigtländer road. If only Zeiss could make me a 28/2... Oh well, what are your thoughts on this tricky decision?

I have a couple of shots up on my blog, you just have to ignore the half hearted scans... Have a look at:
http://blog.alexanderkirkhoff.se

So, you have two bodies--each with their own feel--and want something more between 35 and 50, equally "fast"(aperture)?

From what I saw, I'd suggest the Zeiss 25/2,8(for versatility, and a near equal "hand" to your 50 kit). Yes, you love the 35/2, but the ZM 25 may change "all that". "25?", you ask... well, I have a 28, but the ZM 25 changed "all that". It's a lens a student will later teach 😉

hth+rgds,
Dave

 

[mfogiel]

I feel that the 35/75 combo is more about people, and the 28/50 is more about street (whereas the 25/50 is more about landscape...).

I would get the 35/1.2 Nokton to put on the ZI - this is what I do when I have to shoot in ANY light, and the 75/2.5 Heliar to put on the Leica - this way you would actually save some money and could keep the Nokton too.

Otherwise, selling your 35mm you could get the 28/1.9 Ultron AND a 35/2 Biogon - this way you would end up with a fast 28mm and a 35mm lens which for many on this forum is actually preferrable to the 35 Summicron ASPH. I feel that Leica lenses in general do not deliver value for money, and should be bought only if you need a specialist type of performance regardless of the price.

 

[40oz]

honestly, I'd prefer a 35 to a 50 most times if I'm already carrying both. But if I have only one lens, the 50 is the most handy for the sheer variety of shots it handles well. I wouldn't carry both as a matter of course, generally.

IMHO, if the 35 is too long, get a 28 or 25 or something. If a 90 is too long, get a 75. I wouldn't try to restrict yourself to two lenses simply because you have two bodies - if you want portrait-type shots tonight, grab the 75 or 90. If you want to capture the space, use the 28. If you are simply walking around taking shots of your neighborhood or something, grab the 35 or 50 and just work with them. I guess if you constantly wish for something other than what you have, pick one new length and see what happens.

The 35 is a handy length. But a wider lens is often necessary, especially if you are shooting indoors, ++ in low light. As has been stated, you don't need a really fast 28mm with a rangefinder.

I am wanting an 85mm, but realistically, it's for certain uses, not to keep on one body all the time. It's too long unless I'm intentionally isolating the subject with the frame instead of the depth of field.

Pushing films like Tri-X, Tmax400, and HP5 is simple. Kodak and Ilford provide more than enough data to get great results. Fast lenses are not a substitute for pushing film. The grain from Tri-X at 1600 or even 3200 is not offensive, and the images can be deceptive - I have some negatives I have to check my notes on or I forget they were pushed. It's all about exposure and relative development. D-76 won't create beachball grains at 3200, but if you want it, you can make it 🙂 Don't fear the push.

 

[Kim Coxon]

Bearing in mind what you already have, I would sell one of the 50's and get a CV75. Just because you have 3 lenses, doesn't mean you have to carry them. Try a 35/75 combination. If it works for you, then think about the future, if it doesn't think about selling the 35 and getting a 28. The 75 comes up quite often here so you would not lose much and would be able to make a more informed decision based on your own experience rather than others recomendations.

Kim