35 or 50?

35 or 50?

  • 35mm

    Votes: 292 53.0%

  • 50mm

    Votes: 259 47.0%
  • Total voters
    551
I'm also with the 35, IMO reason why most people have many 50s is due to price and availability of many Leica and other brands of this focal lengh
 
I do like the 50 mm summicron/M8 a lot, gets in to the psychology better.
With an M10 :angel: I would vote different of course.
albert
 
For years all I had was a 28 and a 50, then I added an 85. When I finally got a 35, it didn't seem to have a particular point of view (probably from lack of habit), and still doesn't. Even now, when I go out for a walk, it's usually with a 28 or 24 on the camera and 50 in my pocket. If I had to choose just one, though, it would be the 50. The camera I will never sell is my IIIb with a more modern Elmar, and that would be fine for me if I couldn't have anything else.
 
Last edited:
I go back and forth between the 50 and the 35, but when I stick the 40 on the camera it tends to stay there for a long time. And that's regardless of whether I'm shooting with 24x36 or 16x24 format.
 
Used to prefer wider, now prefer the 50.

I think my photography went from an attempt to do something "street photographer"-like (Lee Friedlander was my idol, and Gary Winogrand and Robert Frank my minor deities) to doing something else. The utter normality of the mundane 50mm lens view sort of suits me best now.
 
40mm is perfect. Oskar Barnack only chose 50mm (5cm!) because it what what he had knocking around. However, few Leicas have 40mm framelines so I'd give 50mm the nod. 35mm seems mnore versatile but it's too easy to get accidental perspective distortion, there's not enough bokeh unless you're really close to the subject and it's limited for portrait use.

Like most people here, I use both.
 
ChrisN said:
If you had to settle for just one lens, would it be a 35mm or a 50mm?
Click to expand...

So I've noticed that a subject starts to fill the 50mm frameline on an M Leica right about the same time I start to feel i'm standing on the edge of their personal space, so it works pretty well for me. Might warm up to 35 but only b/c the wider angle lets me pretend I'm shooting something I'm not :D
 
I have to say that, for me, the 40 is only a good compromise in theory. In practice, I find it not quite wide enough when I need 35, and it isn't quite 50 either. In the end, I find myself a bit frustrated with 40--but it seems I'm in the minority!

50 is my pick, hands down. It's my go-to on my D700, my FM2, and my ME Super. With the 50 Summicron I ordered today, it will be my go-to on my M3.

However, my X100 is forcing me to use 35 more and more, since I can't seem to put that camera down lately!
 
With all this talk about 40's I got nostalgic and put the 43mm Pentax-L (which I haven't used in a while, only on film) on the M9, telling the cam it's a 50 'cron. The glass was made for SLR use, so is well-forward in the mount and should be very suitable for DRF use. I put the 43/50 viewfinder on top for reference. Now I've got to wander about in the cold seeking subjects... :rolleyes:
 
I think it depends on:
1) which particular 35mm and which 50mm lens you have.
2) what you are fotographing.

I use 35/1.2 and 50/1.5 for people.
I use 40/2 for hiking, travel and landscapes.

In general, I find the 35mm gives more "keeper" shots than the 50mm, but when I get it right with the 50mm (in other words have time for a tighter composition) the 50mm really nails it and I get a higher fraction of "outstanding" shots with the 50mm.

The 40mm is the perfect compromise for me - great for the wider view in landscapes, and loose enough for quick grab shots of people with envirnmental context, but still not so wide that semi-close close portraits distort facial features.

My travel setup on M9 is 21/2.8 + 40/2 + 75/2.5 (but saving for 90/4 macro).

In summary - I cannot choose one from 35 or 50mm.
I either take both or a 40mm.
 
I have been using mostly 50mm lenses for the past 20 years, followed by a brief affair with 35mm lenses, but then I saw reason, and returned to a nice balance between 35mm lenses and 50mm lenses. I have no special favoring of one over the other anymore. Both focal lengths can be used for almost any photography type.

The fast 50mm lenses can be less costly than fast 35mm lenses though.
 
A few months ago, I would have said 35mm, without hesitation.. but I have been shooting with only a 50 for the past few weeks and loving it..
 
I grew up on 50's and that is still my "baseline." Going wider feels new and challenging to me. I have recently bought a 25 and a 40. I think I am starting to fall for the 40.
 
I've gone back and forth, but finally settled on the current 50 summicron. I find I can pick out the extraneous stuff in a shot easily with a 50. Now if I could only purchase the Summilux Asph, I'd be set for a long time.
 
George Bonanno said:
Lazy eyes prefer a 35mm or equivalent.

A trained eye demands a 50mm or equivalent.
Click to expand...


That's so not true! We all know lazy eyes prefer the 28mm.

Seriously, it's generally harder to isolate the subject with a 35mm, therefore many ended up being "snapshot" alike. A "trained" eye that demands a 50mm simply suggests an untrained eye for 35mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom