35mm or 50mm Lens and Why.

you can see it in 'self portraits'.

koudelka accidentally received a canon 25mm instead of a 35mm. in another world...
 
ghost said:
you can see it in 'self portraits'.

koudelka accidentally received a canon 25mm instead of a 35mm. in another world...
Click to expand...

yeah, I just grabbed my JK book, much ider than a 35.

.
 
Also I like both, but doing vertical 35 mm shots is not easy. Usually the ceiling or the sky are too much in. Most of the time I use 35 mm, but I crop in PS. Perhaps my SLR zoom habits are bad
 
35 on the m8 or 50?

35 on the m8 or 50?

Seems the obvious would be the 35mm on the m8 but nobody offers the comparision yet...I have used other digitals than the leica with crop factors and the wider lenses seem to shoot and produce diffrent results than i thought although using a 500mm glass i was very pleased with the results.

What comparisons can anyone offer who has shot with the m8?

barry
 
I spent three years trying to convince myself I was a "natural" 35mm shooter. Even in that period I got more keepers when I used a 50 and spent half my time cropping 35mm shots down to about a 50mm field of view. Thus, I'm a 50 kind of guy, but keep the 35 on hand for when I need something wider but still "normal".
 
I'd like to know more about the reasoning in your choice of 35mm or 50mm lenses as your main lens. Paul[/QUOTE said:
Paul: I think that reasoning has little to do with it; I think we learn to see iamges with a certain implicit angle of view, as well as other visual characteristics. This might be because of our favorite family photographs from childhood or a photographer to whose work we've responded. Interestingly enough, my favorite
lens is a 50, whether I am using an M6 or an R-D1. I find it more of a challange to get the look I'm after, both in terms of depth of field and angle of view, with wider lenses. This doesn't mean that I don't use them, I just use them less often than I do my 50s.

For the holiday's, I have extended family visiting and will be taking a lot of group pictures indoors. I made sure to get a 24, which I had loaned to a friend, back for the occaision. Now that is rational problem-solving. But when I head to my in-laws. . . the 50 will be on the camera initially.
Click to expand...
 
50mm for prints 8x12 or smaller, 35mm for prints 12x18 or larger. Because they look better like that, not sure why. What’s BFH Magus?
 
I'm a 50mm guy. I like the tighter angle of view because it lets me control the background more easily. I'm a believer in the idea that what you leave out of a photograph is as important in creating a strong final image as what you choose to include in the photograph.
 
For my RF, (see Avatar left), I leave the 50 on most of the time. I like the tighter crop over the 35. As mentioned earlier, the 50 gives a more natural look for face close-ups, and more general shooting.

Although for candid street snaps, I prefer the 35mm. with a wider Hyper-focus. Then I don't mind the angle distortion it brings to the snap. I am new to candid street snaps, So I am practicing before I post any here.
 
Last edited:
Get close!

Get close!

In case you've not read my previous post on another thread, the 35mm Summilux has served me well for nearly 30 years of street and available light photography though it is not the lens for every occassion.

The shorter focal length permits hand-holding at slower shutter speeds than the 50mm.
It's wider field of view allows the photographer to get more up close and personal with the subject.
It magnifies objects closer to the camera more, thereby creating a greater spacial separation between foreground and background of the image.
The lens is physically smaller and makes the camera easier to carry (and conceal when necessary.)
Increased depth of focus forgives slight errors in focusing in fast-moving situations (except at maximum aperture.)
The width of the field of view of the 35mm lens is roughly equal to the distance from camera to subject. So if a subject is 12 feet away the film will record a field of view of approximately 12 feet by 9 feet. This information comes in handy when shooting from the hip.

So there's six reasons for using a 35mm. Can anyone come up with as many for using a 50?


Robert Capa 1913-1954
"If your pictures aren't good enough, you aren't close enough."
 
Bob Helmond said:
In case you've not read my previous post on another thread, the 35mm Summilux has served me well for nearly 30 years of street and available light photography though it is not the lens for every occassion.

The shorter focal length permits hand-holding at slower shutter speeds than the 50mm.
It's wider field of view allows the photographer to get more up close and personal with the subject.
It magnifies objects closer to the camera more, thereby creating a greater spacial separation between foreground and background of the image.
The lens is physically smaller and makes the camera easier to carry (and conceal when necessary.)
Increased depth of focus forgives slight errors in focusing in fast-moving situations (except at maximum aperture.)
The width of the field of view of the 35mm lens is roughly equal to the distance from camera to subject. So if a subject is 12 feet away the film will record a field of view of approximately 12 feet by 9 feet. This information comes in handy when shooting from the hip.

So there's six reasons for using a 35mm. Can anyone come up with as many for using a 50?

Well put.

An M3 was my first camera, and like many a 50 was my first lens, a nice match. But something a bit wider was the way I was 'seeing' so the .72 finder M-series cameras and a 35mm became my most used combination over the years.

Part of the attraction of the 35 was its compact size ( pre-ASPH days ), easy to carry and use, its a very forgiving lens as long as you fill the frame.

A 35mm lets you get in close with people, and also back away to get the whole environment, buildings and landscape without the wide-angle look. Along with a 50mm its my usual 2 lens outfit, with the 50 for concentrating on details and my 'long' lens.
Click to expand...
 
I use a 50mm, or use a 35mm and end up cropping to a 50mm FOV after....so you know where I stand.
But the main reason is that with a 35mm there is often facial distortion, and with a 50mm there isn't.
 
Here's my try at six pro-50mm agruments. Disclaimer: I do not believe some of my arguments myself ;)

- There is more choice (in term number of lenses) with a 50mm.
- There are very few bad 50mm. The optic quality goes from very good to outstanding.
- 50mm are usually cheaper.
- It is easier to isolate your subject with a 50mm.
- As somebody else has mentioned before, you don't have to get too close to your subject for street photography.
- The fastest lenses are 50mm (noctilux, etc...)
 
I shoot 35mm in my Minox and 50mm on my M6ttl. My Minox has a shutter problem for the second time and as the last repair cost £80 I am on the lookout for a 35mm now for my Leica.

35mm would be my favourite lens
 
50mm shows me what I am looking at, 28mm shows me where I am, 35 is lost in the middle.

I prefer 50mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom