M
Magus
Guest
Post deleted by posters request
35mm or 50mm Lens and Why.
- Thread starter 35mmdelux
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies: Replies 93
- Views: Views 9K
On the street Magus I find 35mm best for me, but I live in the 'burbs, not a lot of street shooting to do. I think if I was in more of a situation where I felt it fit, then I guess 50 would be too narrow and 28 too wide, but that just isn't me at this point. Though that may save me some money, one lens instead of two.
lZr
L&M
I like the 35 and also 50 mm. Wider lenses are for more creative work, I think.
MikeL
Go Fish
rover said:
That's what I've felt, but couldn't put into words. I'm using 50mm almost full time lately. Thanks Rover!
M
Magus
Guest
Post deleted by posters request
Last edited:
R
Richard Black
Guest
I travel with a 50 and a 28. 35 is not wide enough and 50 is just the right telephoto. the 28 is my normal lens on my RFs and my SLRs.
raid
Dad Photographer
I use both focal lengths, but use more frequently a 50mm lens than a 35mm lens. When I want to include people in my travel photos, I prefer the 35mm focal length,and when I want documentation of people's faces, I prefer the 50mm focal length. In my last trip, I had the 28mm-35mm-50mm lenses, but the 28mm lost out and stayed in the camera bag. It was too wide for my needs. Typically, I have faster 50mm lenses than 35mm lenses, and this also affects which lens I use at available light.
The old style chrome Canon 35mm/2.8 brought me back to 35mm lenses since it looks super cool on LTM bodies and it provides nice optical performance too. Sometimes, it is the coolness of a lens that is the decisive factor here.
The 35mm focal length is a normal lens that is slightly wide. Hence, it is perfect for indoor photos. Distortion is not visible, and you get a wide angle lens.
On the other hand ... the 50mm lens is King.
As you see, it is a toss-up for me.
Raid
The old style chrome Canon 35mm/2.8 brought me back to 35mm lenses since it looks super cool on LTM bodies and it provides nice optical performance too. Sometimes, it is the coolness of a lens that is the decisive factor here.
The 35mm focal length is a normal lens that is slightly wide. Hence, it is perfect for indoor photos. Distortion is not visible, and you get a wide angle lens.
On the other hand ... the 50mm lens is King.
As you see, it is a toss-up for me.
Raid
trph_2000
Established
I too like the 50 lux AA for candid shots,often indoors, wide open. I
agree with others that this length makes me think more about composing the shot and makes me summon up the courage to get closer to the subject.
A major point for me is that the 50 has a built in hood. I can't stand fiddling around with putting on the hood and and having to take it off and then find a place to store it in my bag where it won't get dented. The built in hood is also much more discreet.
agree with others that this length makes me think more about composing the shot and makes me summon up the courage to get closer to the subject.
A major point for me is that the 50 has a built in hood. I can't stand fiddling around with putting on the hood and and having to take it off and then find a place to store it in my bag where it won't get dented. The built in hood is also much more discreet.
trph_2000
Established
richard_l
Well-known
I use 35 and 50 about equally, but I usually feel that the 35 is a bit too wide and the 50 a bit too long. I.e., I would be happy most of the time with a 40.
The problem is finding a good 40. The 40 Summicron/Rokkor is okay, but it just doesn't have the finesse of my 35 Summaron or 50 Summicron.
Richard
The problem is finding a good 40. The 40 Summicron/Rokkor is okay, but it just doesn't have the finesse of my 35 Summaron or 50 Summicron.
Richard
Michael I.
Well-known
I like using 35 for street and 50 for enviromental portraits(so I take both with me)
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
ghost said:
Winogrand - used both the 35 and 28mm.
Last edited:
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
Thanks everybody for providing most valuable insights. As I've gotten more into portrait photography I find I'm using the 50mm much more, although my 35mm FL is a strong player for everything else..
One thing I've learned is to take along a fast lens, in combo with a slower lens. So, I've procured both 35/50mm Summiluxes to go along w/ the Summicrons depending on my goal for the day (mix and match).
I'm finding that I like the 28-35-50mm combo. I know they are close FL, but to my eye they render differently. For many years I was a one lens, one camera guy (M4-P and 35mmSummicron). Today I find I need a wider angle sometimes (28mm) or that I want to crop (50mm). On a day to day basis I'll carry 35/50mms - one on the camera and one in my Domke.
Again, thanks for the insight. Happy New Year!
One thing I've learned is to take along a fast lens, in combo with a slower lens. So, I've procured both 35/50mm Summiluxes to go along w/ the Summicrons depending on my goal for the day (mix and match).
I'm finding that I like the 28-35-50mm combo. I know they are close FL, but to my eye they render differently. For many years I was a one lens, one camera guy (M4-P and 35mmSummicron). Today I find I need a wider angle sometimes (28mm) or that I want to crop (50mm). On a day to day basis I'll carry 35/50mms - one on the camera and one in my Domke.
Again, thanks for the insight. Happy New Year!
Last edited:
M
Magus
Guest
Post deleted by posters request
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
With rangefinders? 50mm; even with SLRs. It's close enough, and it's wide enough. Best "fast glass" (don't faint, Magus) available for that focal length, it allows me to isolate my focus point, and minimal distortion (if any).
After that, it's 85-90mm, then 28-35mm. For me, of course.
After that, it's 85-90mm, then 28-35mm. For me, of course.
lZr
L&M
M
Magus
Guest
Post deleted by posters request
M
Magus
Guest
Post deleted by posters request
Nachkebia
Well-known
Well, well, nice discustion here 
anyhow I find 24 (25) has a perfect balance for me for been ultra wide and been normal wide, 28mm is elegant indeed but it is not punkie enough, if you know what I mean 25 is punkie but it is not junkey! like 21mm
35mm is like a snobish wide angle, very elegant, extremly easy to compose, extremely practical in all conditions (dramatic scene, documentary, portrait)
anyhow for me hardest is 50mm and I am mastering it (I wish I had a manner of expresing myself)
anyhow I find 24 (25) has a perfect balance for me for been ultra wide and been normal wide, 28mm is elegant indeed but it is not punkie enough, if you know what I mean
25 is punkie but it is not junkey! like 21mm 35mm is like a snobish wide angle, very elegant, extremly easy to compose, extremely practical in all conditions (dramatic scene, documentary, portrait)
anyhow for me hardest is 50mm and I am mastering it
(I wish I had a manner of expresing myself)
back alley
IMAGES
what a thread, thought provoking and even a bit disturbing at some levels.
using a 50 well has eluded me and therefore it seems a bit unnatural for me. it seems like a telephoto to me and i am always having to back up to use it. i back up to where the 35mm lens would show me what i want but i would be closer yet. one of the reasons that i have tried to use a 50 is that i seem to include too much information in my photos and most people don't like them. it seems the more simple, basic or empty the frame - the more people like the photo. with a 35 my pics are less simple.
the problem for me is when carrying the 50 i then have to carry the 25. i need something wide along also and it seems the 25 is a natural complement for the 50.
with the 35 i can travel with it solo and be very content.
one of the things this thread has shown me is that many people use a fast 50 for portraits and this may account for my attraction to the 50 sonnar. i have been struggling with getting the sonnar and having 2 fifty millimeter lenses but not really wanting to let go of the very fine planar. now i am thinking that it's plain silly to want to keep a lens just because it's so good, even if not used enough.
so maybe i will try to sell the planar, buy the sonnar and use it as a people lens and for low light/available light shooting.
so 25 for some creative stretching, 35 for everyday shooting and the 50 sonnar as specialist lens for available light/portrait/people lens.
hhmmm...
using a 50 well has eluded me and therefore it seems a bit unnatural for me. it seems like a telephoto to me and i am always having to back up to use it. i back up to where the 35mm lens would show me what i want but i would be closer yet. one of the reasons that i have tried to use a 50 is that i seem to include too much information in my photos and most people don't like them. it seems the more simple, basic or empty the frame - the more people like the photo. with a 35 my pics are less simple.
the problem for me is when carrying the 50 i then have to carry the 25. i need something wide along also and it seems the 25 is a natural complement for the 50.
with the 35 i can travel with it solo and be very content.
one of the things this thread has shown me is that many people use a fast 50 for portraits and this may account for my attraction to the 50 sonnar. i have been struggling with getting the sonnar and having 2 fifty millimeter lenses but not really wanting to let go of the very fine planar. now i am thinking that it's plain silly to want to keep a lens just because it's so good, even if not used enough.
so maybe i will try to sell the planar, buy the sonnar and use it as a people lens and for low light/available light shooting.
so 25 for some creative stretching, 35 for everyday shooting and the 50 sonnar as specialist lens for available light/portrait/people lens.
hhmmm...
Last edited: