35mm or 50mm Lens and Why.

[35mmdelux]

Briefly, I shot with a 50mm lens for many years. On a few occasions over the years I missed some shots - generally wide field architecture or indoor group shots. When I discovered Leica I bought a 35mm Summicron. Finally, I was able to shoot indoors w/ impunity and I felt more relaxed about picture taking in general.

Part of me still likes the 50mm lens. For portraits/street its great, getting closer up images. I've found my 50mm Summilux pre-asph remarkable.

I observed on a poll that there are more dedicated 50mm shooters than 35mm shooters. I'd like to know more about the reasoning in your choice of 35mm or 50mm lenses as your main lens.

Thanks - Happy Holidays - Paul

 

[Oh Two]

I prefer 35mm as the perspective is more like the eye's. Yes, I've heard that that is the domain of the 50, but an issue not addressed is how the image is presented either on a monitor or by a print at roughly arm's length. Most images are rarely reproduced at more than 8X10 inches and that is where the eye's perspective is more naturally reproduced.

 

[vrgard]

I have mixed feelings about this one. Having little to do with the resulting image, I really like the size of the 35mm Cron lens on my M6. Even with the rectangular hood, it's a small, unobtrusive lens, that is particularly easy to use indoors in close quarters. That said, I personally prefer tightly cropped images and find the 50mm Cron better provides that perspective in many settings. As a result, I keep switching back and forth between 35 & 50 depending upon what and where I'm shooting.

-Randy

 

[Flyfisher Tom]

I have mixed feelings about this one. Having little to do with the resulting image, I really like the size of the 35mm Cron lens on my M6. Even with the rectangular hood, it's a small, unobtrusive lens, that is particularly easy to use indoors in close quarters. That said, I personally prefer tightly cropped images and find the 50mm Cron better provides that perspective in many settings. As a result, I keep switching back and forth between 35 & 50 depending upon what and where I'm shooting.

-Randy

I agree ... the intimacy of the 50mm keeps me from settling fully on 35mm.

 

[venchka]

I like boff of 'em. Not at the same time maybe.

 

[telenous]

I use them for different applications. For daylight street photography the 50mm gives me some critical distance from the subject(s). I also find it easier to compose with the 50. When the sun goes down it's time for the 35. It allows me perhaps one extra stop, allowing speeds even down to 1/4s in a good, caffeine-free day. Both FLs are indispensable but if I had to dispense with one I could do with the other.

 

[ghost]

50mm is a more full-bodied lens.

 

[rodneyAB]

with only the 50mm to use, i'm learning to like it, despite hardly ever useing it with SLR, but a 35mm is on the list

 

[RayPA]

It probably depends on the application, but I prefer the 35mm. I think the 35mm focal length gives you more options—not only when shooting—but also during ps'ing/printing. It's a good all-around FL. It's rare that I've had a 35 on my camera and wished I had a 50 on instead, but many times I have had a 50 on my camera and wished I had a 35.

.

 

[35mmdelux]

I'm carrying 35mm & 50mm because I like them both. But on a one camera, one lens rig, its the 35mm/1.4 Aspherical.

On a recent overseas trip I took the 28mm/2.8 and the 50mm/1.4. I thought that was a well paired rig. But I did miss the 35mm Summilux. The 50mm works well when I need a little reach.

 

[varjag]

It is easier for me to shoot with 35, but I like 50 more.

 

[joebt]

Interesting discussion here. I use the 35 cron and 50 cron exclusively. I'm back and forth using them both too. I would say the 50mm seems to be my Street glass, but indoors the 35 gets the nod.

I just recently recieved a scanner, and after scanning over 100 images, I noticed that I have used the 35mm more than 75% of the time. I need them both.

I'm going to an xmas party and I'm shooting the M6 with the sf20, but I'm still considering which lens will be my starter.

 

[borismach]

I love both, too.
I find I like very much the perspective of 50s. When I use it, I usually have more time to compose.
On the hand, the 35s are more versatile when I do have much time to think, particularly doing snap shots. I shoot more wildly with this lens. Also, as it has been mentioned before, it can be used in low light situation with very low shutter speed.
I can't let go any of these 2 lenes.

 

[julianphotoart]

I use 50 much, much more than 35 because:
1. At 35 and wider, things that are close to the lens, such as faces, start to have that elongated distorted look; 50 renders the depth of faces and other close-up objects more naturally.
2. The 35 starts to be over-inclusive. It can take in everything in a scene and that's too easy. I like having to selectively crop out stuff or only have some parts of stuff showing, so that the eye is led beyond the image and there are questions left unanswered. Yet, unlike a 75, the 50 gets enough into the image to tell a story rather than isolating things. It's still a narrative lens, but selectively.
3. I'm too timid to get sufficiently in-your-face to get away with using a 35.

 

[Dougg]

On the street, or for environmental portraits, in order to fill the frame, the 35 forces one forward into the subject's space, I find. (28mm even moreso!). And I like the results better, then, as there's a different feel, more immediacy, more impact, more connection with the subject.

After decades of 35 with my M2 (and 40mm for CLE), I've only recently gotten a 50. I rather like the 50 view through the M2, as for the first time I can see around the outside of the framelines. I think the 50 will be useful for portraits at the same distance, but with less environment included. I don't really want this to let me back away from the subject though!

Example below of what I like to do with a 35mm lens...

 

[Nikon Bob]

I prefer the 35 over the 50 as it produces an image the way I see with both eyes not one. It could also be that people are not my thing to photograph but for that I have a 90. Not a thing wrong with a 50 but I just don't use one much.

Bob

 

[willie_901]

Doug,

Impressive... that's close.

I am still adapting to the 50mm FOV for RF work. So far to it seems like if I want the subject (candid people) to be isolated the 50 is a good choice. If I want to show the subject in the context of their environment, the 35 is best. If there's no time to focus, then a 28 is nice.

For me my frame of mind and the location (street vs. restaurant vs. subway vs market vs shopping mall) have a lot to do with which lens I use, or wish I had with me.

 

[ghost]

masters of the 35mm lens:

friedlander
harvey
goldin (28mm, too)
hiromix
leibovitz
billingham
delahaye
pinkhassov

who else...

 

[KM-25]

When I obtained my first Leica some 5 months ago, I was sure that
I could use my 35 cron asph and not need another lens for the Leica. But as much as I love the small size, field of view and look, I kept wishing I had a 50 1.4 asph for portraits. So I got one and I love it, otherworldly good. But what I found was that the 35 was now too close in focal length for the 50. So I sold the 35 and got a 28/2.

I love the change in look from the 28 to the 50, it is much more my style. The 28 is very well corrected too making it still great for people, albeit wider.

My only gripe about the 28 is the overly large shade. I find my self removing it often for critical framing. Without the shade, it is only a little bigger than a shade-less 35 cron asph. But once you put it on, it's just plain huge. I am strongly considering buying a second shade or even a shade for the 35 1.4 and trimming it down a bit for general use and keeping the standard one for critical flare control.

But if I were to go back to the one lens, one cameras way, it would be a 35 1.4, hands down.

 

[RayPA]

masters of the 35mm lens:

friedlander
harvey
goldin (28mm, too)
hiromix
leibovitz
billingham
delahaye
pinkhassov

who else...

uh, oh...that means a "masters of the 50mm lens" is forthcoming—and you know what that means (HCB!). 🙂 I didn't know Lee Friedlander shot with a 35, thanks. What did Koudelka shoot with? That's either a 35 or a 28, no?


.