35mm or 50mm?

i've been using a 35mm, and only a 35mm, for the past 6 months. the focus lever is indispensible when you're photographing people, as hyperfocal only gets you so far. my 28mm m-hexanon doesn't have one, so i'm planning on getting the 28mm elmarit asph or 28mm ultron.

as for the focal length, i'm not really enthused. it's probably the photos i like and look at most, but i'm a 28/50 guy. quick, somebody recommend me a photog that shoots 35mm and really makes it shine. i know lise sarfati and luc delahaye, but i need MOAR.
 
Paul C. Perkins said:
Only one lens? It would be 50mm. . . Only because it's a F:1.2 - and I love speed!l
Click to expand...
Bingo! er... ditto. Though I'm sitting here just now figuring what I need to sell to buy a 21mm Summilux, I use a (fast) 50mm probably 80% of the time. The 35mm lenses? Not so much. Not sure why.
 
50mm is my favourite focal length (35mm on M8/R-D1) ......... 35m does not work for me at all ... probably my least liked focal length.
With a 35mm (or 28mm on M8-rd1) i find it very difficult to get beyond the snapshot ..... unless i have people posing for me.
 
After a lifetime debating this question with myself, the only conclusion I've come to are both are indepensible and I couldn't live without either. So my answer to your question is I haven't got one.
 
40mm for me.

50 feels too tight, and 35 feels too wide. I liked the 40 on Canonet, and bought the Nokton for Leica. I use it with 35 framelines. 28-40-90 is my kit. (40 = 80%, 90 = 15%, 28 = 5%)

- 35/40 has the advantage that you can probably handhold one stop slower shutter speed, and at the same time has more DOF, so it is ideal for dark interiors.
- It also forces one to get closer to the action, be a part of it.

I used to be a 50-kind-a-guy, but since I bought the 40, I rarely use the 50. I think I'll be using the 50 for interior portraits...
 
35 mm, not too wide angle, let you go nearer to people :)

very versatile

I like 50 mm too but I use mostly 35 mm , 50 mm is a bit long for street photography imo
 
I never knew why my 50mm pictures never looked right to me but they didn't. I figured it was lack of skill or vision on my part. I've got about 4 years worth of digital images on my PC, all shot with zoom lenses. I ran one of those scripts that looks at the exif and plots out what FL used. About 82% of my images were shot with the zooms unconsciously set to 35mm. It was quite enlightening and eye opening. I have a 35 CV PII on my M6 and I love it and my images have gotten much better. Apparently I see in 35mm. I had a 50 I was testing on my M6 last week and I felt like I was inside a box trying to shoot.
 
I think that the main reason I have a 50 is because "you're SUPPOSED to have a 50" but I've been using a 35 as standard since I first got one back in 1962. The 50 either sits in the bag or, more often these days, stays home playing body cap. When I'm out on a serious shoot I'm set up with 21/35/90 (or 85), each on it's own body, for indoor use. Outside it's 35/90, and either a 135 on an M or a 180 on an SLR.

For the last few years my everyday carry-around lens has been the 15 Heliar and I love it! It mostly depends on how YOU see. When you look at a scene and "see a picture" that you want to photograph which focal length is best? Some people see wide, some don't. Remember that the original reason for sticking a 50 on the first Leica was that it was the standard lens for a 35mm movie camera at the time. On the 18x24mm movie frame it gave a field of view more like you get with a 90 on a full frame 35mm camera.

For people pictures using a 50 or longer tends to produce pictures that look like you're an observer while a 35 or wider starts producing pictures that make you look like a participant, right there in the scene, even though you're not actually portrayed in the photo. Confused? That's life.
 
aizan said:
quick, somebody recommend me a photog that shoots 35mm and really makes it shine. i know lise sarfati and luc delahaye, but i need MOAR.
Click to expand...

Try David Alan Harvey- he seems to use almost exclusively a 35mm on some of his projects.
 
I have for my Bessa R, 15, 25, 35/1.7, 50/1.5, and 75.

I love the idea of owning the 15, and use it infrequently.

Just got the 25, and am not comfortable with it yet, but I like the angle, and zone focus.

First lens was the 35/1.7, pretty much welded on the body. Good general purpose lens, not much wider than the 50, and a bit smaller and lighter.

50 and 75 use each occasionally, as circumstances warrant.

A friend who has done newspaper work all over the world shoots pretty much all 35mm on his Leicas. Seems to work best for him, and being a bit wider helps in cramped quarters.
 
I agree w/ Alan Davus and others who find both focal lengths indispensible. For me, 50 is "normal" and 35 is moderate wide. I know a lot of folks think these two focal lengths are too close to each other to use both, but I don't find that to be the case. W/ 50, I can zero in and be selective, whereas w/ 35 I can show more context w/out getting too much in the frame. I feel comfortable shooting either focal length.
 
I agree with Spyderman. I used both 35mm & 50mm with the 35mm being my "go to"lens most of the time. On awhim I bought the CV 40mm and it's now my most often used lens.

My standard kit is the 25mm Biogon, 40mm Nokton and the 75mm Heliar....can shoot all day with this combo.

Best regards,

Bob
 
I have both focal lengths and have discovered that I tend to use the 35mm lens most of the time. I guess I see things normally in that focal length! It is probably a subjective choice. For me, 50mm is almost a short telephoto lens. I do use it for portraits and some scenics. But for everyday photography in the streets and around the house, I prefer 35mm lenses.
 
I have downsized recently to a simple outfit - a Leica M6 TTL 0.72 body with a 35mm Summicron ASPH lens. I no longer worry about which body/lens/film to use. I just shoot! Yes, there are certain things I cannot do with such a simple kit. But for the kind of pictures I take, this happens to be the perfect setup.
 
My preference lies with the 50 because the images I shoot with that focal length have more 'staying power'. At first glance, when the prints get back from the lab, I get drawn to what I've shot wider. But looking back at those same shots a couple years later, the ones shot with a 50 always have more to tell..
 
On a rangefinder camera, because I am shooting faster and have the advantage of seeing what is right outside the frame, I prefer 35mm. Life is chaotic, and so are my photos! However with an slr, I have what amounts to tunnel vision - physical isolation is what that kind of camera is all about. So I gravitate toward 50mm, or even longer.
 
Richie said:
I have downsized recently to a simple outfit - a Leica M6 TTL 0.72 body with a 35mm Summicron ASPH lens. I no longer worry about which body/lens/film to use. I just shoot! Yes, there are certain things I cannot do with such a simple kit. But for the kind of pictures I take, this happens to be the perfect setup.
Click to expand...

That's pretty much exactly my kit.

I tend to carry a 35mm Summicron v.IV on my M6 TTL which is in my hand when out and about. In the "manbag" I carry a Wetzlar M6 with 50mm CZ Planar f2 and an M8 with 28mm Ultron attached.

This way I get to have a 50 and 35 on an M6 with b/w film and a "35mm" on my M8 for colour photos. Though I can swap lenses around for colour photos as and when...however, taking the IR Cut filters off and on is a pain when swapping between M8 and M6.

I used to shoot pretty much entirely on 50mm but I've found the 35mm better for general use and the 50mm better for picking people/things out from the background. I think this seachange came when I got the Summicron and found it better at rendering the background OOF at wide apertures than the old CV Skopar, my first 35mm, which I didn't get on with quite so much and the chrome Canon 35 after that which was possibly just too small to focus quickly.
 
The 35mm is my most used prime lens, because I find it the most versatile focal length for taking pictures at events and when traveling, occasions where a rangefinder excels in. With a 35 mounted, I seldom change the lens, even when taking a portrait. Unless I’m trying to isolate the subject, I would prefer to focus close and wide open with a 35mm. A 50mm on a rangefinder usually doesn’t seem wide enough for me.
Strangely when I am using a zoom lens on an SLR, 80% of my pictures are shot at 50mm, even for shots. I suppose with a SLR, I tend to focus on details and experiment with the different focal length until I feel that an optimum perspective has been achieved, and that is usually at 50mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom