50mm v 75mm (alongside 35) with samples

[bayernfan]

The past two weeks I've been going back and forth with 50 and 75 on an M240. My ultimate intention is to pick one of these as THE focal length to pair with a 35mm lens (when 35mm is simply too wide).

I walked around the backyard a little after a heavy storm passed. My intention was to see which framelines felt more natural for framing. These are two images that resulted. I'm drawn to the 75mm image as it's distinctly different from what a 35mm lens could/would produce.

Also, I'm curious to see if anyone can tell which lenses were used. No LR/PS magic used, and sharpening set to zero.

Image #1: 50mm @ f/2.5 from 1 meter

Image #2: 75mm @ f/2 from 1 meter

 

[DwF]

Thanks for posting. I recall an old smoker barbeque relic that was falling toward a fence in my backyard gthat I enjoyed photographing. Using an M9, I compared my 50 'cron to whichever Tele-elmar I had. I preferred images made with the 50.

These that you posted here are different of course, but I am drawn to the 50 here as well. I've become a fan of the 75, but the green shrubs you have in the back are too prominent for me. The bokeh is fine but they distract a bit from the subject in the foreground. I'd love to see the same subject with this 75, but pulled back to a wider field.

Just my two cents....

David

 

[Ko.Fe.]

If I want to see how lens does on M I'm taking slightly more and slightly different pictures than weeds. 🙂

 

[WJJ3]

If I want to see how lens does on M I'm taking slightly more and slightly different pictures than weeds. 🙂

Kinda what I was thinking too.🙄

FWIW, I often carry a 35 + 90.

 

[bayernfan]

Thanks for posting. I recall an old smoker barbeque relic that was falling toward a fence in my backyard gthat I enjoyed photographing. Using an M9, I compared my 50 'cron to whichever Tele-elmar I had. I preferred images made with the 50.

These that you posted here are different of course, but I am drawn to the 50 here as well. I've become a fan of the 75, but the green shrubs you have in the back are too prominent for me. The bokeh is fine but they distract a bit from the subject in the foreground. I'd love to see the same subject with this 75, but pulled back to a wider field.

Just my two cents....

David

I think you're right about pulling back. Using a 35 has forced me to step-in, and it's very likely that a 75 will force me to step-back. Something to think about indeed. Honestly I've never been good with telephoto, but I would like to change that.

 

[bayernfan]

Kinda what I was thinking too.🙄

FWIW, I often carry a 35 + 90.

Well, the "weeds" are of more an image rendering and framing comparison between the two focal lengths. I thought it be fun to see if someone could tell which lens was used.

The primary goal in this post is to gain insight from those that have used 75 alongside 35.

 

[presspass]

A 75 gives a distinct difference from a 35. The only problem with a Leica is the miserable frame lines for the 75. When I carry a four lens kit, it's either 21, 35, 75, and 135 or an 18, 28, 50, and 90. Although I have two of them, the 75 is one of my least used focal lengths. It would help to know what you usually shoot.

 

[Gregm61]

Current preferred setup is a 21mm f3.4 Super Elmar, 35 and 75mm f2.4 Summarits and 135mm f3.4 APO Telyt. This is just the preferred method for how I see, although I will at times substitute the wider 18mm f3.8 Super Elmar for the 21.

Less used second setup consists of the 18mm f3.8 Super Elmar, 28mm f2.8 Elmarit ASPH, 50mm f2 (current non-APO) and 90mm f2 (pre-APO).

 

[Ccoppola82]

I’d go for the 75 or even a 90. That little tele-Elmarit is nice pocketable companion to a 35 and can be had pretty cheaply. I got an aftermarket hood on mine and have had pretty good luck for the 10% of time I need to use it.

 

[DwF]

I think you're right about pulling back. Using a 35 has forced me to step-in, and it's very likely that a 75 will force me to step-back. Something to think about indeed. Honestly I've never been good with telephoto, but I would like to change that.

Exactly right about going from 35mm to 75. I am big on using 35mm and the 75 is very different in terms of composition. And as Presspass mentions the framelines on M are not the best. When I use the 75, unless I'm using it a lot, I find myself framing outside the 75 lines. However for still composition there is time to take more care.

David

 

[NeonKnight]

I found that I was cropping many shots taken with my 50mm in post so I decided to try a 75mm Summarit lens. The 75mm Summarit is an amazing lens and it feels good on the camera; the focus ring is in just the right spot. My main kit consists of a 50mm and a 90mm and I was hoping that this lens would replace both. I did end up liking the results from the 75mm but ultimately I went back to the 50mm because of the size of the lens. The 75mm Summarit on my M6 just did not fit well in my bag and I can't stand having a lens that is so front heavy that it hits the table when you set the camera down. Also, I found that I always instinctively wanted to frame with the 50mm lines which led to lost shots every once in awhile. Now I'm back to my normal kit and just take a few steps forward with my 50 or if I really need some reach I put on my 90 MEM.

 

[Doug]

^^ Agree with DwF... I like the 35 + 75 pairing. And indeed there's a different discipline involved using that pair. I also like 28 + 75, so will carry a 75 on an M camera plus the Leica Q's 28. And I wish there were better options for focal lengths in the 60-70mm range.

 

[WJJ3]

Well, the "weeds" are of more an image rendering and framing comparison between the two focal lengths.

I see, for comparison's sake I can see that.

The only problem with a Leica is the miserable frame lines for the 75.

This!

[...]if I really need some reach I put on my 90 MEM.

And this!