anyone here only has one lens?

[iridium7777]

i started off a couple month ago with only one lens, a 35mm. as much as i like it and as much as i like taking landscape shots for which it works great, i find that if i was taking pictures of people i have to get analy close to them to fill the frame.

so many times i look through the viewfinder where my eye concentrates (.85 on an m6) and click over to the 50mm frame lines and i think "that's perfect" yet with the 35mm there's a whole bunch of stuff that makes it on the outside.

anyone here only has one lens? either a 35 or a 50? (sorry, i'm really not interested in any other focal length, especially the 40mm).

i guess here's what it comes to:

1) is it considered cheating by cropping 35mm pictures to make them more like 50? in certain cases?

2)would you keep the 35 for more versatility and just crop whenever you wanted the 50 look? or get the 50 and deal with it?

i would really really really want to refrain from owning more than one lens, thus i'm strongly considering trading the 35 for a 50.

thoughts appreciated.

 

[lic4]

I crop with medium format all the time; I don't think it's cheating but many will. Photographer "Fan Ho" does it to great effect.
I used to have the same one-lens mentality, but I found that I'd waver between 35mm and 50mm. I don't think it's a bad idea to have both; sometimes you want wider, sometimes you want more telephoto. You can, in a way, get wide to normal with 35 and normal to telephoto with 50.
I don't think having 2 lens is being overly indulgent!

 

[ferider]

Frankly, using an M6 with only a 35/2 is total overkill, since you can get
the same results with a much cheaper camera (pick Hexar AF, Olympus SP,
Yashica, or others). Unless you use something faster than 35/2.

You might want to add at least one more focal length, even longer than 50.
For instance the phantastic 75 Heliar which doesn't cost much. I find
35 and 50 are too close together for a two lens combo.

Roland.

 

[Keith]

Frankly, using an M6 with only a 35/2 is total overkill, since you can get
the same results with a much cheaper camera (pick Hexar AF, Olympus SP,
Yashica, or others). Unless you use something faster than 35/2.

You might want to add at least one more focal length, even longer than 50.
For instance the phantastic 75 Heliar which doesn't cost much. I find
35 and 50 are too close together for a two lens combo.Roland.

I'll second Roland's opinion here ... I've just started shooting with a 35/75 combo on my Hexar and it's very balanced. Keep your 35 and wait for a 75mm Heliar to come up in the forum classifieds ... I got mine here from Mike Goldberg for $250.00 and its a terrific lens!

 

[gns]

I use only one lens. It's enough to figure out where to point one (the possibilities being infinite), so adding another would just be pointless for me.

If the 35 isn't working for you, you should try the 50. You can always switch back. Or use both. There are no rules.
Ditto for cropping- there are no rules, so no such thing as "Cheating".

Gary

 

[nightfly]

I disagree with the thought that a Leica with only a 35mm is overkill. A nice manual 35mm camera with a killer lens might be perfect for certain users. I find that's what I use primarily and it produces exactly the results that I want. The Hexar has a lot of electronics and the 70's fixed lenses rangefinders just aren't in the same class as a Leica. They are nice cameras but they aren't a Leica.

In your case though I'd pick up a 50. You tend to 'see' in a certain focal length so why fight it? Keep the 35 unless economics forces you to sell the 35 to get the 50 in which case, go for it anyway.

Don't fight your vision.

 

[shenkerian]

Hi, I was actually in the opposite position from you. For the past year, I've shot exclusively with a 50. Recently, I started finding it a bit tight indoors, so I picked up a 35. I love the lens for indoor shots, but between the two I consider the 50 more versatile - although probably because I'm so used to its field of view.

I think your choice depends on your personal space - shooting outside, the 35 makes me get a little closer to people than I'd like for the type of framing I prefer. Also, your 0.85x viewfinder suggests a 50 to me.

 

[Lance]

I only have a 50, but only because I can't afford a 35 at the moment. A 35+50 combo is quite nice IMO. 35 is wide but not too wide and 50 is... well normal. It depends a lot on your style. The 75 is a sweetspot for portrait, but too narrow for street. If the 50 is not close enough GET CLOSER.

Cropping is not cheating. They are your shots. Do as you please. I would rather make a good picture perfect by cropping out an I saw than having to stick to some full frame rule. Great photographers crop. Wannabes don't. Just do your best in the shot and make it better when you get back home.

Get the 50 and keep your 35.

Just my 2 kroner

 

[Thardy]

I only have a 40mm for my RF. I have multiple lenses for cameras in other formats though

 

[ferider]

Another way to think about it is checking your work flow.

I looked at your gallery. Nice photos, BTW.

Let's say that you use mostly color, scan most of your pictures with a
high-resolution scanner to 10 MPixel or so, and print mostly on 8x10,
if you print (all of this is true for me, BTW). And cropping is OK.

Cropping a 35mm shot down to 50mm perspective will make you loose
half the amount of pixels. You end up with 5 MPixels. You have to decide
if this is enough for you.

Cropping more will not allow you to print 8x10 any more.

Also RFs were not only built/used for street. I bought a book with a collection
of famous Life magazine photos/photographers the other day. Most were
taken with RF. More than half were (enviromental) portrait situations.

Play with the framlines of your M6 - everybody sees different.

Roland.

PS:

The Hexar has a lot of electronics.

So has your car.

The Hexar has also variable/zoom framelines, a close focus of .6m and one of the best
35/2 lenses available. You can buy around 6 AFs for the price of M6 + 35/2.

 

[Rafael]

Cropping is certainly not cheating. However, cropping a photograph that was shot with a 35mm lens will not give you the same result as you would have produced had you shot the photograph with a 50mm lens. The relationship between the foreground and the background will not be the same in the cropped and the un-cropped images.

 

[gns]

After thinking about your post some more...

If you are asking, "Should I, as a routine practice, use the 35m lens with the 50mm framelines and crop later"?, then no. I think that if you want the 50mm field of view, you should just get the lens.

edit: Marc is correct. The look will be different. Apart from the loss in quality.


Gary

 

[Palaeoboy]

Frankly, using an M6 with only a 35/2 is total overkill, since you can get
the same results with a much cheaper camera

Not really, especially if its your first lens as you have to start somewhere. I also find it beneficial when you get a new lens to take it out and use no other lenses for at least a few months. You will find ways of shooting with that focal length where you hadn't considered before rather than reaching for your camera bag for a focal length that you would normally use for a particular shot.

 

[ferider]

Cropping is certainly not cheating. However, cropping a photograph that was shot with a 35mm lens will not give you the same result as you would have produced had you shot the photograph with a 50mm lens. The relationship between the foreground and the background will not be the same in the cropped and the un-cropped images.

Let's say the 35 has .7m min. focus. Than what you say is true,
only for less than 1m distance, Marc.

Best,

Roland.

 

[Rafael]

Let's say the 35 has .7m min. focus. Than what you say is true,
only for less than 1m distance, Marc.

Best,

Roland.

You're right. I just went away and thought about that one for a second. Sometimes my brain does not connect properly with my typing fingers.

 

[nightfly]

PS:
So has your car.

The Hexar has also variable/zoom framelines, a close focus of .6m and one of the best
35/2 lenses available. You can buy around 6 AFs for the price of M6 + 35/2.

I don't own a car.

I'm sure it's a great camera, I'm just saying that sometimes it's nice to shoot with a fully manual camera with no electronics. Some people prefer this. But apparently on this forum, they aren't allowed to.

I think it's funny how quickly people are to decide what camera is appropriate for other people even though that wasn't the question.

The guy just wanted to know if he could get away with a 35 or he should get a 50. NOT if other people thought it was ludicrous to have a Leica with only 1 lens.

In answer to the original posters question, no, no one on this forum has only one lens. They seem to have 10 bodies, 100 lenses and a lot of opinions about what is appropriate for you to have as well.

 

[ferider]

NOT if other people thought it was ludicrous to have a Leica with only 1 lens.

I did not mean to come across like this. Just reacting out of enthusiam after getting an AF two
weeks ago and seriously questioning why the hell I own 5 Leicas.

Take it easy, please.

Roland.

 

[Rafael]

I'm sure it's a great camera, I'm just saying that sometimes it's nice to shoot with a fully manual camera with no electronics. Some people prefer this. But apparently on this forum, they aren't allowed to.

You detect an antipathy to manual cameras on this forum?

 

[Digital Dude]

Specific to your question, yes indeed! I just entered the Leica and purchased one with more fill than your 35. I will have the 28-cron’ this week and will crop away. I see nothing cheating about it. Perhaps it will account for poor composition on my part, but when I consider the 1.33 crop factor on the M8, it doesn’t seem all that bad.
Regards,

 

[akptc]

THis discussion reminded me how badly I want the Tri-Elmar