CleverName
Well-known
I chose 40 because my Canonet has a great 40mm on it and it's my favorite camera.
Usually on my SLR, I'll choose a 50mm. If I want wider, I use a 28mm. I seem to just skip over the 35, it seems either too wide or not wide enough.
Usually on my SLR, I'll choose a 50mm. If I want wider, I use a 28mm. I seem to just skip over the 35, it seems either too wide or not wide enough.
akptc
Shoot first, think later
My 50 helps me "get to the point" the quickest with whatever it is I am trying to convey with the shot. But I look forward to learning all the other common and less common lengths.
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
The 40mm gives a good angle of coverage for me. And I like the perspective that is associated with that.
George Bonanno
Well-known
45mm...
45mm...
A 45mm lens on a 35mm camera is the perfect complement to normal vision... period ! A 50mm lens on a 35mm camera is a good compromise only because of its universal availability. If you can't take a decent image with a normal focal length lens on a given format, well then, your vision is limited and needs to be trained. Expand your visual horizons and force yourself for at least a few hundred pictures using a normal lens. You will see your images drastically improve. The best pictures on this planet are, were, taken with normal lenses.
Don't BS with comments like "I can't get back far enough" or "I'm too far away". Statements like that are used all to often as a crutch. I'm talking about pictures taken in the true spirit of rangefinder cameras.
If you don't agree after you have at least made a serious attempt to discipline yourself visually using a normal lens, well then, once again, your vision is limited.
That's my personal opinion and I stand by it.
Best,
George
BTW: Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all. Now, turn your computer off and take some pictures.
45mm...
A 45mm lens on a 35mm camera is the perfect complement to normal vision... period ! A 50mm lens on a 35mm camera is a good compromise only because of its universal availability. If you can't take a decent image with a normal focal length lens on a given format, well then, your vision is limited and needs to be trained. Expand your visual horizons and force yourself for at least a few hundred pictures using a normal lens. You will see your images drastically improve. The best pictures on this planet are, were, taken with normal lenses.
Don't BS with comments like "I can't get back far enough" or "I'm too far away". Statements like that are used all to often as a crutch. I'm talking about pictures taken in the true spirit of rangefinder cameras.
If you don't agree after you have at least made a serious attempt to discipline yourself visually using a normal lens, well then, once again, your vision is limited.
That's my personal opinion and I stand by it.
Best,
George
BTW: Merry Christmas and Happy New Year to all. Now, turn your computer off and take some pictures.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
My "normal" is a 28. What is "true" for one person is not always "true" for another.
mattmills
madman (w/ camera)
I've always liked 50, although some of my favorite pics ever were with a 40mm tessar on my rollei 35. I do miss that camera...
froyd
Veteran
Trying to move to 35, but stuck on 50
Trying to move to 35, but stuck on 50
I had to vote 50. I've had the 35mm CV Ultron for a few months, and I forced myself to use it exclusively, but it still does not feel natural to me and the results show it. I find that with the 35 I'm either too close or too far, and that it feels too wide.
The funny thing is that on my slr I use the 20mm prime almost exclusively and I was worried that on my bessa I would be limited to the relatively narrow view of the 35mm lens (if I wanted to avoid an external viewfinder).
Trying to move to 35, but stuck on 50
I had to vote 50. I've had the 35mm CV Ultron for a few months, and I forced myself to use it exclusively, but it still does not feel natural to me and the results show it. I find that with the 35 I'm either too close or too far, and that it feels too wide.
The funny thing is that on my slr I use the 20mm prime almost exclusively and I was worried that on my bessa I would be limited to the relatively narrow view of the 35mm lens (if I wanted to avoid an external viewfinder).
amateriat
We're all light!
I find virtue in all the above, but the only access I currently have to the 35mm focal length is via my Konica Lexio 70's 35-70 zoom...and that one distorts just a bit too much at 35mm for my taste. From there, I have the 38mm f/1.8 on my Konica Auto S3. I love that lens, and it's goaded me to seriously considering a Minolta CLE and CV 40mm f/1.4 Nokton to eventually take the S3's place (and be the "silent running" M-mount companion to my pair of Hexar RFs). I think I do prefer the 40mm POV to 50, but only by a certain amount...I won't be tossing my 50 M-Hex, in other words.
- Barrett
- Barrett
The 40 seems most natural to me, and the 35 nearly as much, after decades of M2 + 35mm and CLE + 40mm. I didn't have an RF 50mm until recently, and it's really not bad, just a tad long. The 50mm framing of the M2 is particularly nice I think, finally being able to see something around the outside of the frame.
PaulDalex
Dilettante artist
There are too many other factors involved. I have many 50 all excellent but with quite different personalities.
arbib
Well-known
When I first got my Bessa, I got a CV25 as my only lens. But I just got a 55mm/2.8 a few weeks ago. and it has stayed on my camera. I like the 50/55, Useful for candid pictures. It forces you to step back a few feet and give some breathing room to your subjects. I am also getting a J8 in 3 weeks, so I will have a low light 50/2. I use the 55/2.8 for outdoor mostly. Walking downtown etc...
just picked up a J9 also (85/2). needs a CLA, but it very usable until then.
Can't wait to spend a day downtown with just the J9 (and maybe the J8 too). will use a slow film so I can use F/2 -F/5.6
just picked up a J9 also (85/2). needs a CLA, but it very usable until then.
Can't wait to spend a day downtown with just the J9 (and maybe the J8 too). will use a slow film so I can use F/2 -F/5.6
DriesI
Established
vote for 50mm
vote for 50mm
35 shows me what I see and 50 shows what I'm looking at.
I like the selectivity of the 50mm, both in terms of framing as in terms of DOF.
I 'switched' from a SLR with 35mm to an MP3 with 50mm. At first I found it difficult to use, but the discipline this lens imposes onto me really is improving my pictures.
So I agree with George on this.
With the 35mm I tend to make more snapshot like pictures with often too much elements in them. The 50mm for me has a far lower 'keeper' rate, but the ones that survive the selection are often much better to my taste than my pictures with 35mm.
regards,
Dries
vote for 50mm
35 shows me what I see and 50 shows what I'm looking at.
I like the selectivity of the 50mm, both in terms of framing as in terms of DOF.
I 'switched' from a SLR with 35mm to an MP3 with 50mm. At first I found it difficult to use, but the discipline this lens imposes onto me really is improving my pictures.
So I agree with George on this.
With the 35mm I tend to make more snapshot like pictures with often too much elements in them. The 50mm for me has a far lower 'keeper' rate, but the ones that survive the selection are often much better to my taste than my pictures with 35mm.
regards,
Dries
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
I've learned to love a 35, which just wasn't true 'till I took up RF photography. I'm trying to see if I can work with a 28 (still haven't had the film developed for shots I took with an Ultron 28/1.9). I'm working with my 75 as well. But I think 50mm will always be my favourite for RF-style photography. It seems such a natural fit.
...Mike
...Mike
steve garza
Well-known
35 is great for street shooting when you need to take quickie shots especially when the subject is relatively close....50mm is more amenable to careful composition.
Paul T.
Veteran
I enjoy using 35mm on my Hexar AF, likewise the 50mm on my Kievs or SLRs has worked well, but the FL that works best for me, by a mile (or perhaps 5mm), is 40mm. It just has a certain... rightness...
colinh
Well-known
I guessed the distribution would be 50 (50%), 40 (10%) and 35 (40%)
When I had a look there were 89 votes out of 179 for the 50. So I had to vote 50 to make it 90 out of 180.
As it happens I've used the 50 summicron that came with my M7 most. In the meantime I've got the 25 and 35 Biogons - but I'm still not used to them. i have to work hard to get something interesting in the foreground.
I also like the smaller depth of field of longer lenses.
colin
When I had a look there were 89 votes out of 179 for the 50. So I had to vote 50 to make it 90 out of 180.
As it happens I've used the 50 summicron that came with my M7 most. In the meantime I've got the 25 and 35 Biogons - but I'm still not used to them. i have to work hard to get something interesting in the foreground.
I also like the smaller depth of field of longer lenses.
colin
Steve Bellayr
Veteran
The ubiquitous 50mm because all the cameras I have came with that lens.
mathomas
Well-known
Nicely put.
Neare
Well-known
Some of the 'cooler' lenses out there are 50mm. But I find 35mm to be more versatile.
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
I see no relation between my favorite images (to me or others) and any focal length or gear oriented reason.
About feeling comfortable, I feel just as comfortable from 15mm to 300mm: I've even traveled with extreme focal length lenses as my only lens.
I don't use normal lenses more than wides and teles.
Cheers,
Juan
About feeling comfortable, I feel just as comfortable from 15mm to 300mm: I've even traveled with extreme focal length lenses as my only lens.
I don't use normal lenses more than wides and teles.
Cheers,
Juan