Do you believe my 35 lens...

rfaspen said:
I dislike changing lenses because of vulnerability, but if I need a certain FL for the shot, the lens must be changed and it will be changed. But, I tend to leave well enough alone if there's no motivation to change. I am also guilty of bringing two bodies, each with a different FL, just because its easier and safer to do that rather than change lenses while out and about. I think I was/am more of a changer when out with an SLR (as opposed to RFs).
Click to expand...
Is changing a lens on an SLR somehow safer than changing a lens on an RF? I never thought about changing lenses as a hazardous undertaking. Cameras are tools.
 
Like Raid, the Elmarit 28 stays on my M9 for the same reason. I got tired of cleaning dust and noticed that I seem to like what I get from that lens more than the others.
 
For some reason (GAS), I rotate through lenses / bodies pretty regularly, but I've kept a 35 'cron v IV for the last several years.. I get tempted to upgrade to an ASPH or a Lux FLE, but it's just so small and light.
 
Robert, I can believe you left the 35 on your M10 for that long! The 35 is a great focal length, and when I want to do it all with one lens, that is the one to use. And when I shoot with my X100, I may not miss having other lens options. If I do feel the need, I can pull the X20 out of my pocket!
 
Robert,
I have similar configuration, M10 with 35/2ASPH.
I added old Jupiter 3 (1952, Brian Sweeney's modified), in case for portrait shoot.

I'm happy with this set

~Ron~
 
For a long time I only had a 50. When I traded my M4-2 for a chrome M6 I soon added my first 35mm lens a chrome Summicron and left that on through most of our early years with children. I don’t find the X100 limiting. The compactness of the fully collapsible Elmar and the wonder of the SBOOI finder mean my Barnacks nearly always have a 50 screwed on. I go out with one lens only 90% of the time. You see more clearly and efficiently with the limited choice.
 
I'm a "one-lenser".

For 5-6 years it was 35mm, now 28mm for the past few months. I just find it more relaxing, but also put it down to my lack of ability or lack of confidence - when I have more than one lens on me I get confused.
But, having used a 35mm for so long, I think I am more confident knowing when it could be useful. Once I feel like that with a 28mm, I might add a 35mm back again...
 
Hello robert, I get too much enjoyment from trying a different lens on my A7S to see what it "looks" like. Instead of the Elmar-M 50/2.8 you saw, I am using a 1974 Pentax Takumar 50/1.4 at the moment.
U51008I1516599084.SEQ.0.jpg

John Mc
 
Almost all my photos the past few years have been taken with the 35/2.5 Skopar LTM I bought from Andy. On rare occasions when I want something longer I use a 50, or if wider I use a 21. Not all that often. I have two bodies, a IIIc with bw film (usually APX100) and a IIIf with Ektar. I try to avoid changing lenses in the field. Better to keep things simple.
 
Yes, I certainly believe you only needed the 35 for this long.

I quite enjoy being able to pre-visualize compositions when I only use one field-of-view. I prefer not to use cropping as a composition tool.

I just used the Zeiss Biogon 35/2 for long spells. Also, like Gregm61 I am happily using my FUJIFILM X100T for a daily carry even though I also own the 23/2 Fujinon for my X-Pro 2.

I often used 28mm (now 18mm) lenses for extended periods.

The lenses I typically didn't/don't keep on my camera(s) for very long were the 50 mm (now 35) lenses.
 
For making pictures, the 35MM (equiv FL) / f2.0 is all that I really *need* to be happy.
But, as I enjoy fidgeting with and experiencing various older lenses, I have a bunch that I play with. Though it is very rare that I leave the house with more than one lens.
The HexarAF / FujiX100 format is the "perfect" design, IMO.
 
Interesting question, Robert, and interesting replies.

I have a few excellent Fuji X mount lenses but quickly realized that using the 12, 16, 56 or 18-55 meant that my absolute, clear favorite, the 35mm f1.4 would be at home or, at best, in the bag or car.

So I bought another X Pro2 for the 35 1.4 (50 equiv) to live on.:)
:)
 
I don't have any digital rangefinders, but when I'm out with the film ones, I tend to use only one lens, usually the 35mm. However, with the switchable frame lines in the Bessa R2S, I am more apt to change to the 85mm.

With the SLR's, I'll start with a wide angle (I have more 28's than 35's), and likely never change. Even when I'm using a zoom I tend to keep towards the wide end of the lens, depending on the situation.

It has more to do with what I am photographing than any style preference.

PF
 
I used one lens, one camera, one film stock shot the same way with one developer for over a year and didn't ever really want for more. Before then I used my 50DR exclusively anyways so I've been using that lens for 90% of my stuff for 6-7 years. Recently just got my 35/2 8 element CLA'd and removed a bunch of haze so now I alternate between those two when I feel like it.
 
ptpdprinter said:
Is changing a lens on an SLR somehow safer than changing a lens on an RF? I never thought about changing lenses as a hazardous undertaking. Cameras are tools.
Click to expand...

This is how you will get dust in SLR VF, by changing lens. Sooner or later, but it will be where. Dusty tools :)
 
ptpdprinter said:
Is changing a lens on an SLR somehow safer than changing a lens on an RF? I never thought about changing lenses as a hazardous undertaking. Cameras are tools.
Click to expand...

No, not really different. In fact I used to use my SLRs in places where it is most certainly a dangerous task to change lenses, even to uncap the lens or spend time looking through the viewerfinder. I had my "sacrificial" bodies and lenses for these situations. But, the real reason I tend to change SLR more often....I can't say for sure.... It's probably because when I use them, I tend to drag more lenses along and shoot subjects that prompt me to change more frequently to get the image I want. But, I'll do that with RF too, so perhaps just a quirk of my personal psychoses :eek:
 
ptpdprinter said:
Is changing a lens on an SLR somehow safer than changing a lens on an RF? I never thought about changing lenses as a hazardous undertaking. Cameras are tools.
Click to expand...

I feel more free to change lenses outdoors with my D700 than with my M9, because the D700 has the "dust shaker" to vibrate the dust off the sensor each time the camera is turned on. The M9 has not got this, so I worry more about the dust that gets in when the lens is removed.

And the larger DSLR lenses are easier to hang onto and not drop. I've never dropped a Leica lens either, but the tiny 35/2 and 35/2.8 ones require special attention. A good rule is to give the lens your full attention when handling it, keeping your eyes on what you are doing, not trusting the sense of touch alone. And I avoid doing it with frozen fingers!
 
I'm the same way, but about 50mm. The only lens I own for my Canon P is a 50mm. For the longest time on my Nikon FM2n I only used a 50mm, with the 28mm coming out on occasion for something different. I recently got the Voigtlander 40mm, which I actually like the most, but it's not a common focal length. Last summer I went to Sweden and London, and 95+% of my photos were shot on a Canon 7D and 35mm (56mm equivalent). When I sold my 7D, I bought an Olympus E-M1, and owned only a 25mm (50mm equivalent) for the first 4 months of ownership. And I now own a second 25mm lens for that. I'm really temped to sell everything that isn't 50mm, but I know I'll come to regret that someday.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom