dee
Well-known
Since the X-Pro 1 with it's new-to-me 27 / 41mm , I have explored using one camera , one lens , and reviving the M8 / CV 35m [ 46mm ] and Helios which equates to 77mm both of which I find excellent .
i explored with a Fuji XF1 compact with nom 25-100 [ actually 'translated' as such on the lens !! ]
Plus a Sony a290 with Minolta 35-80 [ 50-120 ] .
The conclusion is that I am prepared to forgo the wider angles and am content with the 50-120 range . The 25-50 is little used on the compact , and that there is no problem with restricting myself to around 50-100/120 .
The X-Pro revived this , as I have sometimes been uncomfortable with a single lens with 50mm at it's widest - the instinct being to add a Sony kit lens with 28-80 , whereas a better concept for me , would nom 50-120 and nom 50 f1.8 .
I had no choice in the 80s as i had just a 50mm , but it was an interesting experiment ...
[ the XF-1 compact serves as a useful 'cheat ' if I need a fast [f1.7] 25mm ! LOL.
dee
dee
dee
i explored with a Fuji XF1 compact with nom 25-100 [ actually 'translated' as such on the lens !! ]
Plus a Sony a290 with Minolta 35-80 [ 50-120 ] .
The conclusion is that I am prepared to forgo the wider angles and am content with the 50-120 range . The 25-50 is little used on the compact , and that there is no problem with restricting myself to around 50-100/120 .
The X-Pro revived this , as I have sometimes been uncomfortable with a single lens with 50mm at it's widest - the instinct being to add a Sony kit lens with 28-80 , whereas a better concept for me , would nom 50-120 and nom 50 f1.8 .
I had no choice in the 80s as i had just a 50mm , but it was an interesting experiment ...
[ the XF-1 compact serves as a useful 'cheat ' if I need a fast [f1.7] 25mm ! LOL.
dee
dee
dee
lxmike
M2 fan.
In the late 70's, and through the 80's l owned and used only two lenses, a Pentax SMC M 50/3 and a Sigma mini-wide 28/2.8..........today I mainly use a X Pro-1 with 35/1.4, XE-1 with 18/2, X100 and an M2 with 50/1.4
Dogman
Veteran
These days I seldom have need of a lens longer than 50mm-equiv. There are a couple of white Canon telephotos sitting idle on the shelf that I really should dispose of.
The two focal lengths I use the most are 35mm-equiv. and 50mm-equiv. I'll go wider if necessary but I try to avoid the distorted "wide angle effect".
The two focal lengths I use the most are 35mm-equiv. and 50mm-equiv. I'll go wider if necessary but I try to avoid the distorted "wide angle effect".
dee
Well-known
The 50-120 is great for architectural details which shapes my preference .
It seems that either 28 or 35 coupled with a 50 suit many people .
It seems that either 28 or 35 coupled with a 50 suit many people .
scigeek
Well-known
a 35, 50 and a 90 do me, on both LTM and M6.
richard_l
Well-known
Same here. Although it is not as fashionable as the shorter focal lengths, I particularly enjoy 50mm for most subjects.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
50mm was the only lens I was aware of and used on FED-2 in 80ties-90ties. It was not limiting me at all. Switched to wider P&S in the middle of 90ties and it was nothing but point and shot instead of photography with 50.
Years later I've had 50mm on Canon 5D for several months as the only lens and it wasn't limiting at all but fun and creative. I have tried 35mm on 5D and it was boring.
I switched back to film in 2012 and used nothing but 50mm lenses on different RFs. Until I've purchased Bessa R and tried 35mm Color Skopar 2.5. I've had this lens on R for months and used 35 2.8 Zuiko Oly XA to learn real street photography.
35 mm RF has grown on me to become universal focal length. I do like 50mm still and have ELC M3 to enjoy it and thinking of trying J-3 on M-E as the main lens, since 50mm is the portrait lens to me and I like portraits taken with M-E.
I also have 28mm lens on M4-P as something super wide. It is only good for me to get very close to people, but have enough around them to tell the story.
Anything narrower than 50mm FoV became useless to me once I have started to use RF instead of (D)SLR.
Years later I've had 50mm on Canon 5D for several months as the only lens and it wasn't limiting at all but fun and creative. I have tried 35mm on 5D and it was boring.
I switched back to film in 2012 and used nothing but 50mm lenses on different RFs. Until I've purchased Bessa R and tried 35mm Color Skopar 2.5. I've had this lens on R for months and used 35 2.8 Zuiko Oly XA to learn real street photography.
35 mm RF has grown on me to become universal focal length. I do like 50mm still and have ELC M3 to enjoy it and thinking of trying J-3 on M-E as the main lens, since 50mm is the portrait lens to me and I like portraits taken with M-E.
I also have 28mm lens on M4-P as something super wide. It is only good for me to get very close to people, but have enough around them to tell the story.
Anything narrower than 50mm FoV became useless to me once I have started to use RF instead of (D)SLR.
jesenovec
Member
I found out that the 35mm focal length is actually harder to master than let's say 50, 28, 42 as it is neither a normal (42) o wide (28), therefore it's effect on perspective is very hard to master as it does not requre a certain definitive way of using it. But when mastered, it (also same as 42) can carry that something more than the 50, that is not descibable. 50 tends to draw more like a painting (due to a ''flatter'' fov), 42 mimics the way we see the world, also does the 35 if mastered, but it's hard as it includes just that bit more of information than we usually ''need'' to observe.
Just how i see it
Just how i see it
skucera
Well-known
I've found myself constantly frustrated by the limitations of my eyes whenever I've used any camera for the last 35 years. My eyes see wider angles than any camera lens, and then when I want to focus on some details I find my eyes focus on areas tighter than what a 200mm telephoto can focus in on. No one lens offers the flexibility to go from, say, a 28 mm wide-angle to a 300mm, and sadly such a lens just doesn't exist. I see why newspaper photographers carry three or four cameras, with different lenses on each.
Honestly, the lens I've found to be most useful is the classic 50mm on 35mm cameras. If I need to travel light, I grab a camera with a 50mm lens, or something like that.
Scott
Honestly, the lens I've found to be most useful is the classic 50mm on 35mm cameras. If I need to travel light, I grab a camera with a 50mm lens, or something like that.
Scott
farlymac
PF McFarland
Canon, Nikon, Tamron, and Sigma all make 28-300mm lenses, Scott. And there are some APS-C lenses in a similar range, such as 18-200mm by the same manufacturers.
PF
Daryl J.
Well-known
My favorite? The one that will successfully address the task at hand. 21mm? 210mm? Something in between? It's all good. But I gravitate to 42mm-equivalent lenses in 35mm format for general purpose work. But that's about 10-15% of what I enjoy doing.
skucera
Well-known
PF,
I looked at the prices of these, and I realize that I failed to mention one limitation... I can't afford to shop anywhere except thrift shops for camera gear.
There are some Tamron lenses I might dream about, but the L-series EF lenses are right out of my price range.Thanks for the idea, though. I'll see if I can dig up an Adaptall lens that might fit both my Konica and my EOS Elan IIe.
Scott