mikxer
Newbie
What are my fellow RFF opinions on the future of the 50 focal length lens considering the rise of digital and life with crop factors. Have the 28, 35, and 40 become more popular because of the crop factor?
The reason behind my question is that I'm interested in purchasing the new ZM 50 Planar to replace my 40 Summicron but not sure if that's a good idea. I've learned that I prefer a 50 so I'll probably get one here soon, but should I sell the 40 to help pay for the 50? Or should I keep the 40 as the future digital world will remain as it is today with the inherent crop factor?
The reason behind my question is that I'm interested in purchasing the new ZM 50 Planar to replace my 40 Summicron but not sure if that's a good idea. I've learned that I prefer a 50 so I'll probably get one here soon, but should I sell the 40 to help pay for the 50? Or should I keep the 40 as the future digital world will remain as it is today with the inherent crop factor?
Ronald M
Veteran
If you are smart, the digi you buy will be full frame. If you persist in the APS, a 30/35 mm is a substitute for 50mm.
shimokita
白黒
Good question.
I would agree that equivalence is one part of lens selection, however, there might be other factors. For me it's getting all of the aspects of the lens working together with a sensor / film size. The current hype (real and imagined) regarding digital full frame is pulling me in that direction as when I think about it, that makes sense. On the other hand it comes down to what specific lens and what body do I want to use.
Excluding digital, for the last year I only shot 28mm on my film body. Next year I want to spend the time with a good 50mm (on film). It would be nice if my digital had the same sensor size (ff), as I would like to "think and visualize" in terms of one sensor size (e.g. ff). As well I would like to use a specific lens on a digital body for a specific task / topic - which in my case would have to be full frame. Again the reason that I am leaning toward ff digital is that even if I was only shooting digital I would like to work with 50mm in a smaller physical space.
If you like the results of your 40mm then keep it for now. I will be getting a new 50mm because I want to spend time with that format in film. Then we see what happens.
Casey
I would agree that equivalence is one part of lens selection, however, there might be other factors. For me it's getting all of the aspects of the lens working together with a sensor / film size. The current hype (real and imagined) regarding digital full frame is pulling me in that direction as when I think about it, that makes sense. On the other hand it comes down to what specific lens and what body do I want to use.
Excluding digital, for the last year I only shot 28mm on my film body. Next year I want to spend the time with a good 50mm (on film). It would be nice if my digital had the same sensor size (ff), as I would like to "think and visualize" in terms of one sensor size (e.g. ff). As well I would like to use a specific lens on a digital body for a specific task / topic - which in my case would have to be full frame. Again the reason that I am leaning toward ff digital is that even if I was only shooting digital I would like to work with 50mm in a smaller physical space.
If you like the results of your 40mm then keep it for now. I will be getting a new 50mm because I want to spend time with that format in film. Then we see what happens.
Casey
Avotius
Some guy
There is something to be said in the fact that most RF 35mm lenses are smaller then their 50mm counterparts, for instance a 35 summicron on m8 is smaller then if you stuck a 50mm lens on there for sure (disregarding after crop focal length for a moment) that said I would still rather just have a full frame camera and not have to bug with any of that but right now go to admit if you are a 50mm user then an m8 with 35mm is not all that bad, but as someone who has a Canon 20D...well then things get a little more annoying.
Merkinz
Member
With Nikon's new pro and pro-sumer, full frame digital cameras (along side the existing ones, ie 5D...), I would imagine that in the not to distant future, Leica and who ever else decides to perpetuate the digital range finder, will have a full frame model. (and hopefully Nikon's magical ISO performance!)
pvdhaar
Peter
I've a hunch that the DX cameras have made the 50 more popular than ever since the advent of the ubiquitous 'standard zoom'.. They're being positioned as portrait lenses, and a quick look at sites like pbase.com/cameras/ will invariably show the 50/1.8 as amongst the most popular items viewed..
infrequent
Well-known
@pvdhaar - you are quite right there. the other thing about 50/1.8 offerings from nikon and canon is that they are extremely good value.
come to think of it...a D70s/D90 with the 24/2.8 nikkor + 60/2.8 micro nikkor will make a wonderful kit!
come to think of it...a D70s/D90 with the 24/2.8 nikkor + 60/2.8 micro nikkor will make a wonderful kit!
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
To my surprise, I use my 50/1.5 C-Sonnar more on the M8 than on film. Then again, my full-frame film preference is 35/75 and for the M8 I'd like a fast 24 to go with the Sonnar: 24/50 is 32/67 equivalent, close enough to 35/75.
Remember that the 'canonical' frames are 28-35-50-75-90-135, though the M8 has dropped 135 and added 24. Barring a change in frame sizes (which I consider unlikely) the 40mm requires a separate finder or some guesswork/experience.
Cheers,
R.
Remember that the 'canonical' frames are 28-35-50-75-90-135, though the M8 has dropped 135 and added 24. Barring a change in frame sizes (which I consider unlikely) the 40mm requires a separate finder or some guesswork/experience.
Cheers,
R.
mikxer
Newbie
Thanks everyone for your thoughtful replies.
There are really two parts to my question: 1.) is full frame really a near term reality, especially at a reasonable price and 2.) I've been told that taking portraits with a 50 lens on a digital sensor does not have the same qualities as the same portrait but taken with a 75 or 90 lens on film. To expand on the second point, I've been told that the depth of field of a 50 lens stays the same; such that taking a "close up" portrait (i.e. 50 lens on an APS sensor) gives you the look of a 50 lens, not what we would expect from our line up of 75 or 90 lens on film.
(I hope the second point makes sense. I'm not too versed in the digital lingo. Still using film.)
Roger, you do bring up a good point about the need to use an external finder with the 40 in the M8. I currently use a Bessa R3A. The 1:1 finder is wonderful.
There are really two parts to my question: 1.) is full frame really a near term reality, especially at a reasonable price and 2.) I've been told that taking portraits with a 50 lens on a digital sensor does not have the same qualities as the same portrait but taken with a 75 or 90 lens on film. To expand on the second point, I've been told that the depth of field of a 50 lens stays the same; such that taking a "close up" portrait (i.e. 50 lens on an APS sensor) gives you the look of a 50 lens, not what we would expect from our line up of 75 or 90 lens on film.
(I hope the second point makes sense. I'm not too versed in the digital lingo. Still using film.)
Roger, you do bring up a good point about the need to use an external finder with the 40 in the M8. I currently use a Bessa R3A. The 1:1 finder is wonderful.
raid
Dad Photographer
The 50mm lens was King and it is still King and it will remain King. There is no other focal length that offers more usefulness than the 50mm. Everything else can be replaced, but never the 50mm lens. Any serious RF photographer should consider having a few 50mm lenses with them.
bennyng
Benny Ng
How true... I keep gravitating back to this focal length, even when the R-D1 has a crop factor of 1.5 X.
Cheers,
pvdhaar
Peter
Your point makes absolute sense, but there's a catch.. When printing a picture shot with a DX camera, the amount of enlargement required is bigger than with FF. So, fuzzyness at the edge of DOF will show up more (in other words, the acceptable circle of confusion becomes less). The result is that a 50 on DX has more ability to isolate a subject than that same 50mm lens on FF given the same f-stop.
It's the same as with 35mm versus 6x6. You've got open up a 40mm on small format much more than an 80 on 6x6 to get the same subject isolation at the same field of view.. But have the same 80mm lens with the same aperture on small and medium format, and the smaller format has the edge.
mikxer
Newbie
PVDHAAR, thanks for that comment. And thanks to everyone for your thoughts.
I do really like the 50 focal length. I took out my grandfather's IIIF with 50 Summitar and had a blast catching my kids in action.
I do really like the 50 focal length. I took out my grandfather's IIIF with 50 Summitar and had a blast catching my kids in action.