How do you see?

[MarkoKovacevic]

How do you see, in regards to focal lengths? I personally cannot shoot a 50mm, unless it's straight head\shoulders portraits. How about you? I'm best with a 35\28
Added: I also use my leica iii less, as I am not used to the 50mm lens; so i'm forced to carry around this heavy slr D:

 

[xxloverxx]

Sometimes I see 35, sometimes I see 50, and sometimes, when I look through the viewfinder of my Rollei 35, 40 is perfect.

The only time I see any wider than 35mm is if I'm standing right next to a subject and want to photograph them without moving…too bad I don't even have a 35mm yet. I will in about a week though…

 

[telemetre]

It's 50mm for me (on 135 film), whether this is due to the way I see, habit or both is open to speculation (I've been using only 50's for more than 10 years).

 

[rbiemer]

My natural field of view is about 50 degrees so a bit wider than a 50 and narrower than a 35 ( on 35mm film ) but I started with a 50 and used little else until a few years ago and still find that to be the lens I use most often.
Rob

 

[craygc]

On 135 film its a 35mm for me. However, I recently bought a VC 50mm f/1.1 and my views are that for me, a 50mm is good for photographing static "things", which includes posed H&S shots. For capturing a "situation", "interactions" or an "environment" its a 35mm lens or even shorter - the 50mm just does not work for me as a photo-journalistic focal length.

Actually, this is also what I tend to observe with the majority of 35mm or 50mm shots of others. Journalistic/documentary style shots at 50mm are usually something I feel would have been done better being closer with a shorter lens... YMMV 😀

 

[reiki_]

35 for people , 50 for stuff 😀 . Good thing I discovered primes after realisng how much I hate double zoom kits nowadays and what not.

 

[paulfish4570]

I would guess I see movement at 21-24. I see light at 50. I mentally compose at 50. And the 50 helps me maintain a polite distance from subjects. But I badly want a cv 35/2.5 for my Bessa R to more closely fill the viewfinder ...

 

[shadowfox]

24mm for landscape and travel.
35mm for people and people+landscape.
135mm for portrait.
300mm for tele.

I used to like 50mm, but since using 35mm, I often find myself stepping back when using 50mm now.

 

[barnwulf]

I see 28mm about 95% of the time. 21mm sometimes and 35mm only rarely.

 

[ferider]

Still hard to say. I have to ask myself first, if I see the world in landscape or in portrait format, and even there it's 50/50.

I do feel very balanced with the traditional [28|35]/50/90 combo, where the 50 is least important. And I feel RF teles are very much under-appreciated, at least on RFF.

Roland.

 

[Ezzie]

Still hard to say. I have to ask myself first, if I see the world in landscape or in portrait format, and even there it's 50/50.

I do feel very balanced with the traditional [28|35]/50/90 combo, where the 50 is least important. And I feel RF teles are very much under-appreciated, at least on RFF.

Roland.

I agree. I´ve been walking around with a 90 (135 FoV on the R-D1) in the messenger bag for some time now. And it gets much more use than both the 35 and 50 (53 and 75mm FoV on 35mm). The 28 (42mm FoV equiv.) get s the most use.