Main lens 35 or 40?

[domagojs]

Hi all,

I'm considering a move from an SLR to a rangefinder I have experience with Zorki 4 and Yashica Electro and I like the rangefinder shooting style a lot. Now I'm thinking about a Bessa, either R2A or R3A, as a step up.

The camera choice is driven by the choice of my main lens. I intend to use Jupiter 8 as a "classic" look 50, but I want a Nokton as my main lens, either 40 or 35.

I now have a 35mm on my Nikon film SLR and I really like the versatility of it and that it enables me to photograph my child, family, get-togethers and occasional travels. On the other hand, I felt that Electro's 45mm was a bit to tight for what I shoot mainly (much closer to 50 than to 35). For the other stuff I plan to use SLRs anyway, either digital or film.

Why 40 when I'm satisfied with 35? I can buy a R3A and Nokton 40 is considerably cheaper than 35 However, my fear is that I'm gonna be falling back to my Nikkor 35 if this will be too narrow.

So, suggestions, what should I do? Would the 40 be close to 35, or something in the middle of 35 and 50? Or should I go with the 40 and buy 28 with those sexy viewfinders

 

[bastian a.]

I would take the 35mm lens ...

 

[chrismoret]

If there is so much doubt about what lens to buy why don't you try to rent the two candidates for a day. And then make up your mind.

 

[mfogiel]

You have a 50mm, so it would make more sense to get a 28 or 35mm lens as a companion. The rule of thumb is: 1 camera 1 lens= 35mm, 2 cameras 2 lenses= 28mm and 50mm. If you should have just 1 lens, then a 40mm is ok.

 

[btgc]

I think there are no rules. When I had only Mju with 35mm lens, I learned to use it everywhere. Later I got 40mm lens and got used to use it on all occasions.

That's like with ice cream - people like most variety which they eat more

 

[Thomas78]

If you only carry one lens with you, I would take the 40 mm.
I think it is a more suitable all-round lens then the 50 mm, since the diagonal of 24x36 is about 44 mm and the 50 mm is a bit to long in some cases. (40 mm is also the focal lenght of the Rollei 35.)



If you also take the 50 mm lens with you, then the 35 mm would be more sensible...

 

[rover]

R2a and 35.

You can always use the 40 in the future on the R2a, which from what you are saying is a better match for what you want.

 

[rdeleskie]

Like the man said, there are no rules. I love 40mm as a FL. It's on my Olympus 35RC (42mm actually), and I also carry a Minilux (40mm), and will pick up a Panasonic 20mm (40mm equivalent) for my EPL1.

The 40mm Summicron-C is the default lens on my M6. I've tried 35mm but found it slightly too wide (or not wide enough). I was always cropping the pictures.

The Nokton 40mm is a terrific modern lens. However, some evidence (including my own comparisons) suggest it is slightly longer than 40mm (more like 42 or 43mm). That may or may not be an issue for you.

All this said, if you are comfortable with the 35mm FL, I think you should spend the extra $ and get the R2A/35mm Nokton. Beware of false economy: saving a few bucks to purchase a R3A/40mm and then selling them at a loss in six months won't really help you out. Start with what you know and are comfortable with, and then you can add lenses to experiment with later on. "Comfort," IMHO, is very important to the concept of rangefinder shooting.

 

[jsrockit]

They are very close to each other really. I've always felt that I can get away with either as my only lens. That said, perhaps choose your body by if you are more of a wide angle person or a normal person. RF Viewfinders should be chosen by your favorite lens length.

 

[domagojs]

Thanks for all your opinions, they are really helpful!

I think that I'll wait a bit longer and go with the R2A and a 35mm. I'm afraid that 40 would be really to tight and that a relatively expensive set would sit on the shelf and in the end I'd lose money on it when selling it. Better to wait a bit more and then go with something that I'll use for several years - good point rdeleskie.

I'm intrigued by the idea 28 + 40, but I don't have the money for the 28mm anyway. Also, I have NIkkor 28 f/2.8 AI-S (sharp, contrasty and distortion-free) that I don't use because it's too wide for what I normally shoot.

Thanks for your help and I'll check in when I get my RF!

P.S. @ chris: I'm from Croatia and you cannot even buy it here from a real shop, let alone rent it

 

[haempe]

40mm is definitive my focal lenght. If I carry my CLE with 40 mm Rokkor, I stand always right. If I use the Leica with 50mm or 35mm, I must make a step, forward for 35mm or back for 50mm ...

 

[Tompas]

I very much like my R3a but it's really a camera for a 50mm lens: the framelines for 40mm are so close to the viewfinder edges that I cannot see them all at the same time. It's very irritating. And I'm not even wearing glasses. YMMV, of course.

If I could get an inexpensive R2x for use with my 40mm Summicron-C, I'd buy it.

 

[ramosa]

You have a 50mm, so it would make more sense to get a 28 or 35mm lens as a companion. The rule of thumb is: 1 camera 1 lens= 35mm, 2 cameras 2 lenses= 28mm and 50mm. If you should have just 1 lens, then a 40mm is ok.

well said. i think it's best to select current lenses according to future plans. that can be hard, but it will help you have a good spread between lenses. for instance, my first lens was a 28, my second a 50, my third an 18, and my fourth 80. for use on my M8, that's a good spread for the way i shoot.

 

[Steve Bellayr]

Go for the 35/50 combo on a rangefinder. It is the most versatile for what you want to shoot. You already know what the 35 does. Consider the 50 a small portrait lens.

 

[Kolame]

Well, I disagree. I have a 50 and 35mm at the moment. But it’s not that nice. They are relatively close together. Either go for 28mm and 50mm or one 40mm (love this length).

 

[domagojs]

Go for the 35/50 combo on a rangefinder. It is the most versatile for what you want to shoot. You already know what the 35 does. Consider the 50 a small portrait lens.

My conclusion exactly! 35 as a lens cap for the camera, and J-8 as a short portrait lens for the "classic" look. Everything else is either too expensive or not what I really need.

 

[domagojs]

Well, I disagree. I have a 50 and 35mm at the moment. But it’s not that nice. They are relatively close together. Either go for 28mm and 50mm or one 40mm (love this length).

As I wrote, my 50 is really a special-purpose lens more than a companion to the "main" lens. And I'm now thinking that I could sell my Nikkor 35 to finance the move and keep Nikkor 28 (great lens by common consensus) and use that when I want that wide.

BTW, you people helped me a lot to define what I really want and why. Thanks everyone!

 

[Kolame]

As I wrote, my 50 is really a special-purpose lens more than a companion to the "main" lens. And I'm now thinking that I could sell my Nikkor 35 to finance the move and keep Nikkor 28 (great lens by common consensus) and use that when I want that wide.

BTW, you people helped me a lot to define what I really want and why. Thanks everyone!

Don’t want you to think, what I think Think what you want, we are individual and if you get along with a 35mm and a 50mm - why not? Just because, I can’t, you also may not? No, that’s stupid

 

[ferider]

Only you can know. Note that the 40 Nokton is a bit longer than 40mm, more like 43.

I were you I would pick the camera first, then the lens(es). The R3* 1:1 finder rocks if you don't wear glasses.

Then again, an M2 is not much more expensive and is better to use with 35mm.

I used to think preferred focal length was hard-wired. I hated 35mm. I forced myself to use it for a few months, now I cann't live without it.

Meaning: 35 or 40 - in the end it will make very little photographic difference which one you'll pick. But it is easier in use when camera frame-lines and lens match.

 

[John Elder]

35mm lens has been my main lens for 25 years. Shot Philly twice in the last week with my kit that consists of M6 with 35 cron, M4 with 50 cron, and a 21mm. 100% of my shots were taken with the 35mm lens.