Bill Pierce
Well-known
There was a day when the rangefinder was everything for the photojournalist. 3 bodies - wide, normal, maybe a 90mm or 135 with goggles, maybe a reflex housing for long lenses. Then Pentax had an instant return mirror and a diaphragm that stopped down automatically. And things began to shift. First, the long lenses were mounted on SLR's; then all lenses; then zooms began to be used in many situations. The rangefinder essentially disappeared from routine news shooting.
Still, it has maintained its place as a small, unobtrusive camera. But the long lenses, the reflex housings, the multiple bodies have faded. Usually its a single camera with a single lens, maybe a second lens in your pocket. There are still some great extreme wides for the RF that require an auxiliary finder, but those seem to be only brought out on special occasions.
What's the focal length that is your number one? And why? For me, it's the fifty (or on an M8, a 35) simply because I find it's the most versatile focal length. I can do a headshot that might be better with a 105 or landscape that might be better with a 28, but I'm going to come back with something. The "normal" lens rarely lets me down - so much so that I usually carry a big fast one for dim light and a small slow one for out on the daylight streets. Am I the only one who carries two "normal" lenses rather than two different focal lengths?
What lens do you use on your carry around camera and WHY?
Still, it has maintained its place as a small, unobtrusive camera. But the long lenses, the reflex housings, the multiple bodies have faded. Usually its a single camera with a single lens, maybe a second lens in your pocket. There are still some great extreme wides for the RF that require an auxiliary finder, but those seem to be only brought out on special occasions.
What's the focal length that is your number one? And why? For me, it's the fifty (or on an M8, a 35) simply because I find it's the most versatile focal length. I can do a headshot that might be better with a 105 or landscape that might be better with a 28, but I'm going to come back with something. The "normal" lens rarely lets me down - so much so that I usually carry a big fast one for dim light and a small slow one for out on the daylight streets. Am I the only one who carries two "normal" lenses rather than two different focal lengths?
What lens do you use on your carry around camera and WHY?
coelacanth
Ride, dive, shoot.
Normal lens for me is 50mm. More specifically, 50/2.8. 50mm is the most comfortable carry around lens personally. For street and people shots, the distance between the subject and me with 50mm is just far enough so I don't intrude into someones personal space while getting the compositions I like. I'm used to this focal length so I can imagine how the framing will be like without looking into VF when I want to shoot real quick. I'll have hard time doing so with other focal length. I like 35mm too, but I often feel "I should have gotten closer" after seen super quick shots I captured on streets.
Also F2.8 is fast enough for my use (I push B/W to 1600 95% of times) and the size of the lens really counts for carry around. If I had faster but bigger/longer lenses, I wouldn't be carrying the camera as much as I do now. In my case, Elmar-M 50/2.8 perfectly fits the bill. I'm even finding new-to-me Elmar 50/3.5 is fast enough and that compact size is "big."
Also F2.8 is fast enough for my use (I push B/W to 1600 95% of times) and the size of the lens really counts for carry around. If I had faster but bigger/longer lenses, I wouldn't be carrying the camera as much as I do now. In my case, Elmar-M 50/2.8 perfectly fits the bill. I'm even finding new-to-me Elmar 50/3.5 is fast enough and that compact size is "big."
I use 50's most often, just a fascination with fast optics. I have focal lengths from 20mm to 1000mm for my Nikon F cameras. But you'll find a 50mm used for 95% of my shots.
peterm1
Veteran
Probably I would have to say a 35 and a 90. The 35 is for street work. I actually prefer longer focal lengths like the latter but the zone focusing advantage of the 35 is too great to pass up for ordinary street shots simply because my eyes are a bit dodgy and I cannot focus quickly enough. I will also use a 50 when possible, usually shot wide open to isolate the image.
oftheherd
Veteran
My preferred normal lens on an SLR is a 50mm f/1.4. Fujinon for my Fujica ST 901, Contax T* for my Yashica FX 103. The contax stays in my Yashica kit, along with three zooms that go from 18mm to 150mm. My Fujica kit leans towards fixed FL lenses; 18mm(Spiratone), 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, 135mm, and 200mm (Sigma which is also macro). My preferred for my Kiev is the 53mm Helios f/1.8, but I keep a Jupiter 50mm f/2 in the bag.
I prefer 50mm for a normal lens. I only have two for the Kiev by chance. I have other Yashica and Pentax 50mm lenses I could use for the Fujica, but already have enough lenses in that kit. So as a "normal" rule, no, I don't have two fifties except in the Kiev kit.
But I understand you preference for a 50. Unless I have a particular reason, if I have only one lens to take on a camera, it will probably be a 50mm. It is what I started with in cameras, and I guess I just got used to "seeing" that way. I do kind of like the way it depicts things though, so it isn't only "I got used to it."
I prefer 50mm for a normal lens. I only have two for the Kiev by chance. I have other Yashica and Pentax 50mm lenses I could use for the Fujica, but already have enough lenses in that kit. So as a "normal" rule, no, I don't have two fifties except in the Kiev kit.
But I understand you preference for a 50. Unless I have a particular reason, if I have only one lens to take on a camera, it will probably be a 50mm. It is what I started with in cameras, and I guess I just got used to "seeing" that way. I do kind of like the way it depicts things though, so it isn't only "I got used to it."
Pickett Wilson
Veteran
50mm on the FF DSLR when using a prime, 28mm on the 1.6 crop sensor. Like others, I know it by heart and know what it will frame before I put it to my eye. I have prime lenses in most focal lengths, but the 50 is the goto lens.
Dave Wilkinson
Veteran
After using mostly fifties for more years than I care to remember....I've now taken a 40mm as my no.1! 
furcafe
Veteran
Generally speaking, on a (35mm) film body my normal is the classic 50mm. However, when I know ahead of schedule that I'll be shooting a significant amount of time (say a 1/3rd) indoors, a 35mm is a close 2nd; similarly, if I know I'll be shooting mostly indoors in tight quarters, a 28mm will be the go-to focal length.
I do not normally carry 2 versions of a single focal length. If I carry another lens, I would rather have the option of a different field of view. I also will almost always go w/the fastest available lens in a given focal length on the theory that I'd rather pay the size/weight penalty & stop down a fast lens than lose a shot because I didn't have enough speed. The obvious exception to this rule would be if I know that I will only be shooting outdoors or in bright light, in which case I'll gladly opt for smaller/lighter/slower glass.
I do not normally carry 2 versions of a single focal length. If I carry another lens, I would rather have the option of a different field of view. I also will almost always go w/the fastest available lens in a given focal length on the theory that I'd rather pay the size/weight penalty & stop down a fast lens than lose a shot because I didn't have enough speed. The obvious exception to this rule would be if I know that I will only be shooting outdoors or in bright light, in which case I'll gladly opt for smaller/lighter/slower glass.
Bike Tourist
Well-known
I would go with the fifty for 35mm shooting in all conditions. My only and recently acquired film camera, the Bessa R2 has as its only lens the humble CV 35/2.5 P2. I think the 35 requires a little more skill and thought than the 50, since it encompasses more real estate and photography uses essentially the faculty of exclusion as opposed to, say, painting, which is additive.
That said, I must confess to using and liking the 24-70 zoom on my D700 about 95% of the time.
That said, I must confess to using and liking the 24-70 zoom on my D700 about 95% of the time.
photogdave
Shops local
On my RF I use the Nokton 35 1.4 about 80% of the time. Wide enough to get a lot of info in the frame and to zone focus, but short enough to do environmental portraits.
For some reason I've never liked 35mm on SLR cameras and typically prefer 50mm or 28mm.
For some reason I've never liked 35mm on SLR cameras and typically prefer 50mm or 28mm.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
For years, I would have said a 50 (and I have more 50's than any other focal length). Recently, I have been getting wider -- in my both my vision and my waistband. There are some wonderful 35mm lenses out there and 6 times out of 11 that is what I am choosing these days.
Ben Marks
Ben Marks
Nokton48
Veteran
I favor the Canon 50mm F1.2 for low-light shooting (it's my go-to lens), and the V1 50mm F2 Summicron for when I want something different from the Canon. I've had the Canon longer, so it has gotten more use. For the 35mm focal length, I favor the 35mm F2 Canon, and the 35mm F2.8 Summaron.
Good to have a choice.
Good to have a choice.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
*** I edited this response. It was too long and really didn't answer the question.
SLR: 50mm
The 50mm is my normal lens on an SLR. A few years ago I had a falling out with the 50 on RF cameras. I don't exactly know why this happened, but it did and I started to shoot the 50 mostly on an SLR. But I will shoot a 50 on the M2/M4 if discretion is required. For the past 3-4 years I've carried a Zeiss ZF Planar 1.4/50 on a Nikon F/F2/F3-P, but I also have some older Nikkors and a Summicron 2/50 for my R bodies.
Like Bill says, a 50 can handle pretty much anything you throw at it. For one thing I like the natural perspective. IMO it's FOV offers a perfect balance between being too wide or narrow. I like portraits taken with a 50. They feel very natural. In my experience the 50 is also great for street work. It allows you to make a well composed shot just from the edge of the personal space of an individual. The 50 has some reach, without feeling like a tele lens.
RF: 35mm
Summilux-M ASPH 1.4/35mm. The 35 feels like a normal (50) lens to me on a RF camera. Perhaps it's because the framelines almost fill the entire viewfinder on a .72 body? I think it's about as wide as you can go without the distortion that is associated with wide angle lenses. Does that make it a slightly wider incarnation of the 50? I really don't know. It just seems to work.
6x6: 80mm
Hasselblad or Rolleiflex Zeiss Planar 2.8/80mm
For me this is the equivalent of the 50 on an SLR (135 format). It does pretty much anything you ask it to without much fuss.
I switch between 35 and 50 depending on how much of the environment I want to show around my subject, if space is cramped or if I need more DOF at a given stop/shutter speed combination. Looking at my work I have noticed that although they are two very different focal lengths, the pictures that I produce with them are more often than not interchangeable.
I bought a Voigtlander 2/28mm today. I've been in Europe for the past few years and the streets and rooms are often much smaller than what we are used to back in the US. So, I keep bumping in to wall, when I'm trying to back up with the 35. I often feel like I need to take one or two more steps back to get the shot I want. Hopefully this will cure that problem, but I have no idea if it will become my new 'normal' on an RF body. I have a hunch it won't, because it is quite wide...
SLR: 50mm
The 50mm is my normal lens on an SLR. A few years ago I had a falling out with the 50 on RF cameras. I don't exactly know why this happened, but it did and I started to shoot the 50 mostly on an SLR. But I will shoot a 50 on the M2/M4 if discretion is required. For the past 3-4 years I've carried a Zeiss ZF Planar 1.4/50 on a Nikon F/F2/F3-P, but I also have some older Nikkors and a Summicron 2/50 for my R bodies.
Like Bill says, a 50 can handle pretty much anything you throw at it. For one thing I like the natural perspective. IMO it's FOV offers a perfect balance between being too wide or narrow. I like portraits taken with a 50. They feel very natural. In my experience the 50 is also great for street work. It allows you to make a well composed shot just from the edge of the personal space of an individual. The 50 has some reach, without feeling like a tele lens.
RF: 35mm
Summilux-M ASPH 1.4/35mm. The 35 feels like a normal (50) lens to me on a RF camera. Perhaps it's because the framelines almost fill the entire viewfinder on a .72 body? I think it's about as wide as you can go without the distortion that is associated with wide angle lenses. Does that make it a slightly wider incarnation of the 50? I really don't know. It just seems to work.
6x6: 80mm
Hasselblad or Rolleiflex Zeiss Planar 2.8/80mm
For me this is the equivalent of the 50 on an SLR (135 format). It does pretty much anything you ask it to without much fuss.
I switch between 35 and 50 depending on how much of the environment I want to show around my subject, if space is cramped or if I need more DOF at a given stop/shutter speed combination. Looking at my work I have noticed that although they are two very different focal lengths, the pictures that I produce with them are more often than not interchangeable.
I bought a Voigtlander 2/28mm today. I've been in Europe for the past few years and the streets and rooms are often much smaller than what we are used to back in the US. So, I keep bumping in to wall, when I'm trying to back up with the 35. I often feel like I need to take one or two more steps back to get the shot I want. Hopefully this will cure that problem, but I have no idea if it will become my new 'normal' on an RF body. I have a hunch it won't, because it is quite wide...
Last edited:
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
a 50 is PURRfect....
just the Right Distance & Intimacy
my main 50 ..a 1966 lux
though any 50 is GRAND!!!
Its my main POV, the 'natural' way I see
( 35 is fab as long as there is no 50 around )
otherwise a 50mm & a 21mm does IT ALL
just the Right Distance & Intimacy
my main 50 ..a 1966 lux
though any 50 is GRAND!!!
Its my main POV, the 'natural' way I see
( 35 is fab as long as there is no 50 around )
otherwise a 50mm & a 21mm does IT ALL
Last edited:
ferider
Veteran
I really have a hard time with a single lens.
I feel I need a wide and a tele, 35/75, 35/90, or 28/50 all work. I use both lenses more or less equally. Most of my keepers have been shot with 28.
Roland.
I feel I need a wide and a tele, 35/75, 35/90, or 28/50 all work. I use both lenses more or less equally. Most of my keepers have been shot with 28.
Roland.
back alley
IMAGES
since using an rd1 exclusively i am most satisfied with the 15, app. 24mm fov and the 40, app 60mm fov.
i have never used a 60 before but love it now and have never been fond of the 50mm.
i look forward to using a 25 on the rd1, close to the 35mm fov.
when using film, my favourite kit was 35/75.
i have never used a 60 before but love it now and have never been fond of the 50mm.
i look forward to using a 25 on the rd1, close to the 35mm fov.
when using film, my favourite kit was 35/75.
Bob Michaels
nobody special
My "normal" for a 35mm camera used to be a 35mm lens but it is changing to a 28mm lens.
I use one or the other. But if I only have two lenses, one is a 28, the other a 35. I sometimes have a 50mm and 25 or 21mm available but seldom use them.
Why? Well, Garry Winogrand expressed it well for me. But I must add that there is about a 1000X differential in talent. I just like to be close to the subjects and I like the opportunity to include some of the background for information.
Bob Michaels
nobody special
Harry, we all know the "one lens" has been discussed ad nauseum.
But I do share the insightful Ansel's conclusion about too many choices always resulting in you believing you have the wrong one. Ditto: film, filters, or anything else.
Phoenix
Member
If I shoot with film it is my beloved, 50 pre asph lux.
If I shoot with the R-d1, then it is the 35 cron asph to get closer to the same focal length. thanks for asking.
If I shoot with the R-d1, then it is the 35 cron asph to get closer to the same focal length. thanks for asking.
MCTuomey
Veteran
i'm good with 35/50/90. 50 most of the time. 35 when i need to be closer (or can't step back). 90 the least, for tight portraits or detail.
i'm pretty sure i could do alright with just a 50, but i know i'd miss having the other lenses. i like a bit of perspective variety, i guess.
i had several 28s and just could not shoot them well. lack of talent with greater compositional decisions.
i'm pretty sure i could do alright with just a 50, but i know i'd miss having the other lenses. i like a bit of perspective variety, i guess.
i had several 28s and just could not shoot them well. lack of talent with greater compositional decisions.