Ok, why? Why do you like the 50mm? What does it do for you?
I honestly do not know. My first 'real' camera came with a 50mm f1.8. I learned the basics of photography on it. Perhaps it is merely that familiarity.
Perhaps because it is (or was) considered an all-purpose lens. I shot landscapes with it, as well as portraits. It always seemed quite adequate, plus the 50s were generally faster lenses back in the day when we shot Pan-X, and that extra stop or two, plus the ability to create selective focus effects (we didn't know the term 'bokeh' back in the 60s) really tilted the balance towards the cheaper, faster 50.
I like faces. I like to frame head-and-shoulder shots at public events. A 50 lets me do that without moving in close in what seems a threatening manner, maybe? A 50 is friendly, you neither crowd in like a scary person, nor stand away like a stalker. You're in the mix, but not too close for comfort.
Maybe it's that a lot of my old fixed-lens rangefinders are typically 45 to 55mm. You get what you get with those, and learn to live with it.
I know that recently going through a bad patch, I had to sell off a lot of my junk. I didn't want to, but I sold the rangefinder LTM 28s, 35s, 90s, 135s, and some were quite rare; the income was gratifying. I kept only my Bessa R body and 2 50s, the silver Canon 1.8 and the black Canon 1.4. Why? Dunno. I guess I just like the 50. Stripped down to enforced basics, 50 is my choice.
So there you go. I guess at the core, I'm a fan of the nifty 50, for reasons which still sort of elude me.
And I don't know or care what HCB shot with. Love his work, but results are what matter, not how he got them. At least to me.
😉