Telling difference between 35mm and 50mm photos

N

Nick

Established
Local time
2:10 PM
Joined
May 26, 2005
Messages
53
I habitually take a 35 and 50 out with me. Sometimes I'll change mid-roll. By the time I've had the roll developed, scanned and imported into Lightroom - I may have plain forgotten which one took which shot. :bang:

At the risk of sounding like a complete idiot, what can I use (besides experience) to tell the difference? :confused:

For example, the following two shots I'm unsure about. The lenses I could have used include the 35mm Summicron v4, and the 50mm/1.5 Sonnar. Both were taken on Superia 800 with my Leica MP.


Violins in Kabuchiko


Yakitori

I have a guess of which is which, but I'd be interested to see if there's a way to confirm.
 
It's often a guess. I am guessing 35 for the first one - you've got it all in and depth of field is good indoors, a strong clue, notwithstanding your ISO of 800. The second one is cropped and I would say 35 again. You wouldn't choose anything smaller than f2.8 for this shot, and the out of focus areas don't look like the Sonnar at wider aperture.
 
I think that it's often a guess. Experience helps of course, and if the lenses you use have a unique signature, then it helps (for example, I often use a 35/2 Summicon and a 50/2 Summitar, besides the focal length differences, the character of the Summitar is unique enough that i can usually assume which photos I took with it.)

If I really care (like if I'm comparing two lenses side-by-side), then I take notes.
 
Same here, difficult to say when I have the film developed. I do not like to take notes when I shoot, maybe I should! In my opinion here the first could be 35 and 50 the second because the main subject is more isolated from the background. Glad to know I'm not the only one not able to distinguish between 35 and 50!
robert
 
Just had a thought - if this shots would be taken using some other, cheap (compared to this, I mean) lenses and asked which is Cron and which - Sonnar, what is your take how many would figure out this aren't made using mentioned lenses?

Lenses for boys are like shoes for girls, sometimes fact of owning and using means more than their real value, isn't it?
 
Without knowing the aperture settings, I don't think DOF is a good clue.

I could guess #1 was at a small aperture, since there is no motion going on.
And #2 was at a large aperture to speed up the shutter ?
 
I use angle of view as a guide - a 35mm lens has a 54.4 degree horizontal angle of view while a 50mm has 39.6 degree horizontal AOV.

The AOV affects the relative size of objects in the b/g compared to f/g. A w/a lens will render b/g objects smaller compared to a normal or telephoto lens. (Also, if shot at the same aperture, the wide angle's smaller rendering of background objects gives the impression of more sharpness, i.e. greater dof. As you don't mention apertures used for these shots, this can't be used to help with your question).

Compare the size of the foreground violins and stool to the violins and stool at the back wall; in the other shot compare the size of the oof seated figures in the background to the cook.

I am quite confident the violins were taken with the 35mm; I'm only reasonably sure the restaurant shot was made with the 50mm.

Regards,
 
Last edited:
Nick said:
I habitually take a 35 and 50 out with me. Sometimes I'll change mid-roll. By the time I've had the roll developed, scanned and imported into Lightroom - I may have plain forgotten which one took which shot. :bang:
Click to expand...

I'm just wondering why it matters? Not being rude, honestly curious. :D
 
Thanks for all the responses! In the interest of encouraging further discussion, I won't share what my original guesses are just yet. Let's see what a few more people have to say... :)
 
jsrockit said:
I'm just wondering why it matters? Not being rude, honestly curious. :D
Click to expand...

Good question. I'm trying to cut down the herd by understanding which lens gives what particular look and keeping the ones I prefer. Unfortunately, because I swap the lenses around and don't keep track, I can't figure out which lens to give credit to when I like the rendition of a particular image.
 
Im just surprised to see how this topic can get so much technical response...and it would be funny if all these technical aspect such as the angle view etc all are wrong since its only TS who will know the answer...i guess once the answer is disclose, probably all can focus on shooting more and ignore all these technical stuff...

Nice shot thou...love how the superia color works here.
 
Actually just curious, shouldnt someone able to tell from whether the picture produced is from a sonnar or a cron much easier than to guess from the dof?

Since most people claims that they are able to tell from the look of the picture which lens produced the image?
 
Recently I was reading "Light science and magic" (a book about lighting, as the title says) and in the book at some point they have a little discussion about different focal lenses and distortion. They get two pictures from the same position with two different focal length and than they crop the two pictures to include exactly the same portion of the image (what you would do if you were using first a full-frame with a 50mm and then, say a 4/3 with a 25mm lens to get the same picture). They claim that unless one of the lenses has some difference in design which produce a clear distortion and assuming the two lenses are closed enough to match their DOF there is no way to tell them apart. I was not too convinced but I performed my experiment and...yep they seem to be right. All this to say that, unless you have a clear reference point about which angles you might have been shoting probably there is no reliable way to tell apart a 35mm and a 50mm lens just from the pictures.

GLF
 
The degree of inclusion of the wall display tells me that it was shot with something wider than a 35. I would have guessed 28.
 
I cannot always tell with my own pics. But why should I care? Either I got it right, or I didn't. The exact focal length, or which lens I used, rarely matters to me. Without wishing to be unduly rude or inquisitive, why does it matter to you?
Cheers,

R.
 
lynnb said:
I use angle of view as a guide - a 35mm lens has a 54.4 degree horizontal angle of view while a 50mm has 39.6 degree horizontal AOV.

The AOV affects the relative size of objects in the b/g compared to f/g. A w/a lens will render b/g objects smaller compared to a normal or telephoto lens. (Also, if shot at the same aperture, the wide angle's smaller rendering of background objects gives the impression of more sharpness, i.e. greater dof. As you don't mention apertures used for these shots, this can't be used to help with your question).

Compare the size of the foreground violins and stool to the violins and stool at the back wall; in the other shot compare the size of the oof seated figures in the background to the cook.

I am quite confident the violins were taken with the 35mm; I'm only reasonably sure the restaurant shot was made with the 50mm.

Regards,
Click to expand...

+1 on reasoning AND conclusion.
Giorgio
 
I tend to change lenses and aperture very infrequently so I can usually guess accurately as to which took what photo AND the aperture I used. But if I get it wrong, eh? who cares? I don't...
 
It's a good discussion

It's a good discussion

I am glad to read and comment on this, because I always thought that everyone else in the photo world could easily tell what lens FL was used. I could never do that.

It doesn't "really matter" (to me anyway) but it's a good question and good discussion.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom