Which focal length perspective suits you most?

[raid]

I have been taking my family to the beach on a regular basis since our two little daughters started mentioning to us "beach" and "ocean". I started out with the CV 25mm/4 lens followed by the Canon 28mm/3.5 lens. I felt that the images while showing nice "scenes", they did not bring my family into the picture as I wanted it. I then used in a following visit the Konica S2 with its 48mm lens, and the results improved [for me]. Yesterday, I used the 90mm Leitz Elmarit. It is the old model. Here are some results. I hope that you like them.

 

[raid]

Here are some more photos. I find the Elmarit an excellent portrait lens overall. It falls in between the heavy and expensive Summicron 90mm/2 lens and the much cheaper and smaller 90mm/4 Elmar. I got this lens from a gentleman on photo.net a few years ago.

 

[raid]

The 90mm lens allows you to better isolate face expressions than, say a 50mm lens. I used the Bessa T camera with an external viewfinder.

 

[wlewisiii]

Raid,

A 50 is always my go-to focal length. If I'm intending a traditional portrait the prewar 90 elmar goes on instantly. The 85-105 range just does the best job of isolating the subject if you're doing a classical western style portrait. OTOH, if you want the environment in the portrait, then I'd argue for the 50's flexibility. Mr. Adam's picture of Stiegleitz coming down a staircase (Contax I & a Sonnar, IIRC) is just one example of how it can be useful. I'd argue in the 50's favor over wider in almost every portrait case... no, make that every case. I really can't think of a "Portrait" done wider than 50 that I like. Huge amounts of street shots and the like are marvellous, but those aren't portraits the way I see that word in the world.

I do intend to get a 28 for my 7 & CL (prob the CV 28/3.5) but that's really only for when the location is too limited for the 2 foot zoom to work with a 50. Really, pretty close to 99% of my shooting is done with whatever is a "normal" lens on the camera in question. You're obviously talking about 35mm cameras, so the 50 is what I refer to here, but on other formats, I'd still prefer a good prime normal lens if I can only have one. When I stray, I'm more inclined to go long than wide but I understand that's an unusual preference around here 🙂

Hope this makes some sense,

William

 

[FrankS]

What William said. I love the flexibility of the 50mm focal length.

 

[derevaun]

Agreed. If I don't know what I'm going to shoot, I'm rarely disappointed by using the normal FL. I don't even own any wide or long lenses for the RF. Not for dogmatic reasons, but it turns out that framing and focusing are quite second nature.

In any case, those are some nice shots of some fantastically photogenic subjects.

 

[John]

I like the 50 for a greater percentage of my shots, lets say 75%. This is because I can show the person and the surroundings or context of the moment. I like an 85 or 90 for portraiture and shots that emphasize the person. With these I can look for places that could lend themselves to attractive or interesting bokeh. You can take "in focus" shots that show the surroundings, but the view is narrower. 😉

 

[John Camp]

I haven't had a whole lot of experience with it yet, but I like the 50 lux on the R-D1 -- and that's the equivalent of a 75 on an M.

JC

 

[amateriat]

The 50 seems a common touch-point for most of us, and I get a lot of mileage from it as well. That said, it is the 28mm focal length which gets the greatest workout of the three lenses I use with my principal outfit, with the 90 bringing up the rear. Wouldn't be without any of them, of course. When I'm shooting with any of my fixed-lens cameras (Konica S3, Ricoh GR1), it's naturally a case of working with what I've got, unless I have more than one camera on hand, which is often the case. 😉


- Barrett

 

[jan normandale]

make mine a 35mm. I like 28mm and 45mm ... but 50 seems more like a tele lens. I use it from time to time but my go to lenses are wider.

 

[J. Borger]

I haven't had a whole lot of experience with it yet, but I like the 50 lux on the R-D1 -- and that's the equivalent of a 75 on an M.

JC

50 MM (Lux) is also my favourite FL on the R-D1 .. but that does not simply translate to 75mm on an M. In fact what you get with the R-D1 is a cropped 50mm picture. The perspective is still of a 50mm lens and not that of a 75mm .. that is probably why i like the 50mm so much on the R-D1 ... tight compositions with normal perspective. Or another way to put it..... more working distance with the 50mm. A cropfactor is not all bad🙂

 

[Dougg]

I guess the 35 is my favorite... no, I mean the 28mm is it... but on consideration the 40 is more useful... Heck, I like 'em all! I have no trouble finding pics while running around with a 21 attached, or an 90 or a 50, though each takes some adjustment of my visual "settings". But the farther away from 35 or 40mm the lens is, the more challenging it gets.

 

[Todd.Hanz]

I guess the 35 is my favorite... no, I mean the 28mm is it... but on consideration the 40 is more useful... Heck, I like 'em all! I have no trouble finding pics while running around with a 21 attached, or an 90 or a 50, though each takes some adjustment of my visual "settings". But the farther away from 35 or 40mm the lens is, the more challenging it gets.

I agree, it seems whatever the focal length I chose I can usually get something out of it, I like 'em all!

Todd

 

[OldNick]

I've concentrated on the 50mm for a number of years, but more recently began to recognize the perspective of the 35mm. I'm using a Jupiter 12 on my Leica IIIf as my primary kit at this time.

Jim N.

 

[ErnestoJL]

Most of my RFs have fixed lens, so I had no choice: what I have is what I use, be it 45; 48 or 50 mm, and of course feet tele or feet wide when needed.
OTOH, I´ve been shooting SLRs for a long time then I got used to 75 and 100mm (normal + 1.5x or 2x converter) for portraits and for general use, this helps isolate the subject from the sorroundings, and isn´t too long nor too short.
I´d like to have an 85 for my RFs.

Ernesto

 

[ddutchison]

For many years, it's been the 35 (or 40) for me. I always seemed to find the 50 excluded too much. Like Jan, I've thought of it as a mild tele. for when I wanted to concentrate on details.

However, this does seem to be changing of late. I've started to notice that many of my shots could do with a bit of cropping, and I've gotten into the habit of flicking through the different framelines in the VF - the 50's getting used a lot more. I could even take just the 50 out for a day of shooting and not feel I'd made an unfortunate decision.

Maybe I'm developing tunnel vision, because I've begun to notice that some the 50mm shots could be tighter. So now I've just gotten a90.

Still, for the time being, if I could only have one lens it'd be a 35/40. I don't do many portraits, and this FL usually encompasses all of what drew my eye to the scene in the first place. To me, it also seems to have a natural look (as opposed to a 24mm for instance, a FL I also love), it's wide without looking wide.

 

[oftheherd]

I don't think I have a favorite lens, but I due tend to like wide. In 35mm SLRs, I have always loved the old 18mm Spiratone lens I bought over 30 years ago. The 35mm lens I got at the same time gets no use. I have/had a range from 18mm to 600mm. The 600mm when I had it was a handy lens at times, but 28mm and the 18mm remain favorites, even over the 24mm. If I wasn't reaching for wide, it was usually the 50mm on the camera. Part of that may be due to the type of photography I did a lot of in Korea. In order to photograph a lot of the old temples I liked to photograph, wide would often get the shot when normal or tele just wouldn't do. But I just learned to like wide even in other situations.

With my Super Press 23, my first lens after the 100mm normal was a 65mm. I also have a 50mm and a 150. I loved the 65mm but it needs shutter repair now, so the 50mm is my wide. The 100mm worked well as a portrait lens also. I have yet to use the 150mm that way.

For me, my bias is to wide, but I really like to use what seems best to get the photo I want.

 

[raid]

It seems that the 50mm is King here.
I find it exiting to switch once in a while from a wide angle view to a normal and then on another day to a tele. In my case, my subjects are often the same (my family), so changing focal lengths result in very different perspectives. Most of the time, I use the 50mm lenses. I try to force myself to use one lens for an entire roll of film. This way, I learn more about the lens.

Raid

 

[Carrotblog]

Which focal length perspective suits you most?

For most people, it's got to be tunnel vision.

Only....they can't see it 😉

Being native to the wild, eagle eyed telephoto perspective would be great, although flat field wide-angle seems to be better suited for bunnies. That way, grasping more of the visual field, a bunny understands his context better. Wide from 21mm is just swell....

xoxoxoxo

Miffy

http://carrotblog.livejournal.com

 

[einolu]

At first i felt most comfortable taking pictures with a 50, now I like 35 a lot more. Who knows, maybe in another year I will start loving 28mm. I think a fast 28mm lens (like the ultron or summicron) is perfect because it lets you get right into the action and at the same time play around with the DOF a bit.