Guest willjanurgucken2000 Posted February 23, 2011 Share #1 Posted February 23, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) In the RFF was recently a very interesting thread. Maybe we should this discuss this in the Leica forum too. Only 2 lenses: 35 and 50mm!?! Hi guys! I'm using for my style of photography (street, portrait, reportage) since years only 35 and 50mm on a Leica M. (Past: M6+M2 with 35 Cron, 50 Lux; Now: M9+M8: 28/35 Cron, 50 Lux) Sometimes I think it would be nice to have more lenses... Then I think, for what? I dont miss them, I dont like lenses longer than 50mm (I know this from the SLR of my girlfriend), I cant compose with lenses shorter than 35mm (I know this since I tried the 28 Cron from my M8 on my M6/9) So for what? Whats your experience? Are there more people who really only use 35 and 50mm????? Especially the street shooters here... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 23, 2011 Posted February 23, 2011 Hi Guest willjanurgucken2000, Take a look here Only 50mm and 35mm?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
smb Posted February 23, 2011 Share #2 Posted February 23, 2011 I'll be the first to jump in. I fully agree. The 50mm provides a nice format for shooting people with a fast lens. The 35mm provides a good frame work also by putting the subject in their surroundings. I found that the 28mm is harder to work with as the corners sometimes become distorted. It is okay for landscapes. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
!Nomad64 Posted February 23, 2011 Share #3 Posted February 23, 2011 If one doesn't need a 90 for greater distance or for perspective reasons then it is an excellent solution. After all if up to 40 years ago a photographer did everything with just three lenses, one might do almost everything with just two. And if you're into street a 35 & 50 'lux is a terrific combo. Besides, keeping low the number of lenses ensures a lower percentages of missed shots. I do not remember anymore who was to say that every time you change a lens you lose a picture, but he was right. Cheers, Bruno Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted February 23, 2011 Share #4 Posted February 23, 2011 Hi I carry three or four bodies, a Weston exposure meter and 24, 28, 35 and 50mm, most days, some times sub a 40mm for 50mm, for street shooting. You miss shots when you get to the 36 frame, all the best ones, occur when you are rewinding. Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
andybarton Posted February 23, 2011 Share #5 Posted February 23, 2011 95% of my M shots are taken with just one lens. 95% of my SLR shots are taken with just one lens. Most people, I would suggest, need no more than 2 lenses for everything they do. If they are truly honest with themselves. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
christakis Posted February 24, 2011 Share #6 Posted February 24, 2011 I have that combination. To be honest, I don't NEED both but it's nice to have some variety. I rarely switch lenses when I'm out, I just use one for the whole day. But before I go out, I decide in what mood I'm in and choose accordingly: 35mm or 50mm. Wouldn't mind a 24mm for travelling but don't need it tbh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
UliWer Posted February 24, 2011 Share #7 Posted February 24, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) 95% of my M shots are taken with just one lens. ... I'd like to see your 5% M-Stereo shots once. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted February 24, 2011 Share #8 Posted February 24, 2011 These are my two most used focal lengths. I use a 50mm on the M8.2 and have a film body with 35mm in the bag as well. This gives me my two most loved perspectives and a total of 4 angles of view, I might want/ need. Putting the 50 mm on the film body, gives me great low light as well, as shooting @ 3200 @ f1 opens up pretty much every dark corner around. All other lenses are special purpose or play around for me, which I carry mostly to not use them at all or just for the occasional frame - not worth carrying around on most days, really. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sm23221 Posted February 24, 2011 Share #9 Posted February 24, 2011 I would opt for just one. Having both makes little sense to me - take a few steps back and the 50 becomes a 35; take a few steps forward and the 35 becomes a 50. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted February 24, 2011 Share #10 Posted February 24, 2011 These are the two lenses I use the most. I can't imagine being without either as they are quite different. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
menos I M6 Posted February 24, 2011 Share #11 Posted February 24, 2011 You don't buy two different lenses only because of their numerical value difference of focal length. There can be also a substantial difference in their character, to justify owning both - people even own several lenses of the same focal length just for this specific reason. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
csemetko Posted February 24, 2011 Share #12 Posted February 24, 2011 Almost all my shots are taken with a 35 or a 50. In fact, a quick count of the pictures in my book "UNPOSED" shows that of the 51 pictures, 26 were taken with a 35, 19 with a 50, 2 with a 90, 2 with a 28, and 2 with a 21 (all on Leica M's). And those other focal lengths were primarily used earlier in my shooting career--now when I travel I almost always bring only a 50 and a 35. As I'm sure we all know, HCB used a 50 for virtually all his shots--he said using a 35 was "showing off a bit," which is a pretty funny line, but I know what he meant. Generally speaking, I use the 50 when I'm feeling the need for rigorous, tight composition from a slight distance, and a 35 when I want to shoot from the middle of the action. If I had to take only one, I guess it would have to be a 35, but that's a tough one! Cheers, Craig Semetko Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thompsonkirk Posted February 24, 2011 Share #13 Posted February 24, 2011 Maybe only 40mm? I have lenses from 28 to 75mm, some newer & faster, & some just 'beaters' for rainy days & gritty locations. But I've come to regard them as special-purpose adjuncts to a 40mm Summicron. Ironically the 40 Cron with mods cost about 1/20 as much s an M9 body. But it's sharp wide-open & is coded & brings up 35mm framelines. It matches an M9's 35 framelines much better than a 'real' 35. IMO anyone starting out with Leica should shoot with just this lens for about a year. Kirk Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gberger Posted February 24, 2011 Share #14 Posted February 24, 2011 I'd add just one more lens to that - - - the 24. My wife and I have "done" the Southwest, Thailand, Japan, Alaska, Great Britain, Holland/Belgium, Germany, and New Zealand. The streets and architecture in Great Britain and Japan really call for a 24, although we used the 35. Same for parts of Holland. The Southwest and Alaska were 50mm country, as was Germany. New Zealand was 35m country. My wife used the 40mm lens on her CLE and (later) her Minilux had the 40mm. So, I'd guess 70% of our photos were with the 35m (and her 40mm) with the remainder using the 50mm. I grew up on 50mm, starting with an Argus and progressing to the 50 on a 111c in 1945. I "see" in 50mm, while my wife "sees" in 35mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
maurometallo Posted February 24, 2011 Share #15 Posted February 24, 2011 95% of my M shots are taken with just one lens. 95% of my SLR shots are taken with just one lens. Most people, I would suggest, need no more than 2 lenses for everything they do. If they are truly honest with themselves. I'm with you, Andy... But I have taken the concept even further: On my M4-P there has been only a 50mm Summicron since 1985... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MPerson Posted February 24, 2011 Share #16 Posted February 24, 2011 95% of my M shots are taken with just one lens. 95% of my SLR shots are taken with just one lens. Most people, I would suggest, need no more than 2 lenses for everything they do. If they are truly honest with themselves. Yes. 95% of my shots with the MP/M2/CL are with a 40mm either Nokton or Summicron. The rest are the Summicron 35/2 ASPH. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted February 24, 2011 Share #17 Posted February 24, 2011 I have 3 M lenses - 28, 35 & 50. I rarely use the 28 but the other two are probably equally used. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
russell Posted February 24, 2011 Share #18 Posted February 24, 2011 I'm in this dilemma now. On a film Leica I used to be a 50mm shooter. On digital and after getting married I'm leaning more to 35mm. 35mm since you get the person and at least one other element involved. Also on the M9 you can crop aggressively to get it back to a pseudo 50mm. The 50mm, however, has the highest IQ and the sweetest renditioning. Also depending how you look at subject movement and hand shake it's about 1/3rd of stop faster. They're a 35mm version IV cron and a 50mm version III (E46 sliding hood) lux. They're both in silver chrome so the 50mm has a real size and weight. I've the 50mm version IV cron as well which is a better balance for the 35mm cron but to be honest photos from the 50mm lux just scream Leica. I guess if I had to take one only it'd be the 35mm unless I knew I was going into mostly low light. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
400TX Posted February 24, 2011 Share #19 Posted February 24, 2011 I'll agree that a 35 and a 50 will cover 90% or more of the situations you may want to photograph, whether you use a Leica M or another system. Rather than a 35, I have a 28 'cron for my wide lens - it's pretty close to the 35 in terms of field ov view. I use it and a 50 for over 90% of my work. I also have a 90/2 for travel & landscape, but rarely use it. I'm keeping it because based on past experience, I know if I trade or sell it I will be kicking myself within three months (made that mistake with my Voigtlander 35/1.2). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wudai_e Posted February 28, 2011 Share #20 Posted February 28, 2011 I found anything wider than 35mm on a full frame M hard to work with because kinda defeat the advantage of a range finder system: 1. Not being able to see what's really going on outside the frame for a particular lens anymore. 2. Not really compact and simple anymore ie. external view finders. 3. Slow to frame and take the shot: have to focus then look through the VF... doh... 4. Wider Leica lenses can't really differentiate themselves apart from zeiss or voigtlanger in terms of IQ and bokeh except maybe the 28mm cron. So I totally agree with OP. 35lux + 50 Lux would be enough for almost anything on a M. Maybe If you're rich enough and can add a 28cron to the kit and that's it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.