50mm vs. 35mm

[gnarly]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am awaiting the arrival of my M9-P and lens, and was wondering what others thought of either getting the 35mm Summilux or the 50mm Summilux.

I will be doing mostly street photography, and artistic photography, very little if any landscapes, and am not sure which would work best.

[bill]

Gnarly, the logical answer has to be to ask in return how you see the world. What focal length do you prefer to capture your vision. There are many (like me) who regard the 50 as the "standard" focal length. There are others who see the world in 35mm terms. The Summiluxes you list are both fine lenses. Go on what suits you. You can use both for "street" and "artistic" purposes - they are broad churches

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[dickgrafixstop]

A bit like asking "which arm would you like amputated?"

 

Doesn't matter - whichever one you get is wonderful and you'll still want the other.

[zoe]

I was recently facing the same question and decided on the 35 because sometimes you can only back up so far. About three months have passed and I am glad I picked the 35. Of course I still want the 50 too. But learning the 35 has been a full time job and it is a lens that takes awhile to learn to get the very best from it. I would choose it first again.

[1JB]

I started with the 35 cron and did a lot of city and town "street" photography with it. Great lens with great DoF for that kind of work. Generally I don't get that close to the subjects. I added a 50 lux and like it better for capturing people in the city since I can be at the distance at which I feel comfortable. For broader shots that capture more of the moment or surroundings I stll put the 35 in my pocket. You won't go wrong with either lens. If you go with the 35 you'll also get a fantastic landscape lens and the quality of the files is such that you can crop the heck out of them for street photography. The 50 gets the shots of people I want without much of a crop at all.

[lars_bergquist]

I own both – and use them. Both are really 'standard lenses', one short and one long. The 35 is for the streets, and for indoor use, the 50 is for the great outdoors (which does not simply mean 'landscapes'; I am not really into landscape work).

 

But while the 35mm Summilux does need its speed, the 50mm replaced my Summicron not because it is faster, but because it is more resistant to flare and internal reflections. I understand that the Summarit is quite respectable in that field, and the speed is OK for general use. The Summilux is a super optic, and I won't part with it, but today, I would have gone for the Summarit.

 

The old man from the Age of the 5cm Elmar

[tobey bilek]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Wait for the camera and use the viewfinder to see what works.

 

I dislike the effect when moving in close with wide lenses. Objects near the lens get too large.

 

For only one lens, my choice is 50. Then a 90 or 75, then 35. Others will see the world differently.

[sblitz]

depends on how many lenses you are going to buy in the near term. to me the 50lux is perfection but if i only had one lens for an extended time i would choose the 35, much more versatile for many more situations than the 50. you will end up with both

[Peyton Hoge]

It doesn't matter which you buy, because you will buy the other one later. It's the Leica lifestyle!

[ophyls]

I just got my M9P too and got both the 35 and 50 1.4 summiluxes....they are both great lenses and I agree that ultimately you prob will get both! Essentially I have found the 35 great for all sorts of general photography and is versatile. The 50 is more suited to people and animal photography. Both give outstanding bokeh... If I were starting off and had to make a choice I think I would get the 35mm for its greater versatility.

Good luck..

[theno23]

Do beware though that either of these lenses is hard to find for a reasonable price.

 

I've ben waiting for a 50mm Summiliux for over a year.

 

- Steve

[gnarly]

Thank you all for your input, this has been helpful. I have ordered both along with the M9-P (August 2011) and I realize that this is, or can be a long waiting game, until they do arrive. I asked the question as I thought I might spread out the cost by purchasing one at a time, but from what I am hearing and reading, if I am in the cue I should just stay with my original plan.

[Printmaker]

Might as well order a 90 while your credit card is still smoking.

[algrove]

Gnarly, the logical answer has to be to ask in return how you see the world. What focal length do you prefer to capture your vision. There are many (like me) who regard the 50 as the "standard" focal length. There are others who see the world in 35mm terms. The Summiluxes you list are both fine lenses. Go on what suits you. You can use both for "street" and "artistic" purposes - they are broad churches

 

Regards,

 

Bill

 

+1

 

I might add for street work it depends how close to your subject(s) you want to be. Intimate or aloof. In either case they both are great. I already had the Zeiss 50 1.5 when I bought my 35 a few months ago. I have to say "Wow, what a sharp lens the 35 is to me." On my M9 it just might be (or seems) sharper than the Zeiss 50. But that is my feel although I have printed Zeiss 50 images up to 20x30 and those same images could take 30x40 and still be crisp where I want then to be crisp. I like the 35 better than the 50 for my street work and in fact plan on a 24 Lux for more closer street work and then maybe the 21 lux after that as I get better at close up street work.

Edited October 5, 2011 by algrove
clarify

[yanidel]

35mm or 50mm for street photography ? » Yanidel Street Photography

[ramosa]

Indeed, it is a personal thing. If I were to have one lens for general work (or street work, for that matter), it'd be a 35mm. Two lenses? 35mm and 75mm or 80mm. Three? 35/50/90. But that's how I see. I have no need for a lens wider than 35mm on FF, but others, including some greats (e.g., Winogrand, Meyerowitz, Parke), love(d) them.

[Heureka]

35 would be my choice but I started with a 28. Me like big time.

[Anasebi]

Honestly if you don't feel like you know which you want I strongly advocate just buying both lengths in older modles or pick one and get a CV nokton version in the other. If I had to pick it would be 35mm hands down, but I can understand why some prefer the less or more intimate(depending on subject) 50mm. There is no financial blunder in buying cheaper lenses, don't believe me?. Just look at the konica M Hexanons. I also don't recall finding any CV lenses ever having a noticeable depreciation either.

[Rick]

I am awaiting the arrival of my M9-P and lens, and was wondering what others thought of either getting the 35mm Summilux or the 50mm Summilux.

I will be doing mostly street photography, and artistic photography, very little if any landscapes, and am not sure which would work best.

 

The 35mm works best, except when the 50mm works best... simple as that.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[tompoes]

I had the same problem. Decided to buy the 50 mm Summilux and the 35 mm Summarit.

A fantastic combination and extremely impressed by the Summarit 35.

Conclude that i use both focal lengths on a 40 percent basis each and the remainder is split between 21 mm Zeiss and 90mm Summarit.

I have a 35 mm Summilux on order.

Again the Summarit 35 is an amazing lens but like the 1.4 capability of the Summilux version.