50mm vs. 35mm

[zlatkob]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I was going to write something else, but then I realized that the best answer is: just read Yanidel's article, linked above.

[Lord Fluff]

The old adage goes that if you don't know what lens to buy, then it doesn't matter which lens you buy.

 

....which I tend to agree with. If focal lengths aren't yet part of your brain, and you don't understand how they do or don't affect photography, then buy either. Or a 28mm. Or a 75mm. Or anything really. In time you'll then come to learn what changes with focal length, and what doesn't.

 

More practically, the 50 lux is hard to find, the 35 lux near impossible. And the 50 is cheaper.

[Jager]

Either one works - both are square in the wheelhouse of what the full-frame M camera does so well.

 

The key is to leave whichever one you end up with stuck to the front of your camera for weeks or months at a time. That's when your camera disappears.

[Broadoaker]

Get a 28 and a 50. Seriously.

[Shade]

I personally like the 50mm point of view. Hence I have the 50 Lux. But I also like the 35mm for random street shots, hence I am looking to buy a 35 summaron instead of a Lux.

[lars_bergquist]

I did read the Yanidel article. Much of what he says is sensible, but I can't buy his claim that a 50mm lens makes you less conspicuous or intrusive than a 35mm. Your behaviour – that is, your attitude – is far more important that physical distance. I have been able to stick a 21mm lens practically into the ears of people without them noticing it. Be assured that you belong there and have a right to be there but that the lens of your camera is the only part that really is there – and you will be accepted.

 

Being an old fart with a white beard and an 'obsolete' camera does help, of course. But I did my 21mm stuff when I wore only a moustache, and a SLR ...

 

Using zone focusing, and knowing what you are doing, you can work so fast and with so little movement that people scarcely react to your presence. I am also convinced that being properly dressed for the occasion (5–10% overdressed is about right) and being friendly and relaxed also improves your local Karma.

 

The gum-shod old man

[1JB]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On the subject of street photography, if you haven't seen the documentary "Bill Cunningham New York" take the time to. It's fascinating to watch how he works the street as a fashion photogarpher for decades. It's available in dvd or streaming from Netflix.

[jschone]

Or, if you want to "come closer to your subject", do a google video search for Bruce Gilden.

[skinnfell]

Hello

 

I own both, but in summicron version.

However the choice is the same.

 

For the longest time I had only the 50, then got the 35. Only recently have I invested in other focal lengths. Rather than make a choice for you, lets make some personal/generalized comments on both to help you choose:

 

- Optical quality is absolutely top notch. Neither should mechanical quality be a consideration. Rest assured that it is the best.

 

- Think about your photography. What do you like to photograph?

 

- 50 is better for details. Accentuating something interesting.

- 35 is better for showing context. Showing something with some story around it.

 

- Are you a storyteller? Choose 35

- Are you a collector of details? choose 50

 

- Sum up your 10 favorite pictures. Are they wide or telephoto shots?

- Henri Cartier Bresson is famous for using the 50mm, although he also used other focal lengths. Elliott Erwitt too. Does this work inspire you? Get 50

 

- The 50 is easier IMO to work with as it is easier to single out interesting subject matter. A wide angle is pretty hard to get good pictures with, even a 35.

Going longer than 50 will separate the subject from the background and as such can easier get boring.

 

- Do you like to take pictures of individuals, individually? Get 50

- Do you like to take pictures of groups of individuals? Get 35

 

- Do you like to photograph people? 50

- Do you like to photograph people in their surroundings? Get 35.

 

- Do you like to photograph in very low light? Get 35.

- Do you like stage performances? Get 50.

 

- Do you have kids under 5? Get 35. (focus issues)

 

- Do you frequently photograph people in front of gas stations? Get 50. (will wash out background more)

 

- Are you shy? Get 50. If not get 35.

 

 

My personal choice based on my personal photography?

Definitely 50.

Or maybe 35.

No 50. For sure.

But most of my shots are done with 35.

But the ones I like the most are made with 50.

 

 

 

Or just get both in summicron version and be done with it.

[GarethC]

It's funny, while I was waiting for my M9 to arrive I sort of asked the same question, looking to pare down my lens collection. Mine wasn't a 35 vs 50 question but a 18 vs 21 vs 25 vs 28 vs 35 vs 50 vs 90 question (I had all of them) and the concensus was to get rid of the 18 and buy a 75.

 

If you came here looking for help, you're in the wrong place We're all here to vicariously spend your money

[IkarusJohn]

With my Nikon gear, the 50 stayed in the box it came in. I had zero interest in it. Over the years, I found that I was either using a 180 mm f/2.8 prime, or the wide end of a 17 - 35 mm f/2.8 zoom.

 

Since getting an M9, the order has changed completely - 50, then 28, then 21, then 75, then 35.

 

Curious. I have often wondered if that is because it was only with mid-telephoto or with ultra-wide that I was getting the drama I wanted with the SLR, whereas with the Leica the images are just so clean and sharp, I am much more involved in the image.

 

I should add that with the M9, the first pairing I had was 35 & 75, and I liked it a lot. I then found the 50 & 28 pairing. I see the 21 as a stand alone lens that I take only if I think I might need that particular lens, regardless of the others.

 

Cheers

John

[algrove]

It's funny, while I was waiting for my M9 to arrive I sort of asked the same question, looking to pare down my lens collection. Mine wasn't a 35 vs 50 question but a 18 vs 21 vs 25 vs 28 vs 35 vs 50 vs 90 question (I had all of them) and the concensus was to get rid of the 18 and buy a 75.

 

If you came here looking for help, you're in the wrong place We're all here to vicariously spend your money

 

Did you only change out the 18 for the 75?

 

If not, how do you feel about having the 24/25 vs. the 28 while also keeping the 21 and the 35?

 

Also what type of images do you mostly like to shoot?

 

I guess I have been too methodical about lens selections by trying to keep a 18-20 degree variance between each lens size, from 18mm all the way up to 135mm.

Edited October 6, 2011 by algrove
clarify

[gnarly]

Yes I can see that everyone wants to spend my money. Well some day when I think I have 2 cents to contribute, I will try to spend some of your money for you. Thanks by the way. !!!

As for the lens 50 vs 35, I have gone thru a large number of my images metadata, and it is interesting to see (using my 24-70mm primarily) that there is a very close average of 35mm to 50mm images, in my database. Now the interesting part is that if I compare to the other possible focal lengths, these two (35, 50) are for the most part (better than 50%) the predominant lengths.

So if I look at this data it appears that on some level I have answered my own question.

My budget has these lens's taken into account, so I figure I might as well go for it.

All of your input is very much appreciated.

Thanks all.

[hamey]

For my M7 camera I only have one lens and thats the 35mmf2 asph, now if I scan the image and wanted a 50mm focal lenght I Just crop the image accordingly to what ever focal crop I like.

Saves all the hassles of buying and changing lenses

 

Cheers.

[bill]

Good grief, man! Don't let the full-frame Mafia hear you talking like that!!

 

Regards,

 

Bill

[exile]

50 lux + 35 cron.

 

(unless you want an older lens signature with lower contrast)

[gib_robinson]

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

 

Lars, why does the 35mm need its Summilux speed more than a 50mm? I would have said the reverse . Given the same lighting, I more often need speed from a 50 than a 35. For me it's hard to imagine life without a 50 f/1.4 but I seem to do fine with a 35, Summicron, at least with respect to lens speed. I would love the IQ of the 35 Summilux. No question.

 

--Gib

[Printmaker]

50 lux + 35 cron.

 

(unless you want an older lens signature with lower contrast)

 

Exactly. I missed the EFV of the 35 Summicron on my M8 that I purchased a 50 Summicron for my M9. I was on a waiting list for a new 50 but a version 3 popped up while I was waiting. Having once owned a version 3 (and a DR Summicron), I knew this would be a good people lens - lower contrast and less wrinkles with dreamy backgrounds. Now I find that I couldn't be without either lens. And, when I want a portrait with wrinkles or to shoot a youngster, I put my 90 Elmarit M on the M9.

[albireo_double]

I find that the 50 Lux Asph plus 24 Elmarit Asph make a nice combination for travel/street, if you only want to take two lenses with your M9. The 24 is great in tight places, narrow streets, markets - good at showing the context and interesting perspective. And the 50 is perfect for portraits, tighter landscapes etc. I wouldn't take a 35 plus 50 with me - they are too close/similar to create an interesting image set from a trip / project / assignment. My vision is very 50/24 now (used to be 35/90 for a long time).

Just a thought.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[MikeD700]

Stand out from the crowd and take a 40mm if you want only one lens. Get the one that came with the Minolta/Leica CL.