Jump to content

Your favourite focal lengths, and what do you shoot?


Keith_W

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Quite often on this forum I see people asking which lens they should buy. People then pop up and say they like 35mm, or 50mm, or maybe even something else. 

 

I have long believed that which focal length you prefer depends on what you like to shoot and your preferences for subject isolation. These are my favourite: 

 

75-90mm: Many people like this length for close in headshots, but I find it provides too much isolation. I like some context in my photos, and you don't get that when the background is blurred out of recognition. It might be different if you want a flattering angle and you want the lack of background - e.g. if you work in a studio. 90-100mm is also my preferred length for Macro, although I haven't explored Leica macro lenses yet (thinking of getting a Canon body for that). 

 

50mm: My preferred length for head and shoulder shots. When stopped down a little, there is enough of the background to provide some context. I rarely use this focal length for anything else apart from photographing people, but since most of my photography is shooting people, I use this lens a lot. I find the FOV too narrow for landscapes or architecture. 

 

35mm: IMO the most versatile focal length. I can get more context in my people shots, and it is almost wide enough to shoot a small group of people. This is my preferred F/L for waist up shots, and if I back up more it is great for full body shots. What's more, I can get away with slightly less shutter speed - which is very useful when I am on tour and it is getting dark. It is almost wide enough for landscapes and architecture, but not quite. 

 

28mm: This is as wide as I ever get. I find anything wider difficult to use - you have to deal with distortion, and you have to be extra careful with composition otherwise you won't see that rubbish bin or something out of context which will ruin your shot. If you want to take a nice picture of the Eiffel tower without having to walk 500m away (and then deal with the haze), this is the lens to use. 

 

As you can see, my focal length preferences are heavily influenced by what I shoot. My camera is to shoot pics of my family, for vacations, and for a little bit of flowers, food, landscape and architecture. I do zero street photography, no studio photography, don't shoot bands, nor sports, nor birds, nor aviation.

 

When I started in this hobby, I wanted a versatile camera system - hence a Canon, zoom lenses, and lots of fun experimenting with specialty lenses - I have owned a few tilt-shifts, and that Canon 65 MP-E macro lens (which can take up to 5x magnification!) and some of those absurd fast long lenses. As I realized why I use my camera, I started to simplify. These days I only shoot 28-50mm. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

28-50 is a great set, just not wide enough for my liking. I pair a third lens when I use my 28 and 50, the 18mm Super Elmar.

 

That said, I'm in Alberta, Canada on vacation right now and do not have any of those with me. My most-used set and what I have is the 21 Super Elmar and 35mm and 75mm Summicrons.

Edited by Gregm61
Link to post
Share on other sites

35 on RF. If I can't use 35, then 50. The rest is rudimentary so far. Just sold another 90 f4 Elmar. 28 is on its way, but not because I need 28, it is special lens, which I wanted to try for sometime.

 

I do isolate objects with 35, but use different than just DOF methods.

 

28634130494_b9241ab5b2.jpg

 

Or object isolates itself:

 

med_U57736I1501508203.SEQ.3.jpg

 

:)

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

35, 28, 50 in that order of preference on a Leica M. If I'm taking two I honestly don't have a real preference. I'm as happy with 28 and 35 as I am with 35 and 50 or 28 and 50.

 

Maybe I need to be more discriminating, but I'm photographing for pleasure in the limited time I have to do so.

 

At some point I'd love to try a 21 as I find it a very interesting perspective.

 

J :)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

With my Leicas my usage (from greatest to least) is: 35->50->135->90->20->400->280. The longer lenses, of course, are with a Visoflex. 35mm  I use probably about 50% of the time, 50mm about 25%. The rest really depends on what project I'm working on. With SLR bodies, 28mm substitutes for 35mm in most cases for me.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I shoot whatever makes a good story. I do tell stories, so my photographs are mostly "about" and not "of" my subjects - about people, about things, about places, about situations, and above all about relationships.

 

I find a broad range of focal lengths helps in defining those relationships visually - near to far, large against small, dominant and receding, isolated from the background or alone against the background or connected to the background - spacially (and sometimes by focus, but not necessarily). But a "broad range" does not mean "all focal lengths." I cover most of the full Leica-M range with 4 lenses: 21/35/75/135. I skip the intervening lenses because I don't have time to consult my navel about the mystical and subtle differences between a 28 and a 35 or a 35 and a 50 - I need to have a clear choice and make it fast.

 

I use each of them about equally because they each tell parts of a story in different ways. They provide contrast with one another, just as the movements of a symphony contrast with one another. Very wide, moderately wide/"normal," long, and close. Easy and fast to suit the lens to the task.

 

21mm - 20/21mm is the first focal length I have purchased in every camera system since 1977. I switched from Nikon to Canon entirely because Canon had a pretty good (and cheap) 20mm f/2.8 FD while Nikon still had mediocre (but expensive) 20mm f/3.5 or f/4s. I don't use it to get "wide," so much as to define relationships between subject and environment. Near and far, large and small, important and less important. Or - it puts the viewer right smack in the middle of events - from inches away. I learned how to use it in general over decades on SLRs - I learned how to use one on the Leica M (two viewfinders) in about 2 weeks.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

35mm - I use this because it makes the best full use of the .72x M viewfinder as set since the M2. And it is more compact than the 50s or most 28s (I concede the Elmarit ASPH 28 is equally small - but not as bright). It is not my most-used lens, but a good changeup from wider/longer lenses for variety or a less intense effect. The extra stop of speed is useful, too.

 

 

75mm - mostly used for the tight framing at 0.7 meters - in the studio or "studio-like" real-world subjects, but also when the 135 can't handle low light, and I need a flatter perspective or more reach than the 35. For a while when the only 75 was the massive f/1.4, I used a 90, but once I got hooked by the tight cropping of the M8 with a 50 or 90, I've been using 75 on full-frame.

 

 

135mm - Ideally, I would get along with just a 21 and 135, except for the limitations of M 135s (speed, framing tightness and, rarely, focusability).

 

A 135 on the M saves me the trouble of carrying a second (SLR) camera unless I need to jump to a 400 for sports or wildlife. For whatever reason, I find a 135 rather easy to focus - of course it is often at f/5.6 while a 90 gets used more at f/2 or 2.8. And, of course, it's usually used at longer distances where DoF covers more of the main subject. I find it a very nice compromise that can "switch-hit" for either a 105 or a 180 (my old Nikkor/Canon choices) - and weighs less than either.

 

I took both a 135 and a 90 to Europe a couple of years ago - and when I found I was cropping half my 90mm shots to the 135 field of view, and the native 135 shots were usually stronger anyway....

 

 

BTW - Keith, thanks for asking. Composing my response helped me understand why I use what I do, and why it suits me exactly. GAS held at bay for another couple of years. ;)

  • Like 15
Link to post
Share on other sites

I like 28.

But the things I like to look at (drain pipes and gutters) are inaccessible so I like 90.

But the pictures you get from Apo-Summicron-M 1:2/50 ASPH. are acid clear so I like 50.

But there isn't always enough light and I only have one fast lens so I like 35.

But European streets are so compact so I like 21.

But when you don't want to mess around with camera settings and take care of composition I like 28.

I love my Summaron.

  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a most difficult question because I don't choose my lens because of focal length, I choose by fingerprint. I can shoot in almost any environment with any focal length. Though 28 and 75 lux are mostly in my bag. Recently I shot an entire trip with a 50 APO, even macro. Film I tend to shoot 35. Pretty much, the more crowded, the wider. In China I shoot street with either 21 or 28, but it depends on how I feel. Often I'll just shoot with just soft lenses, 21 Elmarit 60mm filter and f/1 Noctilux. It depends on the look I want. Soft or sharp, deep DOF or shallow, contrasty or not. It all depends on the look I'm after, each environment dictates what I choose.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

For me there is no hard and fast rule for what I shoot with what (I shoot for fun). For 5 years I shot 99% of time with only 50mm (Canon days) and I didn't feel restricted. However, now with Leica, the temptation to use jewel like lenses is so great that I keep trying different lens just because it is fun.

 

Having said that, this is my typical use:

 

15mm: Dramatic landscape

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

28mm: Most versatile. Landscape and Everything.

 

 

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

..continuing..

50mm: People mostly

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

90mm: Landscape. Hiking.

 

135mm: When I don't want to disturb. It is great for landscape too.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

... and lastly

400mm: Birding.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

The M system certainly has some standout lenses and focal lengths, particularly in 28, 35 and 50 mm. But the ultra-wides can produce some really interesting and fun views so I wouldn’t discount them because of difficulty or effort required in post.

 

I found DxO Viewpoint very quick and easy to correct a range of problems, particularly perspective distortion in urban environments with its multi-line correction tool. It does a good job even with severe problems. A bit pricey but then isn’t life?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I grew up in the 60ies with 50mm fixed buit into the Voightländer at that time. In the recent years I had Canon with mainly zooms but 50mm prime as well. With this background nowadays I am not so much fixed to a focal length. I still like 50mm Lux but also 28mm Cron. It easily happens that one day I go out with one lens and the next day with the other one. For family parties I use the 50lux. Then I have 75mm Cron which I use the least as it is quit long already. Mainly for street photography I bought that lens. But it happens that one day I have just this lens with me. And then I zhink that it actually does not matter too much for me which lens I have on the M10. To be frank I believe I could do with just the 28mm. In that case I would have the Lux rather than thr Cron. But this is theory as I have 3 lenses to make my life difficult.

 

What I am actually very happy about is that I am gone away from the zooms. With my primes of course I have to think much more what I actually want to have on the picture that I am going to shoot. This is a much more intense experience.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

35mm

 

I mostly shoot family, friends, travel, whatever. The images look natural without huge perspective issues. 

I don't like to carry two lenses, I always feel distracted by the second lens.

I've dallied with a 21mm which I really enjoy but found too hard as a single lens for a day/week (you need to be really close). I've also spent some time with a 50mm (probably my second choice) and 90mm (a good second lens but worse than a 21mm as a sole option). So basically a 35mm is the most versatile single lens option for me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...