Choosing btw 35 and 50.

[TG14]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am looking for a first leica lense but torn btw 35 and 50.

 

35: good all rounder, easier to zone focus

50: bokeh but less or hard to zone focus

 

Wanted to get thoughts from ppl who had to make the choice and what pushed it one way or anothet.

[dunos]

I think this is down to personal preference more than anything. I had a similar choice a few months back and opted for the 35mm as it was a focal length that I am very familiar with and enjoy. I figured that it would be better to get a focal length that I already knew while I learnt the camera and how to manually focus before venturing out into other lenses. I'll probably look at getting a 50 in a year or so.

[M11 for me]

I started with the 50 Lux and 28 Cron. That is actually enough for quite a lot of situations. The 28mm you can easily crop to get something like 35mm. So if you think that you want to go and to stay strictly with just 1 or 2 lenses then I would evaluate the 28mm instead of 35. But if you want to stay with the 35 and 50mm then the 35 is more versatile as you can crop to get some 50mm. Go then for the Summilux. With that fast lens you are fine for situations in less light. 

 

And by the way. After having used Zooms for many many years, with Leica I learned very quickly that the focal length does not matter so much (for landscape and travel). The M10 is a camera that I use most time with just one lens (the others stay at home). I always try to change around a bit (one lens a day). 

 

In general it might be true that with 50mm it is easier to find good perspective than with a wider angle. But that is me. I then would choose the 50mm first.

Edited April 13, 2018 by Alex U.

[Lelmer]

Doesn't matter...you'll end up having both 

 

But for the first one, I recommend the summicron 35, perfect on M body

[Leicaec421]

Doesn't matter...you'll end up having both 

 

But for the first one, I recommend the summicron 35, perfect on M body

 

+1

[ibramr]

Doesn't matter...you'll end up having both 

 

But for the first one, I recommend the summicron 35, perfect on M body

+2, but suggest starting with 50mm. It is perfect on M body.

[TomB_tx]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On film I used 50 more than 35, but on digital i use a 35 more, as the quality hold up to crop more when necessary. The Summarit 35 f2.5 is almost always on my M10.

[M11 for me]

50 you can crop to 75 and 28 to 35. Does it not make sense then to consider 50 and 28? Which one first? 50mm Lux. This will be your standard companion for everything including low light.

[AntonioF]

I am looking for a first leica lense but torn btw 35 and 50.

 

35: good all rounder, easier to zone focus

50: bokeh but less or hard to zone focus

 

Wanted to get thoughts from ppl who had to make the choice and what pushed it one way or anothet.

 

I started with a Summicron 35 asph on an M6 one year ago. Great all arounder like you said, but not the best for shooting people (which I rarely do), in my opinion. So, after a few months I bought a cheap Canon 50/1.4 LTM because I wanted a 50mm only as a secondary lens. Very good lens, by the way. 

Eventually, a couple of months ago, I capitulated and I bought a Summicron 50. 

Honestly the 35 is still the lens I use more frequently. It's great if you like to walk around in a urban contest with narrow streets.

 

 

On film I used 50 more than 35, but on digital i use a 35 more, as the quality hold up to crop more when necessary. The Summarit 35 f2.5 is almost always on my M10.

 

This is one of the reasons I felt the need for the 50mm. Cropping on film can be annoying.

[jdlaing]

35. It’s easier to get a 50mm fov from a 35mm than the other way around. 35 is less restrictive.

[Steve Ricoh]

In regard to zone focusing, the wider the lens the easier to zone focus. With the 35 f/2 it's a breeze, in fact I can set to f8 and focus by feeling the position of the focus tab relative to the 6 o'clock position. The 50 f/1.4 requires more critical focusing and I generally use the range finder for most, if not all, apertures of f/8 and wider.

[lct]

50 because i see in 50mm. Now what about you? What focal length do you feel better with? Only you can know and others' tastes cannot change anything to that.

[PCPix]

It's funny - I've always been a 35 fan and bought a Summilux 35 FLE with my M10. I also have a Summicron 50 (v.3 - the one everybody dislikes!) and I am actually enjoying the 50 over the 35. This shouldn't be - I love 35's and mine is the latest in a legendary line... but here I am favouring an ebay purchased tatty old 50... Take what you like from this, but I suspect that in time you will end up with both - and you'll no doubt find that it's emotional rather than technical why you favour one over the other.

Edited April 13, 2018 by PCPix

[evikne]

If you like bokeh (and I guess you do because you mentioned it), I would go for a 50 first. 50mm Summilux ASPH is a great choice if you want shallow depth of field from a relatively small lens. It is amazingly sharp, even wide open, makes very nice and smooth bokeh, and focusing is pretty fast and easy.

[spydrxx]

I've commented on the choice lots in the past, so rather than repeat myself, for you....I'll recommend a CV 40.

[M11 for me]

I've commented on the choice lots in the past, so rather than repeat myself, for you....I'll recommend a CV 40.

 

As a first lens on your M10? It is certainly an excellent lens otherwise you would not recommend it. But I can hardly imagine this as first lens as there are even no framelines for 40mm. Of course you do not need those framelines. But after all you bought the most famous rangefinder camera and now I would expect that for your start you choose equipment that is fully done for it and compatible. If really you would consider 40mm then go for the 35 Summilux. In your rangefinder with this lens you see the 35 and the 135mm framelines.