Time to beat a dead horse, 35mm or 50mm summicron

[Frogfriend]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

So I’m going to be getting an mp soon and am looking for a lens to go with it to celebrate the birth of my first kid. My first thought was a 35mm summicron. It would be able to handle shooting in doors in tighter spaces and also be forgiving for taking pictures of my son as he gets old enough to run around. As I’ve been walking around shooting though I’ve found myself gravitating towards my 50mm lens on one of my slrs. I like how it is a little more focused with less in the frame to try and work with. I like how it is more representative of what I see when I look out. So the question is, anyone have any thoughts on what I should go with? Do I go with the tighter, more true to my eyes 50mm or do I go with the wider, maybe a little more flexible 35mm? I do like to take landscape pictures too. Also I feel like a big deciding factor will be how the frame lines look in the viewfinder. I wear glasses so will the 35mm be a little too hard to see? Thanks for any input, I appreciate it!

[Viv]

35mm.

[evikne]

50mm is great for close portraits when your child is small. When your son gets older and starts to run around, a 35mm is probably more useful. I don’t think 35mm frame lines are hard to see when I wear glasses. 

If you start with a 50mm, maybe you can afford a 35mm lens in two or three years?

[Mute-on]

You will need both, ultimately. When your child starts moving, keeping him in frame will be more difficult in close quarters with a 50mm. Indoors, a 50mm feels like a short Tele to me. Outdoors is a different matter. For general use, you could consider 35 for indoors and 50 for outdoors. Landscapes can be taken with any focal length, but I tend to gravitate to 35 and wider. YMMV. 

A 35 will look a little tight with a 0.72 viewfinder if you wear glasses, but still useable if you just reference the entire viewfinder, all depending on your prescription. I only notice framelines for 50 and tighter on a 0.72, or 35 on a 0.58 viewfinder which is no longer available anyway. In reality for 35mm or 50mm it’s a non-issue. 
 

Congratulations on your impending fatherhood and Leica MP.  I love mine (children and the camera…..)

Enjoy!

[Hans-Dieter Gülicher]

35 mm and you will be happy! If needed you can take high quality crops up to 25 %.

I`m a landscaper, too and on the other side I like shots on near distances. I will go to Alaska and Canada in August/September. In spite of my big boy S3 my combo will be the M 10-R plus APO-Summicron 35 and 75 mm plus Visoflex 2.

Regards Hans

[AndreasG]

Though I started my Leica M affair with a 50mm Summicron lens (and a young born) many years ago, I recommend a 35mm lens, it is more versatile for your purpose. Definitely further lenses will raise your interest sooner or later, it could be 50, it also could be 75, 90 or 28, 21mm. Certainly you will figure this out with your growing Leica experience. A Leica lens never stays alone.

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

With MP, I'd take 35mm.

SLR is (very) different from M use.

In SLR we can see only the image sending from the mirror through the lens, showing wide open viewing, dof may be different from the picture taken,

nothing wrong with that, only different.

In the Leica M viewfinder, everything is "clear" and with same magnification (SLR shows different "mag" depending on the lens), not showing the "real" dof neither.

For me as first M lens I'd go for 35mm then complete the set later on if need be (21/28/50/75/etc.).

 

Anyway have fun learning Leica M.

[John Robinson]

My rule of thumb is that, with 35, you can always crop (up to a point depending on resolution of film/sensor) but if you find that you are always cropping towards a 50mm field of view, then might as well shoot 50mm to get the better image quality.

[105012]

7 hours ago, Frogfriend said:

... As I’ve been walking around shooting though I’ve found myself gravitating towards my 50mm lens on one of my slrs. I like how it is a little more focused with less in the frame to try and work with. I like how it is more representative of what I see when I look out…

Listen to your inner artistic voice.

[evikne]

35mm is very versatile, but may lead to distorted faces if you are tempted to go too close to fill the frame.

[TomB_tx]

On film I used primarily a 50 Summicron for decades. On digital I use the 35 (now a Summarit instead of my old Summicron) most of the time. I find for my use I can crop the digital image on to a 50mm FOV without noticing loss of quality, but have the full 35mm FOV most of the time to provide context and perspective.

[Ouroboros]

I have both; a 35mm summicron asph v1 and a 50mm summicron safari edition.  You won't see any difference in iq between them, the 35mm has a focus tab and a removable hood, the 50mm has a sliding hood and no tab.  I don't wear glasses, so I can't comment on what happens with the 35mm frame lines. 

If you're only buying one lens initially, I'd go with the 35mm for the increased aov as a do-it-all utility lens.  If you intend to buy another lens at some point, you might want to think about adding a 75mm rather than a 50mm for a more versatile two-lens set. If you go for the 50mm first, you could add a 28mm later.

In the end, you might even do what I did and build up a full set of summicrons! 

[Hans-Dieter Gülicher]

I have it (after the 002) since about 3 months and I love it. The design meets the M proportions clearly better. The properties are well according to my needs. What about a discussion of possible facilities of the V 3 as produced by Leica Wetzlar, GPS, higher relsolution ....

Edited June 21, 2022 by Hans-Dieter Gülicher

[Jeff S]

Faced with the same choice over 30 years ago (but no kids), my first M lens was a 35 Summicron. I knew that a 50mm would follow, and it did.  Then a 28mm.  Same trio of focal lengths continues to this day for me.  No problems framing with glasses despite changing VF specifications… one learns to adjust… but thin, flexible glass frames help if prescription permits. RF viewing only for me with an M. 

Jeff

Edited June 21, 2022 by Jeff S

[spydrxx]

When I got my first Leica lens it was a 35 Summaron. When my daughter was born it worked great in the first year for those memorable shots, greater DOF than a 50 making focusing grab shots quicker. In her 2nd year I began to experiment with a 135 to capture her from a distance unaware of my presence....no camera in her face for a change. I only got a 50 many years later. YMMV but I think your first lens, a 35, will serve you best at the start, and you can hopefully pick up a 50, if you still want one, later on. Enjoy whatever you choose and congrats on a new member to your family.

[Jean-Michel]

To Frogfriend. Either lens will serve you well  Since you are wearing glasses, with the 35 lens on, you will need develop a weird technique to move your eye around the viewfinder in order to see all the edges as you will not really be able to see all the edges at once. For decades I used a 35 Summicron with 'goggles' in order to see the 35 field through the 50 frame. In film days,  the resulting smaller rangefinder patch did not cause an issue with focusing. I was fine using it with am M9 and later an M-P, but eventually chose to purchase a current 35 'cron.

Note that using an M with whatever lens and running around kids is not an easy task. Essentially, focus first and let the kid run into focus. 

[Aryel]

Faced with the same choice, I went with a 50 first. I was used to it coming from slr. I love it for family shots. It gives a very intimate feeling and I feel more part of the photo than when using the 35mm. 

This being said, I think you cannot get it wrong either way, and this is why you have so many different opinions. It all comes down to personal preferences.

Congratulations!
 

Edited June 21, 2022 by Aryel

[lct]

7 hours ago, Al Brown said:

Get the 35. Thank me later.

Get the 50. Thank me later . Just kidding but it is a matter of tastes as usual.

Edited June 21, 2022 by lct

[otto.f]

I really loved my 50Elmar-M as a landscape lens, but only in the Andes, not in European landscape which are much closer mostly and I really need a 35 there. When my kids were young I preferred a 75 for them.  Voigtländer offers a very nice drawing 75/2.4 and an 35  Ultron ii. Both can be get for the price of one Summicron 35 and you won’t regret, look at the Ultron ii threads here. You might want a real Leica lens  but the times have changed a bit in that respect.

Edited June 21, 2022 by otto.f

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[a.noctilux]

😇

In the OP case, I'd go for 2x Summarit-M 35mm AND 50mm.

80cm nearest focus though 😉.

Two winwins.