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

[a.noctilux]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

😇

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

80cm nearest focus though 😉.

Two winwins.

[tommonego@gmail.com]

Only you can decide for yourself. My experience was I used 2 lenses on 2 M2 bodies a 35mm preasph Summilux and an 85mm Nikon ltm. I would buy 50s and sell them, think I had 2 or 3 DR Summicrons. I would mostly use the 35, the 85 was fantastic for portraits. 

[Advertisement]

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

[a.noctilux]

Like here ?

Two M2 and two Summarit-M 2.5/35 + 50

👍 easier to use f/2.5 (very good IQ with Summarit-M wide open) than f/2 Summicron (that just me ! )

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!

Edited June 21, 2022 by a.noctilux

[waltron]

It’s all very personal. Certainly, 35mm is the better do it all choice but I feel like I make better pictures with a 50. I don’t wear glasses but still find myself looking around the viewfinder for the 35mm framelines sometimes (I’m weird, this does not seem to be normal experience!) and really like the fact that I can properly see what I am excluding from the frame with a 50. I own both, but plan to sell one soon, just got to decide which!

[logan2z]

Lots of great advice already, but I'll chime in: 

I debated 35 vs. 50 when buying my first Leica lens but ultimately went with the 35mm Summarit 2.4.  It was the only lens I shot on my M-A for a couple of years before buying a 75mm Summarit 2.4.  A couple of years later I added the 50 Summicron v5 and the 28mm Elmarit 2.8 ASPH.  I very recently added a 90mm Elmarit 2.8 (Leica lenses are addictive!).  Since owning the 50mm and 28mm I have rarely used the 35mm as the other two seem to cover things well.  I like the 75 Summarit but not sure I'll really use it much now that I own the 90 and my other Leica film bodies (an M4 and M3) don't have 75mm framelines. 

Long story short, I don't think there is a wrong choice between the 35 and the 50, and you'll end up owning them all at some point anyway 

[Siriusone59]

It really doesn't matter which one you get first.  Because you've asked that question, I'm betting you'll have both before long.  It's all part of the Leica experience.😉  I predict your next question will be 75 or 90mm for portraits.  Most of those here have experienced the same thing when we ventured into the world of Leica.  Even when we choose to save a few dollars buying Voigtlander or Zeiss lenses, we still look for a decent deal on a Leica version to replace it.  

 

[Prosophos]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm going to break the rules and say that if i had to choose between a 35 and 50 -- and could only have one -- I'd pick a 40mm lens instead

But if I can't break the rules and I have to choose between the 35 and 50, these days I'd probably pick the 35.  In the beginning of my photography, I made the opposite choice.

In the end, like others have stated, you'll probably end up owning both.

—Peter.

[pippy]

35 minutes ago, Prosophos said:

I'm going to break the rules and say that if i had to choose between a 35 and 50 -- and could only have one -- I'd pick a 40mm lens instead ...

Actually I'm with you, Peter.

For many years my #1 lens was my 40mm f1.4 Voigtlander Nokton and I still absolutely LOVE that lens. I am aware that in certain - and, for me, very unusual - situations there is the chance that some slight 'focus-shift' might be an issue but IMX it was never once apparent in 'real-world' shooting.

From all I have read about it the Voigt. 40mm f1.2 is an absolutely stellar performer and any focus-shift seen with the earlier lenses has been eliminated. Slight downside is that, understandably, it's a little bit larger and a little bit heavier than the f1.4 lens but still compact in comparison to a DSLR lens. IMO it would be a phenomenal choice for a 'First Lens' in so many ways and for so many situations.

Failing that f/length I'd say get a 35. You can always crop IN to a frame but you can never crop OUT...

Just my tuppence worth.

Philip.

Edited June 21, 2022 by pippy

[Prosophos]

1 hour ago, pippy said:

Actually I'm with you, Peter.

For many years my #1 lens was my 40mm f1.4 Voigtlander Nokton and I still absolutely LOVE that lens. I am aware that in certain - and, for me, very unusual - situations there is the chance that some slight 'focus-shift' might be an issue but IMX it was never once apparent in 'real-world' shooting.

From all I have read about it the Voigt. 40mm f1.2 is an absolutely stellar performer and any focus-shift seen with the earlier lenses has been eliminated. Slight downside is that, understandably, it's a little bit larger and a little bit heavier than the f1.4 lens but still compact in comparison to a DSLR lens. IMO it would be a phenomenal choice for a 'First Lens' in so many ways and for so many situations.

Failing that f/length I'd say get a 35. You can always crop IN to a frame but you can never crop OUT...

Just my tuppence worth.

Philip.

Right on, Philip!

Many of my favourite photographs were taken with that same 40/1.4.  It's an often maligned (and objectively flawed) lens that renders beautifully and is perfect for many situations.  It's the only M lens I've had from the beginning; the rest have come and gone.

Regarding the 40mm FOV in general, I'm actually picking up a 40/1.2 to try.

(Sorry to hijack the thread... )

—Peter.

[lct]

You don't have to buy a Leica lens. Nowadays very good lenses can be had for little money. I lent my M8.2 with a 7artisans 35/2 to a relative of mine and he likes them so much  that he "forgets" to return them to me. BTW the image quality of the M8 is second to none as long as you use an IR-cut filter and you don't go above 640 iso too often.

[grahamc]

I find 35 much more versatile and is generally on my camera. it sounds like photographing in tight space will be important to you.  With a 50 mounted I often find it too tight, whereas never have that issue with a 35, which can do everything.  In saying that a 50 is indispensable also IMO for nicer compression on portraits etc so no doubt you will want to add it in time .

[shirubadanieru]

While I love both 50 & 35, 35 is a far more versatile lens that can do a bit of everything. Most SLR 35mm have distortion but Leica non-asph 35mm have literally zero distortion which lets you take really nice portraits with them as well.

At the same time they work great for travel, casual snaps, street etc when you shoot them at f8.

[shirubadanieru]

7 hours ago, pippy said:

Actually I'm with you, Peter.

For many years my #1 lens was my 40mm f1.4 Voigtlander Nokton and I still absolutely LOVE that lens. I am aware that in certain - and, for me, very unusual - situations there is the chance that some slight 'focus-shift' might be an issue but IMX it was never once apparent in 'real-world' shooting.

From all I have read about it the Voigt. 40mm f1.2 is an absolutely stellar performer and any focus-shift seen with the earlier lenses has been eliminated. Slight downside is that, understandably, it's a little bit larger and a little bit heavier than the f1.4 lens but still compact in comparison to a DSLR lens. IMO it would be a phenomenal choice for a 'First Lens' in so many ways and for so many situations.

Failing that f/length I'd say get a 35. You can always crop IN to a frame but you can never crop OUT...

Just my tuppence worth.

Philip.

By the way the voigtlander heliar 40mm f2.8 is an amazing (& tiny) lens.

[Erato]

14 hours ago, shirubadanieru said:

By the way the voigtlander heliar 40mm f2.8 is an amazing (& tiny) lens.

+1 love Heliar

Both focal lengths can't be wrong since that is the sweet spot of an RF camera. I love them all and have different variations.

Or maybe OP could buy the Q2(or even Q2 Mono) and thank all of them(above) later...🤣

Edited June 22, 2022 by Erato
Thank you all, indeed...^^b

[evikne]

It would have been nice with a little feedback from the OP.

Although he is probably much more confused now than before he started the thread. 🙄😄

[Frogfriend]

3 hours ago, evikne said:

It would have been nice with a little feedback from the OP.

Although he is probably much more confused now than before he started the thread. 🙄😄

I’m here! I’ve been reading and thinking! I do think the 35 would be more versatile as people have said. I didn’t really think about how the different focal lengths would behave depending on if mounted on an slr vs range finder. I actually went to a Leica store today and got to take a look at both lenses. Surprisingly, at least to me, I liked the frame lines on the 35 a little more. I did notice that the lens hood they had on picked into the viewfinder a little though. 

[Jeff S]

15 minutes ago, Frogfriend said:

 I did notice that the lens hood they had on picked into the viewfinder a little though. 

One quickly adapts. For me, a non-issue, although some prefer to switch hoods or shoot without, depending on lens.

Keep in mind that regardless of lens mounted (or even if none), one can use the frame line preview lever to view different lines for alternative framing.

Jeff

[NigelG]

Unfortunately for me the question as it played out was not 35 or 50 but 35 vs. 28/50

I should/could have maybe stopped at 1 M body and a 50 Lux ASPH….hello slippery slope!

Every photo my wife/friends have ever loved was taken with that combo - whatever the (digital) body it was attached to. I still have a black anodised and a silver chrome version (sold the black chrome retro edition due to the hood issues (see other threads) and preferring a focus tab)

I use the 28 cron over a 35 and I have sold off a 35 ASPH FLE through Ivor at Red Dot (for the second time 🙄) recently.

For me the issue is that I know I prefer a 50 but only with a 28 in my pocket/bag. I tried a 35 many times as a single lens option but just couldn’t deal with its “in between-ness” - it’s neither “fish nor fowl” for me. For you however it might be a perfect do-it-all solution.

I know many say that it’s the quintessential Leica M focal length but in this case MMDV - My Mileage Did Vary.

 

[otto.f]

6 hours ago, Frogfriend said:

lens hood they had on picked into the viewfinder

You will very soon forget that totally. I can only remember working around this sometimes with the Elmarit 24

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[John Robinson]

11 hours ago, NigelG said:

I prefer a 50 but only with a 28 in my pocket/bag. 

Since I got a Summicron-M 2/28 ASPH (1st version), my Summicron-M 35 (pre-ASPH) has sat on the shelf so I can certainly second this suggestion.  If you have a 50, a 28 is definitely a better complement than a 35 and the frame lines on most recent Ms work well at 28.  On an M2 it is reasonably easy to compose by working to the visible viewfinder and using the frame-lines to help find the level.  An apropos the discussion about cropping, it is very easy to crop from a 28 frame to 35-equivalent FOV without losing much.