Your relationship with focal lengths

[Lelmer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As we are in the Leica M section, I guess the relationship question primarily relates to M lenses. Although I still navigate between 21 and 400mm on my Nikon DSLR, 50mm is my preferred focal length on the M. I have 28, 35, 50 and 90, but after a few shots, the 50 is back on my M 😊. Having said that, I must recognise that I appreciate the 35 when travelling.

[Herr Barnack]

Nowadays when going on a photo walk with my M10M, my 28 Elmarit M is almost always attached.  I have tried to use a 50mm, but the field of view is just too restrictive.  Sometimes I will carry my 50/2.4 Summarit M in case I find myself needing a more narrow FOV.

I think my Q2 has influenced the way I see in terms of photography.

If I take my M-P 240 Safari, I will mount the chrome  35 Summicron M that came with it.  One must be a stickler for color coordination. 😊

[Sam737]

This is an interesting thread, was just thinking this morning about why certain focal lengths are appealing to me, and others not so much. As an example, and apologies in advance to 28mm fans, but for some reason, to my eye,  so far its just not a focal length that I like as much, as say 24mm or 35. I have been reviewing image threads for 28mm, just to try to figure out why I feel the way I feel. I like the images with people in the fore ground/portraits, but possibly feel the landscape, or say building images, just appear a bit cramped to me.  I have the 24mm Elmarit, and took it to Iceland a few years ago, and some of my favorite images were taken on that lens. Maybe I just need to spend more time with a 28, it's a  described classic focal length.  I have a summicron 28, one of the first leica lenses I purchased years ago. Or maybe its best to just like what I like and be done with it. As I type last sentence, I do continue to think its probably best to keep open attitude toward all the focal lengths. I do continue to see amazing images on this forum of all lengths. Recently did like the portraits type images on 28mm, so maybe that is something to explore, possibly getting closer to subject, see how it goes. Last point is a question to others, I have more recently tried to pair lenses with camera, and film or digital, rather than switch lenses about. I wonder if others do the same. It establishes a certain look on the images, and I choose the combination for the particular day or event or trip. For instance, I have a R8, that I like to shoot with ektar 100 and have 35 R summicron, which just produces amazing rich color, but old color film look. I recently got a 35 summicron M, V1 with googles, that I will be trying out on M3 with tri-X 400. Hope you all have a great day. 

[newtoleica]

its changed over the years. When I started as a teenager I only had a 55mm Zenit lens in the 70's, then I worked with a 28mm and 50mm OM pair with an OM1 for many years. Anything else was beyond my budget. As I was able to afford more lenses I tried a lot of them but always seem to come back to the 35 (or 40) and the 24. With an SLR I would add an 85mm, but with a RF 50 is as far as I go. 

I think I like to get in quite close, do a lot of environmental portraiture on the street and interact with subjects, so depending on how tight the place is (street markets being particularly tight) either the 24 or the 35 work best. 50 on the street is for more deserted spaces else people get in the way all the time. Occasionally use it for tighter street portraits but I never have use for a longer lens these days. 

On the wider end I've used a 21mm for landscape shots, but its not really my thing and although they can look pretty at the right location the images don't 'move me' in any way. As I get older I tend to stick more and more to doing portfolio/essay type street photography, what I have been doing for 45 years. I have a full frame 'point and shoot' with a 35mm lens (RX1RM2) for family snapshots.

[solidstate100]

Having spent decades acquiring gear and multiple different camera and lens systems I now find I barely use any of it and content myself mostly with an M body and a 35mm.

If I am going on a special trip I will take a Billingham with an M6 and M-P 240 and 3 lenses - 35, 50 and 90.  On the day I will take either the film or digital body out (slung over my shoulder) with a single lens, mostly the 35.

If I am wandering about on a daily walk/locally I only ever take the 35.

I have seen the light and travel as light as I can these days, never going to take an enormous heavy bag stuffed full thinking i'm a "pro" ever again!

[Leslie22]

Interesting how we change as the years go by. I’m now a one lens person for a day out, usually a 50 or 35.

On holidays Iv’e had to “force” myself to take the 50 off and use the 35. (Strange as I started on a 35 in the 1970’s and hated the 50)

Planning a European trip (from Australia) I will be carry the full load of Lens’ 18 to 90 (plus SL2 with 90 to 280)

But, I’ll probably go out each day with a 50 on the camera and the 24 & 35 in the bag “just in case”

I wouldn’t leave the others at home …. It feels good knowing they are there if I need them

 

[scott kirkpatrick]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Once things start working. I don't feel the need to change a lens unless I want to capture something completely different.  I had moved from mostly 35 to mostly 28 to mostly 24 (briefly) when I got an APO 35, and that has stayed on my M11 since then.  I think the choice of wide angle is a statement of the distance from people and the degree of getting into the middle of things that I feel comfortable with.  If I need another focal length (used a 75 last weekend), I just put it on another M body (10-D or 10-R, currently).  If the car or a safe storage is not handy, I'll sling them both on and feel like an old time PJ. 

[SiggiGun]

Interresting question! If I take just my statistics (digital only), my favored lens is still the Summilux-M 1.4/35mm ASPH. (pré-FLE). However, If I take a look on shorter periods of time, it has changed multiple times. First switch was, when I received the APO50. My combo (mainly used) changed to 28CRON + APO50 for un certain time. Then I got the APO35,...  for now 35mm is back.  Regular used is now this lens (No more need for a 75mm or 50mm).

However, and just for fun, I will travel in the near future, I am not yet clear about the lens(es),.... 28+50, 21+35 or simply the beloved TRI-Elmar 28-35-50.

But at the end, most of images will ne taken with 35mm,... 

[erniethemilk]

I started photography with a 50mm and through my time I’ve come to find 35mm is just a natural focal length for me. I quite often find a composition and almost walk to that focal length before I look at the camera to take the shot. 
 

I shoot a little bit of 28mm and currently considering an Elmarit as I have the TT Artisans 28mm 5.6 and would like something for gloomier conditions - but I find that step from 35mm down to 28mm quite a jump. I guess in time I’d adjust as I did going from 50mm down to 35mm. 

[evikne]

When I was a Canon user some years ago, I used to have all fixed focal lengths from 24 to 300 mm. I wanted to be prepared for any situation and carried a bag full of lenses all the time. When I moved to Leica, this changed immediately. My first Leica lens was a 50mm Summilux ASPH, and this was the only one I had for a long time, until I eventually added a 35mm Summilux FLE.

I have sold and bought several Leica lenses since, but mostly only with these two focal lengths. I no longer feel the need for anything else. My photographic style has changed with Leica. Now I just want to photograph the close things around me, as I see them, and I appreciate traveling light. Actually, I wish I could cut down to only one lens, but I will probably never be able to choose between 35 and 50mm. Both are indispensable, in their own way.

Edited April 10, 2023 by evikne

[SNJ Ops]

I’m primarily a portrait photographer so I shoot portraits from 24 mm to 200mm depending on the type of portrait and my desired composition.

I very recently bought a used M10 and 35mm f2 Biogon for street, I’ll see how I get on with 35mm but street I have tended to shoot at 50mm.

[Lelmer]

9 hours ago, evikne said:

..... Actually, I wish I could cut down to only one lens, but I will probably never be able to choose between 35 and 50mm...

I am afraid I have the same problem 😂

[LocalHero1953]

There are times when I ‘need’ to use a particular lens or lenses, for events or theatre/performance/stage, when it’s the SL2-S and 24-90 and 90-280, perhaps also with a Summicron-SL 75 or 90 for portraits. That makes a heavy bag. 

But if I’m travelling, or out with friends and family, the constraints are down to me. I’m typically a wide person: 28 or 35. I’m very happy with the Q2. When I had a digital M, I usually carried an Elmarit 28 and Summicron 75 (for those opportunistic portraits), but the 28 was most used. 

In recent years things have changed a bit, as I have diverged into film and older Leicas. They all have 28 or 35 fitted (though the Barnacks arrived with Elmar 50s). I am currently on holiday by car, which has allowed me to experiment a bit: I have a Q2, MP with Summilux 35 pre-asph (loaded with Portra) and Leica Standard with a Nikon 2.8cm f/3.5 (loaded with Delta 3200). They have all had their use, but I doubt I would want to carry 3 cameras regularly, however small. 

I don’t see my lens use changing much to wider or longer for travel/social/casual photography. If I can’t take the photos I want in 28-35, the problem probably lies with me, not the lens. 

[Nimar]

I currently own two 35s and two 50s,

Two big and perfect, two small and light. Though I haven’t found much use for the 50s recently. 35 feels the most natural, 50 feels more limited for shallow portraits or distant objects. I suspect I’d use the 50 more if I was doing more street / landscapes. 

[Ko.Fe.]

 

I have grown with one 50mm lens and one rangefinder camera. It was totally enough for me, been myself. 

No AF, no IBIS and no flicking to eye EVF. Still feels as up to date novelty. As confirmation -  digital M is twice more than SL2-S  

I still use one lens, one camera to go out, travel. I have bag. I don't like to keep valuable things in lint abundant pockets  

It just how I feel and how close I want to be. 21, 28, 35 and 50 I choose from. 

  

 

 

 

[Rick in CO]

I empathize with the above quote by Joshua.  Ended up with a 28/35/50 MATE, primarily for travel, sometimes with a compact 21 and 90.  What is interesting is that my focal length usage for different trips varies.  Usually 50 predominates, 35 sometimes, 28 in the minority, 21 rarely - although it is indispensable for certain interior shots.  The 90mm lens occasionally is used more often than all the others.  With the M10R I can extend the range of the 50 out close to 90 and still get good results if I choose to leave the 90 at home, similar to the Q idea, but not any further.  If only I could have afforded that 28/35/50/75 Varifocal Leica lens recently auctioned!

[Kiwimac]

My Leica system has two lenses - the Lux 35 (latest close focus version) and the Lux 50 (which was the latest until very recently!).

If I was going on a trip I would take both - they aren't really a hardship to carry compared to my last system (Fujifilm GFX). 

One positive aspect of the price of Leica glass is that I do not anticipate owning dozens of lenses.🤣

 

For the GFX I had 35, 45-100, 100-200 and 250. I could barely lift the bag with that lot in. The IQ is astonishing but what use us a system that you never want to carry?

Edited May 14, 2023 by Kiwimac