35mm or 50mm?

[Olaf_ZG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My most beloved lens was the Planar 45mm for the G1… and somehow, therefore 50mm is so natural to me. It’s my favorite F/L.

Often looking - here - the 35mm is too wide too me. If the photographer shot a bit tighter, the image would be stronger. My opinion of course. That said, when I look at images like of Peter Turnley, I like how he uses 35mm.

To me, 50mm is great outside, as you have space to move around. For most portraits, 50mm does better. Inside, 35mm has an advantage, and for reportage as well.

I have a 24mm, great for going wide. A 28mm, tiny, as I want to be it tiny, and two wonderful 50’s.

Have a 35mm as well, the nokton 1.4sc, but it is too gimmicky to me. So may be I should get a new 35. Not to big, the nokton is perfect regarding size.

But then, maybe I don’t need 35. Maybe 50 is all one need. Any photographers out here without a 35?

[pcgarner]

My Q2 sadly declined all invitations to the 35mm party. 

[Advertisement]

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

[Smudgerer]

51 minutes ago, Olaf_ZG said:

My most beloved lens was the Planar 45mm for the G1… and somehow, therefore 50mm is so natural to me. It’s my favorite F/L.

Often looking - here - the 35mm is too wide too me. If the photographer shot a bit tighter, the image would be stronger. My opinion of course. That said, when I look at images like of Peter Turnley, I like how he uses 35mm.

To me, 50mm is great outside, as you have space to move around. For most portraits, 50mm does better. Inside, 35mm has an advantage, and for reportage as well.

I have a 24mm, great for going wide. A 28mm, tiny, as I want to be it tiny, and two wonderful 50’s.

Have a 35mm as well, the nokton 1.4sc, but it is too gimmicky to me. So may be I should get a new 35. Not to big, the nokton is perfect regarding size.

But then, maybe I don’t need 35. Maybe 50 is all one need. Any photographers out here without a 35?

There's no definitive answer to this question, what lens works for one person may not work for another, you have to experiment with your image-making and hone down to what works for you. Just looking at another photographer's work, liking it and trying to emulate it is denying the chance of your own signature. It takes time, mistakes and work to get there, most of all mistakes and many of them because with those you get to know what you don't like in the images you make and that by itself can give you clearer direction onwards.

[dpitt]

1 hour ago, Olaf_ZG said:

My most beloved lens was the Planar 45mm for the G1… and somehow, therefore 50mm is so natural to me. It’s my favorite F/L.

Often looking - here - the 35mm is too wide too me. If the photographer shot a bit tighter, the image would be stronger. My opinion of course. That said, when I look at images like of Peter Turnley, I like how he uses 35mm.

To me, 50mm is great outside, as you have space to move around. For most portraits, 50mm does better. Inside, 35mm has an advantage, and for reportage as well.

I have a 24mm, great for going wide. A 28mm, tiny, as I want to be it tiny, and two wonderful 50’s.

Have a 35mm as well, the nokton 1.4sc, but it is too gimmicky to me. So may be I should get a new 35. Not to big, the nokton is perfect regarding size.

But then, maybe I don’t need 35. Maybe 50 is all one need. Any photographers out here without a 35?

Same as you, I feel the 35mm is too wide for me. My Summicron 40C is a lovely compromise between fast and slow, wide and standard. Can be used inside and outside and is one of the most compact tiny lenses for the M.

[Olaf_ZG]

29 minutes ago, dpitt said:

Same as you, I feel the 35mm is too wide for me. My Summicron 40C is a lovely compromise between fast and slow, wide and standard. Can be used inside and outside and is one of the most compact tiny lenses for the M.

May be I should just buy that one and be done with it! Or the heliar 40/2.8, compact as a summaron 28…

[muskyvibes]

2 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

My most beloved lens was the Planar 45mm for the G1… and somehow, therefore 50mm is so natural to me. It’s my favorite F/L.

Often looking - here - the 35mm is too wide too me. If the photographer shot a bit tighter, the image would be stronger. My opinion of course. That said, when I look at images like of Peter Turnley, I like how he uses 35mm.

To me, 50mm is great outside, as you have space to move around. For most portraits, 50mm does better. Inside, 35mm has an advantage, and for reportage as well.

I have a 24mm, great for going wide. A 28mm, tiny, as I want to be it tiny, and two wonderful 50’s.

Have a 35mm as well, the nokton 1.4sc, but it is too gimmicky to me. So may be I should get a new 35. Not to big, the nokton is perfect regarding size.

But then, maybe I don’t need 35. Maybe 50 is all one need. Any photographers out here without a 35?

What do you mean about “gimmick”? If you’re a 50mm shooter like me then yes, you need a 35 as a second lens. I also have that Nokton SC (version 2). It’s a lovely lens. The only noticeable optical flaw is some moderate distortion, but that goes with the vintage feel. If you don’t like then try the Ultron. If that’s not to your liking then a 35 Summicron ASPH may be the best bet. 

I don’t like 40mm because framing is a guess. 

[Olaf_ZG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 minutes ago, muskyvibes said:

What do you mean about “gimmick”? If you’re a 50mm shooter like me then yes, you need a 35 as a second lens. I also have that Nokton SC (version 2). It’s a lovely lens. The only noticeable optical flaw is some moderate distortion, but that goes with the vintage feel. If you don’t like then try the Ultron. If that’s not to your liking then a 35 Summicron ASPH may be the best bet. 

I don’t like 40mm because framing is a guess. 

The flare of the 35 (sc), is fun, but it gets a gimmick. Bokeh is rather irritating. I simply dont like this lens as my only 35mm. Thought I would though.

[dpitt]

47 minutes ago, Olaf_ZG said:

May be I should just buy that one and be done with it! Or the heliar 40/2.8, compact as a summaron 28…

The F2.0 really makes a difference. And the Summicron 40C is also a 'modern' vintage lens, closer to the 50mm Summicron v5 than the 50mm Summicron Rigid in rendering.
Both the Summaron and Heliar are not even close. Its up to you what you like best of course.

Framelines are simple. I had my lens modified to bring up 35mm lines. Coded as 35mm Summicron v3 for the M8.
The standard framelines it brings up are 50mm and are useless to me. Because the 35mm frames are to narrow anyway for the 35mm lenses, they are almost exact for the 40mm if you shoot on the inside of the frame line.

[muskyvibes]

28 minutes ago, Olaf_ZG said:

The flare of the 35 (sc), is fun, but it gets a gimmick. Bokeh is rather irritating. I simply dont like this lens as my only 35mm. Thought I would though.

I don’t consider this a gimmick. It’s just optical flaws of vintage lenses. These are “character” lenses. That’s what this lens is. 

You can’t buy a vintage inspired lens and not want these things. Go for a modern ASPH 35mm instead. 

Edited December 10, 2023 by muskyvibes

[TomB_tx]

50 was always my standard lens on film cameras, but on M10 I find 35 is more universal, as it easily crops to 50 FOV, while the reverse won't. At my age I prefer to carry a single camera and lens instead of my old kit. I have the CV 1.4 v2 (MC) but on M10 use the Summarit 35 2.5 most, with a 50 2.5 as alternate. (Both are the same small size and handle identically.)

[adan]

The really short version: I now use both a 35 and a 50 (along with a 21, 28, 75, and 135)

The longer version: But I come at it from a different direction.

For decades I skipped 50mm lenses altogether (~1980-2021 - in any 35mm system).

Before kit zooms, they were "the lens that came with the camera." Which meant "the conventional wisdom" - what the hoi-polloi use - unexciting and unoriginal. The "lined paper" across which the advice is always to "write sideways." Pour épater la bourgeoisie!

https://www.amazon.com/They-Lined-Paper-Write-Sideways/dp/1586421263

One gets ahead in art by rebelling against, and throwing out, the conventional. 😁

The 35 (used right) has just a bit more edginess and surreality in how it handles space. Which is one reason the M3 viewfinder, limited to nothing wider than 50mm, had vanished by the end of the rebellious 1960s.

However, since 2022, I have added a 50mm Summicron v.3 as a "relaxed 75mm." Lighter, smaller, easier to focus - but capable of intimate portraits and other "short-short tele" work that doesn't need the reach or "perspective" of a 75/90/135, but still provides subject isolation.

In the 50mm compilation below, the top-left picture (of a woman and her husband hanging her art at the gallery) was my "epiphany" that there is a place for 50mm drawing. A 75 would not have had enough context; a 35 would have lacked the separation.

If Ralph Gibson has declared that "75 is the new 50............,"*** again I write sideways by declaring that "My 50 is my new 75!" At least some of the time.

But my ab-"normal" is still the 35mm lens (or even a 28 Summicron - another "new" discovery - but that is for a different thread).

*** https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Yaf8l1quJQ

 

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!

[muskyvibes]

Some people feel they need a lens in every focal length to cover everything. 

for me, my lens serves to give me what I see in my mind, and each lens matches your personality. For me it is a 50mm. To that a 35mm is the perfect pair because it can look like a 50mm. Sometimes either you don’t have enough room to move or architecture is too big to fit in the frame. 

For me it’s not either or. It’s both. I put the lens on depending on where I’m going. I bring one camera and one lens wherever I go. 

Choosing a lens is just a journey in self discovery. It’s not about the lens it’s about you and how you see the world. Eventually a companion to that lens will emerge. That way when you put all your photos next to each other you won’t be able to tell which is which. It’ll be seamless. 

In my journey I’ve gone from 24mm to 85mm.  But I only own 2. I’ve tried them and now I know. 24 is too much. 28 is just too wide, frame lines are hard to see, it looks sparse and without form, it’s hard to frame it the way I see things. 85 is too narrow. 50 is just right. I know instinctively where to stand and the frame is exactly as I want it. I can see it in my mind before looking through the finder. 

The 35mm has been an interesting one because I shot this lens exclusively for a couple of years. I didn’t have any other lens. It was great, yet I always longed for the 50mm. I was always cropping. 

So it just so happens these 2 lenses are my perfect pair. The 35 is my 50 when I don’t have enough room.

Simetimes I look at a photo and I have to see the exif data to remind myself if I took it with the 50 or the 35. Sometimes I can tell by the colors of the SC when the light hits it the right way. 

Edited December 11, 2023 by muskyvibes

[raizans]

To me, each major step in angle of view has distinct strengths and weaknesses. Your needs and style might lead you to use one or the other, or both, or neither. It’s worth giving a new lens a try if you think it might help.

Edited December 11, 2023 by raizans

[kivis]

10 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

The flare of the 35 (sc), is fun, but it gets a gimmick. Bokeh is rather irritating. I simply dont like this lens as my only 35mm. Thought I would though.

I guess each to their own. I use the CV Nokton 35mm f1.5 nearly everyday without complaint. May the force be with you.

[pixie]

I prefer my M3! I use the Goggles  Summaron 35mm f2.8.

I was always a 50mm shooter, but now there are more folks everywhere! One needs to get closer!

HCB also moved to 35mm in Japan. (Ernst Hass.) I think use of 35mm for portraits not nice, due to wide angle normal distortion.

Peter Turners images a case in point!

[Olaf_ZG]

This is an image with a 50mm. Really don’t know what a 35 would have added to it. But that’s portraits. Landscape is a different thing. But isn’t every day life about the people we’re with?

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!

[rtai]

I started with a 50mm Summicron then bought a 35mm Summilux Asph. I just go closer with the 35mm. The focusing tab on the 35mm adds to the ergonomics. I never use a 50mm anymore. Now I use a 28mm and rarely the 35mm; I prefer to just go closer still.

Edited December 11, 2023 by rtai

[pippy]

5 hours ago, Olaf_ZG said:

...But isn’t every day life about the people we’re with?...

For me? Rarely.

Not all that interested in taking pictures of people to be perfectly honest. Sometimes they might add an interesting 'Motif' within the image but otherwise?....Nah.

😸

Oddly enough - on the question of "35 or 50?" - earlier today I realised that I really want to use my 40mm much more frequently than has been the case lately. Such a great f/l.

Philip.

Edited December 12, 2023 by pippy

[Mr.Prime]

I think this question has been raised many times and doesn’t really have a definitive answer. I use both. 

What I was always failing to grasp in past years was that it’s not really about the F/L but the angle of view. If you want to recreate what the photographer saw then you want to match the angle of view of the lens to the angle of view the image has when viewed in print form. A landscape taken with a wide angle lens that is printed and viewed close up so that it fills your vision, will look fairly natural. Instead of having too much sky, the sky in the image will fill that part of your vision that expects to see sky. So the choice of lens F/L can sometimes be made by thinking about the end use, print size and viewing distances. 

Edited December 12, 2023 by Mr.Prime

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Per P.]

I agree with Mr.Prime, and I would almost say that it is a trick question. A few years ago I reviewed my Lightroom catalogue and could see that at least 75% of my better pictures were made with either a 35mm or a 50mm. It was split 55/45 between those two with the 50mm being the ultimate favourite. In other words, so long as I have one of them I'm ok.

But style and subject is a key factor. There are not just people in most of Peter Turnleys pictures, people is his subject. Period. And he goes close. I took a workshop on people photography one time, where I used the 35mm exclusively for a week. One of my learnings was that if I was more than 3-4 meters away then the picture didn't really work.