Should I simply give up?

[hansvons]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If 35mm doesn't work for you, don't force you to use it. But I wouldn't sell the lens if you don't have to.

There will be a time when you might try it again because 35mm is like 50mm the closest you can get for a natural perspective. 35mm pretty much covers our field of view whilst 50mm feels a bit too narrow but renders distances like our human vision. Plus, the Summicron ASPH is a sharp character lens, Leica’s pinnacle 35mm design from the film era.

35mm, BTW, is the most used lens in filmmaking and for many famous directors and DoPs their preferred lens (in S-35mm that would be roughly 25mm). However, you must use your feet more than with a 50mm and the shots won't have that expressionist feel of 28mm. 35mm is boring, not fish nor meat. And that's its beauty. It's demanding but rewarding. 

I shoot 98% of my stuff on 35mm, but I do own a 50mm Summicron v4 for those rare, classic portraits and like the lens' subtle character. I dislike wide-angle lenses, 28mm and shorter because their rendering always looks cool (you must be blind not to succeed) and give a wrong impression of what's in front of them. They are loud and not delicate. 

And finally an experience from the field: I hate changing lenses when I photograph. It steals time and kills opportunities. That's why 2 cameras are better than one and why I don't own a full set besides the fact that I only need a 35mm lens.

Edited April 27 by hansvons

[IkarusJohn]

I’d stick with it, but not because it is inherently good or “what works for you”, but because it makes you think.

It’s easy to say “I’m a wide guy” or “50 works for me”, but I do think that is a cop-out.  My first Leica lens was the 35 Summicron ASPH - a lens loved by many.  I found it a bit meh.  I wasn’t sure why.  Rendering?  Composition?  Why was it so boring?  I then felt I needed to come to grips with that focal length.  I set it as a challenge.  First was to get a lens I liked - no point using a lens with a rendering you just don’t like (35 Summilux ASPH (FLE), I’m looking at you).  Then I realised that I wasn’t thinking at all about the composition that worked for me with that lens.

So, here’s the challenge - look at your 35mm shots and try to work out why they don’t do it for you.  My guess is - taken at head height, subject not filling the image, or not providing the balance or drama you want.  I suspect it’s all about composition, and not setting up the shot which works best for that focal length.

50mm is relatively easy, particularly with an M camera where the tendency is to put the subject in the middle of the frame.  You get little context, and the subject is well presented, and probably taken wide open.  28mm provides drama - provided you actually have a subject (not just random images of trees or scrub) and you consider the surroundings, then it is easy to get interesting images (iPhones notwithstanding).

But with the 35, it is so close to your visual framing (43mm being standard), you need to work harder to get the shot you were probably thinking of.  Move closer, crouch down, put your subject off centre, think about the background, or step back to get more context.  For me, this has been an interesting exercise which has broken some lazy habits.

Then think about selling!

[Advertisement]

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

[Jeff S]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

50mm is relatively easy, particularly with an M camera where the tendency is to put the subject in the middle of the frame.  You get little context, and the subject is well presented, and probably taken wide open.

There are many more ways to use 50mm, in my experience, often not so easy.  I seldom shoot mine wide open, for one.  

Maybe more exercises to change habits? 
 

Jeff
 

 

[lencap]

Since you’re comfortable with the 50, as am I, maybe you can go back to your favorite images and see what apertures you shoot most often.  If they are wide open, or close to it, the 35 focal length may bother you because of the large depth of field and lack of bokeh in your images.  My guess is your landscape 28mm shots are probably f/8 or so to get sharp wide angle shots that help tell the story in your composition.

If that seems to be part of the issue you can experiment with the aperture on the 35 to see if there is a type of shot that balances your desire for an esthetic image and the story you want to tell.  If not, maybe the 35 doesn’t capture the image in your mind’s eye as well as you’d like.  If so, maybe getting lenses that help you tell the story you imagine it are better suited to creating what you enjoy.

I’m primarily a 50 shooter, and for me the 35 suffers from what I just described - too wide to isolate my subject, too much depth of field in daylight shooting.  I too tried the Q, but as I’ve written frequently, that FL doesn’t work for me.  I take landscapes occasionally, and most of the time my iPhone 14 Pro is in my pocket and does an adequate job.  It’s also easy to edit/store/share images in the Apple ecosystem.  Still I enjoy the SL2-S for the haptics - how it feels in hand, and how it reminds me of shooting B/W film on Nikon F bodies for many years.  I consider it an artistic tool, while the iPhone feels like an appliance.  That may also explain why the 35 doesn’t work as well as you hoped.  Any camera these days is fully capable of taking great images, but the desire to shoot, and how it makes you feel is really the key, at least to me, for why I still own a camera instead of defaulting to an iPhone. 
 

 

Edited April 28 by lencap

[IkarusJohn]

2 hours ago, Jeff S said:

There are many more ways to use 50mm, in my experience, often not so easy.  I seldom shoot mine wide open, for one.  

Maybe more exercises to change habits? 
 

Jeff
 

Perhaps.  I should rent a different 50, and only judge prints ...

[Jeff S]

Not a gear or a rendering issue. Common mistake.
 

Jeff

[IkarusJohn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

39 minutes ago, Jeff S said:

Not a gear or a rendering issue. Common mistake.
 

Jeff

I have no idea what you're on, Jeff.

Perhaps revert to the OP's question?

[Jeff S]

32 minutes ago, IkarusJohn said:

I have no idea what you're on, Jeff.

Perhaps revert to the OP's question?

I initially gave a serious response to your quote from post #22, then an appropriate response to your usual sarcasm in post #25. 
 

Try to keep up.

 

Jeff

[costa43]

Usually easier to talk about one’s self with this sort of thing as its relatable in this instance. I felt similar to you when I first started using 35mm after being with a 50mm for so long. I always had to always take a step back or a couple of steps forward. My shots were boring and I thought what’s the fuss with this famous focal length. In the end I think it helped me improve my photography, especially composition. I find with wider lenses they can impart a cool look to the image and the same with tele but with a 35mm/40mm. The content needs to be more interesting for the photo to work. It’s a boring, normal view.  It’s now my preferred focal length for many things. I tend to use it for anything non specific. Family bits and general life documenting. My everyday lens. My advice would be to hold onto it for a bit longer before final judgement. You might end up revisiting it at some point. 
 

 

Edited April 28 by costa43

[hansvons]

6 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

I’d stick with it, but not because it is inherently good or “what works for you”, but because it makes you think.

 

Considerate post. Agree 100%. I love thinking. 

[hansvons]

2 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

I should rent a different 50, and only judge prints

I stopped worrying about lenses (got 3 35mm primes) and bought a proper 44” printer. Best investment in my image-making ever.

[Strmbrg]

Hello! 

From my mental point of view, I don't really understand all these rather deep concerns about gear. I am not completely immune to it myself, but I try to place myself in the center of the whole photo-hobby. Not the gear.
The absolutely most important factor for the resulting images is me. My creativity. My ability to make images.
Without that, the photos risk to become only documentations of what the gear can produce. Not what I can create.

When my creativity and my ideas dries up, I notice that the gear, the comparisons of gear, the performance of gear, what to buy etc. takes a very dominant place in my mind.
"If I just get that lens instead of this one, then I will be able to make the images I want to make... the gear I have limits me... The gear I have is the limitation, not myself..."

If I buy that exptional lens, or this higher performance camera, I can get extremely sharp, abberation-free, boring images, ready to withstand my very deep pixel-peeping-analysis.
When I focus on pixel-peeping, the image is of no concern at all. It is so, because I never look at the whole image when I zoom in and analyse the gear-performance-revealing details. 🙂

The same mentality gives me concerns about what lens shall I get for a trip to Cologne? Can I even use that lens for the later visit to Uzbekistan, or?.. And what is the best lenses to bring with me for the walk in the park on Sunday? 

So, excuse me for being somewhat provocative, but I struggle with those matters myself. Much more if i look several years back than nowadays, but still way too much today.

The absolutely biggest potential is to "upgrade" my own creativity, not to upgrade the gear. That is of course not saying that gear-upgrade is of no importance. But it is saying that the focus on gear and technical performance is way too intense.

Another interesting reflexion:
Can I at all judge things without comparing them? Think of it. 🙂

Edited April 28 by Strmbrg

[tom0511]

vor 6 Minuten schrieb Strmbrg:

Hello! 

From my mental point of view, I don't really understand all these rather deep concerns about gear. I am not completely immune to it myself, but I try to place myself in the center of the whole photo-hobby. Not the gear.
The absolutely most important factor for the resulting images is me. My creativity. My ability to make images.
Without that, the photos risk to become only documentations of what the gear can produce. Not what I can create.

When my creativity and my ideas dries up, I notice that the gear, the comparisons of gear, the performance of gear, what to buy etc. takes a very dominant place in my mind.
"If I just get that lens instead of this one, then I will be able to make the images I want to make... the gear I have limits me... The gear I have is the limitation, not myself..."

If I buy that exptional lens, or this higher performance camera, I can get extremely sharp, abberation-free, boring images, ready to withstand my very deep pixel-peeping-analysis.
When I focus on pixel-peeping, the image is of no concern at all. It is so, because I never look at the whole image when I zoom in and analyse the gear-performance-revealing details.

The same mentality gives me concerns about what lens shall I get for a trip to Cologne? Can I even use that lens for the later visit to Uzbekistan, or?.. And what is the best lenses to bring with me for the walk in the park on Sunday? 

So, excuse me for being somewhat provocative, but I struggle with those matters myself. Much more if i look several years back than nowadays, but still way too much today.

I know it. I am even so far that I accept that my hobby is not just photography but also gear !)

otherwise I would have to accept I am just a gearhead , even more than a photographer.

to the op… over the years my preferences changed again and again. I now also like 28-50 a lot.

But this can change. If you dont need the money, you can just leave the 35 at home for a while and some months later ask yourself if you missed it.

if carrying just one lens I mostly prefer 35 though.

only you know.

 

[Strmbrg]

I often visit churches and take photos inside of them. I like the atmosphere, I am not religious. 
I own tree lenses and I own one camera. Sometimes i use my 90mm, sometimes my 50 and another time the 28 is mounted. It really doesn't matter so very much. I can of course not make the same images with all tree lenses. And some images are impossible to make with each one of them. But I can make different church-images with them. 🙂 
My mind is something like: "Okay, today I have the 90mm mounted. Let's see what i can do with that lens in this church" (or whatever it is surrounding me for the moment).

"Hm, a 90mm in Venice?.. Why not? Lets get creative! I cannot make that image, but I can make this one instead!"

And, I don't want to make similar images as those I have seen others have made. They can of course be very similar, but that is rather coincidences than copying.
"Oh! What a beautiful and creative image! I want to make a similar myself!" Inspiration can of course reach me from outside. But un-reflected copying of what others already have done is not really training my own creativity.

Edited April 28 by Strmbrg

[JoshuaRothman]

For years and years, 35mm was my default focal length. Then, this past year, we had our second kid. All of a sudden 35mm felt too tight. I couldn’t get the whole family in the shot. And, also, 35mm felt too wide: there’s more chaos in the house and I find myself wanting  to frame more tightly and deliberately. So I’ve shifted to a 28mm + 50mm combination for my everyday setup. Either Elmarit + Summarit or Cron + Lux.

I’m a simple photographer and for me a lot of focal length choice boils down to working distance and content. So as those things change, my lenses change.

All of which is to say, maybe 28 and 50 just suit your circumstances more than 35. 

[Ko.Fe.]

If you are fine with 50, even after getting fine 35, it means you are totally  fine with 50 

[yanidel]

What is the point on forcing on you a focal that does not feel natural ? 

Do you feel you will get better pictures?

Not my experience. I stick to how I best see the world.

 

[charlesphoto99]

I've never really gelled with 35. Always found it not wide enough nor close enough. With a 28 one has more flexibility and a 50 more ability to isolate if need be. Just because others swear by a focal length doesn't mean you have to like it as well. 

[pgk]

It took me over twenty years to realise that 35mm was my most preferred focal length. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pippy]

1 hour ago, pgk said:

It took me over twenty years to realise that 35mm was my most preferred focal length. 

Lucky you! I've been snapping seriously since the late 1970s and I still haven't worked that one out......😸......

Currently I'm in a ménage à quatre; the other parties being 28, 35 and 40.

Philip.

Edited April 29 by pippy