Should I simply give up?

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Makes me feel like i live in a harem but in my ménage à 30+, 50mm has always been my preferred focal length since 1971. Summicron 50/2 v3 then, countless Summicrons, Summiluxes and other 50mm lenses thereafter...

Edited April 29 by lct

[brickftl]

I agree with you in that I love using my 50/1.4 lux asph for environmental portraits, especially as I did this past weekend: https://brick.smugmug.com/Photography/2024-4-27-Herb-Festival-and-Greening-of-Mnts-Festival

Since you acknowledge that 28 is nice for environmental shots and you have the ability to crop if it's too wide, then I think that your current kit of a 28 and 50 is fine - you don't need a 35.

For what it's worth, my kit is that 50 plus the 35/1.4 steel rim reissue (because no other lens when shot wide open produces the dreamy, glowy images that it does and that I'm obsessed with - happy to send you examples if you'd like) plus the 21/3.4 super elmar. I was inspired to get the 21 from this video, and I think it's especially well paired with a monochrom like you have: 

 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[pippy]

1 hour ago, lct said:

Makes me feel like i live in a harem but in my ménage à 30+, 50mm has always been my preferred focal length since 1971. Summicron 50/2 v3 then, countless Summicrons, Summiluxes and other 50mm lenses thereafter...

😸

In my case the 28/35/40 trio are merely the Favoured Concubines of The Moment. As you might imagine there are a lot of jealous political machinations and plot-hatching going on behind the scenes.

😺

Philip.

[Olaf_ZG]

Thank you all for feedback. I know that in the end it is my call, but it is interesting to read your journey and discovery of your fav f/l.

Next to a M, I have a SL. Sold even the SL35apo, though it is said to be the best lens. It was not for me.

As my M is a monochrom, and therefore a kind of speciality tool, limiting the amount of lens choices is really tempting. But then, how can a m-photographer not have a 35?

[IkarusJohn]

It’s not compulsory, Olaf!

I like the idea of a Monochrom as your soul M.  I prefer my photography when I have to think about what I’m doing,  My favourite “trio” of M lenses is 21-28-35-50-75 😂

I have another urge to rationalise - selling my SL, 24-90, TL2 and 11-23 & 35 TL lenses.  I will keep my X2D and 38V as my single lens kit and see where that gets me.

[pippy]

1 hour ago, IkarusJohn said:

...I prefer my photography when I have to think about what I’m doing,  My favourite “trio” of M lenses is 21-28-35-50-75 😂...

😸 on your 'Trio' and a +1 for the 'think about what I'm doing' bit.

Philip.

[Sebastian S]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

maybe you are one of those rare 40mm guys. Not for nothing it was one of the most beloved focal length for 2 decades on many semi-pro rangefinders. the summicron-c gives you a very clean classic look, sharp, but not clinical, dreamy, but not to dreamy wide open. It's like a tamed 35mm preAsph renderingwise with a litlle narrower fov. 

[Bikie John]

1 hour ago, Sebastian S said:

maybe you are one of those rare 40mm guys.

I seem to be one, at least for general-purpose photography with an M. It took me a while to twig that I was nearly always cropping 35mm images (unless I deliberately wanted a "wide" look) while 50mm felt a bit claustrophobic and cramped while shooting. I got the lovely Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 used for a good price and love it. I still take crap photos but at least I enjoy doing it 😀

John

[DadDadDaddyo]

I don't know what my true "inner focal length" is for certain. If forced to guess, I'd say it's 90mm. Very often, when I spot something, it's a something that's surrounded by other things. Sometimes those other things provide context, but frequently, they're simply distracting and pose a compositional pain in the neck. So a 90 makes it easy to isolate the something that drew me to raise the camera to eye in the first place. 

But the other thing: I've sung the praises here of the combination of an L-series body and the 24-90, an amazing lens that truly lays claim to the term, "a bag of primes".

So why am I not using that combination *all the time*? It's available, it's flexible, and I know exactly what it can do. What's going on? Why, when I've got access to the Summicron-l 50mm and 35mm, am I not using them *all the time*? Their sharpness is already, deservedly, legendary. 

The answer? Simple. They function superbly in a strictly functional way, but they don't move me. Sure they're sharp, but I don't have a single Leica lens that isn't sharp, at least, sharp *enough*.

And vitally, *something about shooting through the SL-Series bodies imposes itself between me and the shooting. 

It's kind of.... I look *through the optical finder of an M, but I end up feeling as if I'm looking *at the image in the SL finder.

And that's enough that it weighs against the convenience, flexibility, and power of the amazing optics that characterize the L-series. I use the L-series when the importance of producing a guaranteed image outweighs the factors influenced by my preference. Do I have to swap between focal lengths quickly and constantly? I grab the L-series. Do I need a long zoom? I grab the L-series.

But for an immersive photographic encounter, for truly engaging with the world around me, there's nothing like an M. And a 90. Or a 50. Or a 35. Or a 24. (grumble...)

So to the OP: unless you're consciously setting out to challenge your habits or patterns, there's no reason to try to shoe-horn yourself into a focal length that doesn't feel right, especially, *especially, when there's another focal length that does. Do it when necessity calls for it, not when it's simply you, your camera, and the world around you, and you want nothing to get in the way. 

Relax. Enjoy!

 

[dpitt]

5 hours ago, DadDadDaddyo said:

But for an immersive photographic encounter, for truly engaging with the world around me, there's nothing like an M. And a 90. Or a 50. Or a 35. Or a 24. (grumble...)

Well said!
It is unique, compact and relatively light. But the most amazing is how the viewfinder shows a real life view of the world before you. In all other systems you are looking through a lens which brings a kind of tunnel vision, distortion (compacting or expanding what our eye sees) , and DOF issues, so blurring out things...

With the M you have to imagine all this before you take the shot unless you are using the LV or EVF, but then it becomes just another camera... Of course you can imagine all this with another camera too, but the moment you bring other camera's to your eye, they will limit your vision to what the lens sees, not what you can see in normal life like the M rangefinder presents to you. This gives more control to the fotographer...

Edited April 30 by dpitt

[Olaf_ZG]

So, prepared by billingham 35 for a citytrip: as I will go to a zoo, I packed a SL with the 90-280. I also added a zm 50 sonnar. The 35mm on the mm didn’t fit in the bag, the 28 summaron did. Looks like my bag is telling me sth…