50mm “lens” for landscape photography

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 minute ago, erl said:

How many times have you shot a 'standard' lens (50mm for 135film) and later looked at the image and decided to crop it?

I would lie if i said never but very rarely actually. I may use 35mm lenses as "standard" too, but it is mostly with perspective control so i cheat sort of this way. Again YMMV.

[pgk]

42 minutes ago, Derbyshire Man said:

.... and natural perspective ....

I suspect that this actually refers to 'magnification' in that if you look through a 50mm lens on some viewfinders it appears to be similar to that we experience directly. But perspective is actually based on viewing point not magnification.

[Anthony MD]

Every book I’ve read about the 50mm lens characterizes it as “normal”…🧐 

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!

[Anthony MD]

2 hours ago, lct said:

When i use a zoom lens, i unconsciously set it to 50mm, or 35mm in APSC. It's because of things like this that i know that i "see" at 50mm. The only focal length i can use both eyes opened. Also, my default lens has always been a 50mm, the "standard" lens as we used to say in the past. The lens with which most if not all 24x36 photo kits were sold in the film days, namely a Summicron 50 or an Elmar 50 at Leica, or a Planar 50 or a Tessar 50 at Zeiss. I use many other M-mount lenses at present, from 12mm to 135mm, and i never felt the need to limit my choice to 50mm, but as a great photographer used to say, « the 50mm is my life ». YMMV.

That’s why they call it the “nifty fifty” it’s so nifty…😂

[Anthony MD]

4 hours ago, Derbyshire Man said:

Maybe in terms of compression and perspective but human binocular vision has a 120 degree field of view, you’d need an 8mm lens to get that into a 4:3 frame! There’s a built in claustrophobia with a 50mm lens. That may feel positive in terms of intimacy or tight construction of the frame, although not always, but it certainly isn’t in any way ‘natural’ or mirroring human vision, no matter how many times we read that oft repeated statement. 

Sometimes you can believe what you read…📚

[pgk]

54 minutes ago, Anthony MD said:

Every book I’ve read about the 50mm lens characterizes it as “normal”…🧐 

Then you are reading old, out of date, books, and they are wrong anyway. One of my lecturers, Sid Ray, who has probably forgotten more about lenses than most of us will ever know, suggests that the 'standard' lens is simply one whose focal length is equal to the diagonal of the format, as Nikon state, but that this was the case because in the early days of photography (and even before in the 'camera obscura') a ~40 degree field of view was the field of view from the earliest lenses which was actually usable at small apertures. So progress in lens design was based around this field of view because it proved to be the easiest field of view to use in order to make progress in terms of lens design evolution. It was not until late Victorian times that wider lenses were introduced with what was considered to be acceptable performance. So Nikon were right in some ways but wrong about a standard lens approximating the angle of view of the human eye; they were repeating an oft quoted misnomer.

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Funny to have this discussion on a Leica forum while the highly praised M3 had no 35mm framelines at all. Only 50mm, 90mm and 135mm. To use 35mm lenses, one had to use goggles or add-on viewfinders. Built-in 35mm framelines came only with M1 and M2 cameras, and the M2 kits were only composed of 50mm lenses to begin with.

[Anthony MD]

1 hour ago, pgk said:

Then you are reading old, out of date, books, and they are wrong anyway. One of my lecturers, Sid Ray, who has probably forgotten more about lenses than most of us will ever know, suggests that the 'standard' lens is simply one whose focal length is equal to the diagonal of the format, as Nikon state, but that this was the case because in the early days of photography (and even before in the 'camera obscura') a ~40 degree field of view was the field of view from the earliest lenses which was actually usable at small apertures. So progress in lens design was based around this field of view because it proved to be the easiest field of view to use in order to make progress in terms of lens design evolution. It was not until late Victorian times that wider lenses were introduced with what was considered to be acceptable performance. So Nikon were right in some ways but wrong about a standard lens approximating the angle of view of the human eye; they were repeating an oft quoted misnomer.

I’m also reading Leica’s newest book, 9th Edition, calling the 50mm lens standard…!

 

1 hour ago, pgk said:

Then you are reading old, out of date, books, and they are wrong anyway. One of my lecturers, Sid Ray, who has probably forgotten more about lenses than most of us will ever know, suggests that the 'standard' lens is simply one whose focal length is equal to the diagonal of the format, as Nikon state, but that this was the case because in the early days of photography (and even before in the 'camera obscura') a ~40 degree field of view was the field of view from the earliest lenses which was actually usable at small apertures. So progress in lens design was based around this field of view because it proved to be the easiest field of view to use in order to make progress in terms of lens design evolution. It was not until late Victorian times that wider lenses were introduced with what was considered to be acceptable performance. So Nikon were right in some ways but wrong about a standard lens approximating the angle of view of the human eye; they were repeating an oft quoted misnomer.

 

[Anthony MD]

Just now, Anthony MD said:

I’m also reading Leica’s newest book, 9th Edition, calling the 50mm lens standard…!

 

 

 

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!

[Anthony MD]

31 minutes ago, lct said:

Funny to have this discussion on a Leica forum while the highly praised M3 had no 35mm framelines at all. Only 50mm, 90mm and 135mm. To use 35mm lenses, one had to use goggles or add-on viewfinders. Built-in 35mm framelines came only with M1 and M2 cameras, and the M2 kits were only composed of 50mm lenses to begin with.

Exactly, but maybe Leica is also wrong…😂

[spydrxx]

I think the term "standard" refers not to the human field of view, but rather to the most used or most sold "kit" lens. From my experience, the "standard" field of view is more like that captured with a 42mm lens.

[Anthony MD]

4 minutes ago, Anthony MD said:

I’m also reading Leica’s newest book, 9th Edition, calling the 50mm lens standard…!

 

21 minutes ago, spydrxx said:

I think the term "standard" refers not to the human field of view, but rather to the most used or most sold "kit" lens. From my experience, the "standard" field of view is more like that captured with a 42mm lens.

 

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!

[Anthony MD]

6 minutes ago, Anthony MD said:

 

 

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 May 9 by Anthony MD

[Anthony MD]

6 minutes ago, Anthony MD said:

 

 

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 May 9 by Anthony MD

[lct]

38 minutes ago, spydrxx said:

[...] I think the term "standard" refers not to the human field of view, but rather to the most used or most sold "kit" lens [...]

Not the way it is presented in the Leica brochure # 91449 below. "Standard" lenses are only 50mm there. Same in the Summilux 50/1.4 asph technical data where the lens is presented as "a new highspeed standard lens". I won't bother you with more references there are plenty (too many?) of them in this thread already.

Page 13 of LeicaM9_brochure_en.pdf

[Anthony MD]

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!

[Anthony MD]

2 minutes ago, lct said:

Not the way it is presented in the Leica brochure # 91449 below. "Standard" lenses are only 50mm there. Same in the Summilux 50/1.4 asph technical data where the lens is presented as "a new highspeed standard lens". I won't bother you with more references there are plenty (too many?) of them in this thread already.

Page 13 of LeicaM9_brochure_en.pdf 765.16 kB · 0 downloads

I’ll stick with Leica’s understanding…📷

[pgk]

It doesn't matter how much you quote folklore, its still folklore. If you bother to read and understand the history of photography then you would understand my last post from which it was obvious that 'standard' lenses derived from those which were first used. These were used because of their performance and also proved easiest to evolve in terms of lens design. So they bacame 'standard'. The ideaa about field of view, maginication and so one came later.

[Anthony MD]

Just now, pgk said:

It doesn't matter how much you quote folklore, its still folklore. If you bother to read and understand the history of photography then you would understand my last post from which it was obvious that 'standard' lenses derived from those which were first used. These were used because of their performance and also proved easiest to evolve in terms of lens design. So they bacame 'standard'. The ideaa about field of view, maginication and so one came later.

Maybe it’s you that’s following folklore…!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Anthony MD]

9 minutes ago, Anthony MD said:

Maybe it’s you that’s following folklore…!

 

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!