View Full Version : The venerable "50"
mike goldberg
11-21-2007, 09:09
Hi all,
Over many months, I've learned to "see" again via the 50mm lens. In the SLR work I did in the '90's and earlier, the 50 was considered "boring." Often, going out with one Nikon, the 35/2 and 105/2.5 went with me and that was it.
Of course, the RF camera is a different kind of tool, ballgame, way of life... or whatever you want to call it. So, I'm wondering if others would like to share stories, anecdotes, info, and of course images in a kind of 50 sub-forum, right here? See photo:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=72343&ppuser=5480
Ciao, Mike
Welcome back to the world of the 50mm Mike! I started off here (well, approximately - Yashica MG-1 which has a 45/2.8 was my first "real" camera) and have not left it yet save for brief excursions :)
My theory is that 50 was considered boring back then because it came with every SLR - by the same token 35 or 38 is now arguably the boring focal length instead, since it's the wide end of all the P&S cameras. Given that a lot of people don't know how to use their zoom, there must be more photographs taken at 35/38 than any other length these days.
It's interesting you mention the SLR - I find 50 "feels longer" on an RF than it does on an SLR. Not really sure why, but it may be related to being able to see outside the frame when composing. As such I use it a bit differently on the RF to how I used to on SLR.
I did try 35 and 85 in my case for a time, but just couldn't get on with it - always wanted the field-of-view in the middle, or at any rate, it necessitated switching lenses almost continuously!
Sometimes I wonder why I bother with other focal lengths - chances are if I leave the door with the 50 on the camera and something else in my pocket, it'll still be on there when I get back at the end of the day... also nearly all of my own photographs that I actually like were done with the 50! (or 80 on the Hasselblad)
Long live 50mm!
MikeG, you know that there are many fans of the 50s here on RFF.
.. - I find 50 "feels longer" on an RF than it does on an SLR. Not really sure why, but it may be related to being able to see outside the frame when composing. As such I use it a bit differently on the RF to how I used to on SLR.
Now that's funny; I've the same experience. The 50mm on the SLR always felt a bit short. I was always trying to get in closer to fill the frame for a portrait, and that of course always spoils the perspective.. With an RF, I use the 50mm more environmental, stepping back a bit to tell the whole story as it were. And that stepping back immediately gives a more flattering perspective..
Nowadays if I do take out the dSLR, I use a 35-70 almost exclusively at the long end.. But still I prefer the RF with a 50..
Long live 50mm!
I couldn't agree more!
Yep ... 'nother 50 fan here! :D
I have eleven of the little devils!:eek:
Quite a big 50 fan here myself... however quite often i do feel like i need a wider lens (28 say?)
but yeah i love the 50.
mr_phillip
11-22-2007, 23:11
My walk-around kit tends to include 35mm, 50mm and 90mm – but when limited to one it's always the 50mm. I've had people tell me in the past that 50mm is a 'boring' length, but hell, how many of the greatest images of the 20th century were taken through 50mm optics?
Once converting to RF I figured 50mm to be my piece of cake as well, in particular when coupled to M3. Albeit recently tend to shoot 35mm on my M6 (M3 was at Youxin for minor adjustment after CLA), still feel 50mm to be more versitle overall...
Recalling my SLR days, I used to have 28-70/2.8L on my EOS-3 nearly 90% of time shooting mostly somethere in the middle of range and a bit longer, so still 50mm or thereabouts used to be very useful then also...
Spyderman
11-23-2007, 01:08
Count me too.
I have 50/1.5, 50/2, 50/2.8, 50/3.5 (all FSU LTM), so now I don't have only the problem to choose which focal length to take with me, but also the dilemma which 50 to take with me :D
Igor.Burshteyn
11-23-2007, 01:51
let's see...
I 50mm for every camera mount I have, in om mount I have 4 different 50mm: 50mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4, 50mm f3.5 macro, 50mm f2 macro.
Conclusion? I lack 50mm f1.2...
Yes, I do like 50mm focal length.
I have just been trying out a late Nikon manual focus 50mm f1.4 on my Panasonic L1 via an adapter. Boy that lens sure does produce sweet images and wide open its bokeh is smooo.....ooooth!
mfunnell
11-23-2007, 02:51
I can't help but think that people who regard the 50mm focal length as "boring" seem to think that their own boring photos might be made "interesting" if they used some other focal length. If the only interesting things in my photos were the technical characteristics of my chosen focal length and film size then I doubt I'd ever take a photo at all.
One of the wonders of the 50 (for 35mm film) is that there are no tricks to be played in the (IMO, way too common) sense of "look at me, I have a wide_angle|telephto lens". A good photo taken with a 50 (or its equivalent for other film/sensor sizes) has to stand on its own merits, rather than "wow, aren't games with perspective such fun!" (or so cliched?)
...Mike
photobizzz
11-23-2007, 03:37
I have gained a new respect for the 50mm focal length since I started with RF's and although I only have 2, a Summarit and a Nokton, I know I will probably get one or two more in the future for their different signatures.
Great focal length! Been using Summicron, Jupiter 8, Jupiter 3, F Zuiko/1.8 for most of my pictures.
I'm another 50-fan. When I started shooting many years ago, all 35mm cameras usually came with a "normal" lens in the 50mm range. Being a contrary type, I rebelled and started using 24mm, 35mm and 85mm lenses on my Nikon F to the exclusion of the 50/1.4 that came with the camera. When I bought my Leica M6, the only lens I had available for several months was the Summicron 50mm so I was forced to use the 50mm focal length for all my shooting with that camera. Even as I added focal lengths for the Leica, I still found myself using the 50mm the most. I currently have 15 50mm lenses in the house for four different brands of 35mm cameras.
We sometimes are seduced by lens effects. The wide angle's expansion of space and the telephoto's flattening of perspective are valid tools under the right circumstances but they cause visual fatigue when you see and use these effects day after day.
No matter what I may say, the 50mm lens is the one most typically on my camera.
I currently have 15 50mm lenses in the house for four different brands of 35mm cameras.
That's a collection!
I'm 50mm fan, too. I have 5 of them, but one will have to go.
let's see...
I 50mm for every camera mount I have, in om mount I have 4 different 50mm: 50mm f1.8, 50mm f1.4, 50mm f3.5 macro, 50mm f2 macro.
Conclusion? I lack 50mm f1.2...
Yes, I do like 50mm focal length.
Igor: Do you realize that in addition to the Zuiko 50/1.2, you also are lacking:
55/1.2 and, depending on which 50/1.8 you have...
F.Zuiko 50/1.8 (silvernose)
F.Zuiko 50/1.8 (black)
50/1.8 MC
50/1.4 early version
50/1.4 late (>600xxx)
:D
I found the 50 to be "pedestrian" on the SLR ... not exactly boring, but a bit uninspiring. Perhaps that stemmed from my first 35mm camera, the Konica C35V, which had a (tremendous) 38/2.8 and formed my vision a bit. So the 50 seemed a bit long and constricting when I got the OM and F.Zuiko/1.8 silvernose. When I acquired a 35/2.8 for the OM, I got back to the way I saw. Now the 42/1.7 on the SP gives me what I like, sort of a happy medium. BUT ...
Over the last several months, I have shot a lot with the 50/1.4, partly to exploit the more limited DOF, partly for its low light capabilities. This week I have been shooting a lot with the 50/1.8 (miJ) --- nearly as fast as the 1.4, but more compact. In tight quarters it allows me to isolate little kids (great niece/nephews), etc.
So after a long acquaintance, I am starting to fall in love with the 50, whether on SLR or RF. Which reminds me I should get out my Tower 51 again, with its super-sharp Steinheil Cassar 50/2.8.
Mike: The portrait is lovely! Now I'm jacked up to try the new T-Max 2 in HC-110 ... aaargh, too many developer choices!
literiter
11-23-2007, 06:59
Back about 1960 or so I bought a fixed lens, 35mm job, called a "Supra". I think it may have had a 45 or 50 mm lens. Life was a little simpler then, no reaching for the zoom collar, no digging around in the bag for another lens.
Now, I seldom travel anywhere without my whole kit.
There must be a special Heaven for those few of us who just have one camera, one lens, one film and Cartier Bresson's motivation.
I am also a fan of 50mm lenses for the RF camera. I find it the best suited focal length for how I see the world around me. I may have 14-16 RF 50mm lenses in LTM, but since I got two Contax cameras added to my sets, I have added two 50mm lenses already in Contax mount. As for 50mm SLR lenses, who knows what I have in "that closet".
I do not have any modern 50mm RF lens. Maybe [or maybe not] I am missing out on something.
There must be a special Heaven for those few of us who just have one camera, one lens, one film and Cartier Bresson's motivation.
Well, except for HCB's motivation, we can do the rest if we want to. I recently made an oath to myself to use one camera, one lens and one film for the next 6 months. I am using a M4-P, Planar 50/2 and Neopan 400. I have plenty of other gear, but like many of us, I was shooting as much (or more) to try my gear as for the picture itself and finding I wasn't taking interesting photos.
I settled on a 50mm lens for the next 6 months, partly because I love the Planar and know it well enough already, but also for the 50mm perspective. As has been said already, there is nothing gimicky about a 50 and it can do almost anything.
I used to shoot mostly the 35mm focal length, but was finding that what I found interesting at the time I took a shot was sometimes lost in the frame of the final print. The 50 forces me to focus (no pun intended) on what I find interesting. If I need more context, I have to consciously acknowledge that and back up (if possible) or determine that the shot is not that interesting without the context and move on. Another way the 50 emphasizes your subject is that you don't have unlimited depth of field, so some subject isolation is going to be part of the final image (unlike wides where you can have almost everything in focus).
It is nice to always know what I am tacking with me when I leave the house and one camera with a lens attached is a lot easier to take everywhere than a whole kit. Less than a month into it, I am already learning more about myself as a photographer (and my gear) than I expected. 5 months and 1 week left to go!
P.S. This hasn't stopped me from wanting more gear... I'll just have to wait to play with it.
i think that many of us started with a 50mm '' free '' with an SLR !
As to whether this is '' boring '' just because it was often my best lense among the Soligors / Vivitars /Sigmas etc , which was all I could afford , is dependant upon the , in my case , snapshooter .
The great advantage for me , with a Autisic glitch , is that it is a similar view to that which I am accustomed to , and somehow , I become able to really learn / take in what a 50 will do , but on my M8 - 50mm is definitely longer ! OOPS !
Even when I built up my collection of Rokkors , the tiny 45mm f2 was / is my favourite - a wider 50 on a smaller version of the Minolta SRT - the meterless SRs it's a deelight . I have 2 of them and a 35mm Fi.8 , but the shop did not know what it was @ £15 / $30 !
dee
hans voralberg
12-04-2007, 15:14
Count in 1 more 50 addict, I have 7 50mm on 3 different system and most of the time it's all I need :D Gotta love the 50mm, though I find 40-45 cool as well, for that wee bit more space
@ Dee: just curious, where/which shop is that ? I wanna pop in and looks for some bargain too ^^
pesphoto
12-04-2007, 15:28
Yep ... 'nother 50 fan here! :D
I have eleven of the little devils!:eek:
holy cripes! :) I love 50mm, my favorite lens. I just agreed to purchase a Canon 1.4 from a fellow member here to try on my Bessa R.
sepiareverb
12-04-2007, 15:39
Three fifties for me currently, I've used and then sold three others in the last year. A 50 is nearly always on a camera I'm carrying, though I often carry two
50mm remains my fave FL, however I'm beginning to appreciate a lot the 35mm FL. Time and work will say.
dpetrzelka
12-04-2007, 20:55
pdx138/Kyle -
Can you speak to the focusing action on the Planar ZM?
I've been using the collapsible Summicron 50, and love the FL, but its really slow focusing and large minimum focus limit me on indoor shots of family - my primary subject.
I've had a 25 and 35's, but am trying to get rid of them in favor of learning to use one lens/camera/film combo really well.
From the shots I've seen online the 50/2 ZM Planar is on my short list.
My first serious camera was a beautiful, big, black Nikon F that I purchased (barely) used around 1970. It came w/ a wonderful 50mm f1.4 Nikkor lens, and I used exactly that combo and nothing else exclusively for the next twelve years. Call it poverty-imposed "one camera, one lens" (I was a student during that period), but I never felt limited. I guess I learned to see w/ that focal length, and although I've flirted w/ other lenses since I seem to return to the 50.
50mm for me is a focal length that covers so much: portraits, street, landscapes. Occasionally I feel the need for something wider or longer, but those are supplements and not the main lens. Also, it is possible to fine wonderful 50s at relatively little cost.
Since jumping on the RF bandwagon, I find myself now owning 4 50s. How did that happen? Doh! :eek:
Thank goodness the 50mm focal length is my favorite, as I do much of my shooting on fixed lens 50's folders. Besides these (which include Tessars (actually 45mm), Xenars, Xenons, Color-Skopars, and Solinars), I have ten 50mm & 55mm Takumars, 4 Jupiters, & a Leitz Elmar for my FSUs. I even use my Takumars (yes, I know it's not really a 50 on the smaller sensor) as the main lens on my DSLR.
PHOTOEIL
12-04-2007, 21:31
Over here we call the 50 mm lens for 35 mm film the 'standaard lens', it is my standard tool...
When I only had my Nikon F3HP it was always the 105/2.5, which I used. I had also the 50/1.4 but it collected dust. Now, with the Leicas, the 50 became my favorite FL again. Having the Summitar, Summilux 50 pre-ASPH, and the Summicron 50mm vs 3, the Summitar is my favorite for its size and rendering. The Hassy only has the (50mm eqivalent) 80mm and for the Rolleiflex it is the 75/3.5 Planar.
50mm rules ! (But so does 21mm ... :))
The more and more I shoot the more I fall in love with 50mm as a focal length. Sure, I sometimes suffer from wide-itis, so thats why I bought a 28mm Ultron.
In any case, here's some great photos from Bud Green. His work is stunning.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/bud_green/
pdx138/Kyle -
Can you speak to the focusing action on the Planar ZM?
I've been using the collapsible Summicron 50, and love the FL, but its really slow focusing and large minimum focus limit me on indoor shots of family - my primary subject.
I've had a 25 and 35's, but am trying to get rid of them in favor of learning to use one lens/camera/film combo really well.
From the shots I've seen online the 50/2 ZM Planar is on my short list.
The focus has what I'd call a medium throw - definitely longer than some, but not too much. Enough for accurate focusing, but it never feels like a chore to focus like some lenses. Ergonomically, it is very comfortable to use. I would have preferred a tab to the focusing nub, but that is personal preference.
I think the .7 minimum focus distance is a huge difference over the .9 of older lenses in a 50mm. It turns a 50 into a very capable portrait lens.
One thing I'm learning by limiting myself to a single lens is that the Planar is a little big for a carry everywhere lens. I love it, but for travel I wish I was using a collapsable instead.
All that said, the results are fantastic which is what counts.
Dektol Dan
12-05-2007, 07:59
I bought a DR Summicron 50 for my M4. I bought a 2.8 Summaron 35 at the same time. I shot one roll with the Summicron and it's been in storage until two nights ago when I needed something fast for a Cafe Tacuba concert.
I scanned the pictures yesterday. Wow, what a nice lens in low light. I only shoot 50's for the 'look' of the lens, the Summitar being a favorite. I find them still to be a giant pain to work with. They're telephotos to me. I'll stick with the wides.
dpetrzelka
12-05-2007, 08:14
pdx138/Kyle-
Can you post some B+W and Color photos from your 50/2 Planar ZM?
Cheers
pdx138/Kyle-
Can you post some B+W and Color photos from your 50/2 Planar ZM?
Cheers
Sorry, no scanner... I'm working on it though.
hofrench@mac.co
12-05-2007, 18:47
My M-Hexanon 50 makes a very capable portrait lens on my M8, which I've just sent off for cleaning.
I've been shooting my Hexar RF exclusively in its place, giving it more use than I have for a good while, perhaps 2/3 of the time with the 50 on board.
It's a lot of fun, and this is a fantastic lens. A sample from rural China shot last week:
<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/aglimpseoftheworld/2090360780/" title="Straight Edge by A Glimpse of the World, on Flickr"><img src="http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2042/2090360780_55d0c8d0bd.jpg" width="500" height="332" alt="Straight Edge" /></a>
...
One thing I'm learning by limiting myself to a single lens is that the Planar is a little big for a carry everywhere lens. I love it, but for travel I wish I was using a collapsable instead.
I have five 50's across three systems, most recently the classic Elmar 50/2.8. I had thought the collapsible feature was a gimmick until the lens was mounted. Wow! The profile is streamlined, aiding general portability. Plus, it looks darn cute. :)
I have five 50's across three systems, most recently the classic Elmar 50/2.8. I had thought the collapsible feature was a gimmick until the lens was mounted. Wow! The profile is streamlined, aiding general portability. Plus, it looks darn cute. :)
Yup, I think I'm eventually going to get one of those - Actually, I want the current one. I have not found myself wanting faster the f2 with a 50, so between the Planar for general use and the Elmar for travel, I think I will be set on 50s (not counting the others I have in screw mount already...).
I have posted these images before, but maybe some of you have not seen them. I had several 50mm lens tests in the past years, and here are some results from one of those tests at 2.0:
1. Collapsible; http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5297421
2. Rigid; http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5297418
3. This photo was taken with the Summitar wide open:
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5297449
4. Jupiter 3 wide open: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5297425
5. Nikon 50mm/2 wide open;
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5297453
6. Canon 50mm/1.5 at 2.0 ;
http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5297431
7. Canon 50mm/1.2 at 2.0: http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5297434
8. Zeiss Jena 5cm/2 LTM : http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5297459
9. Canon 50mm/1.8 at 2.0; http://photo.net/photodb/photo?photo_id=5297546
There can be variations in the quality of the vintage lenses, but you can see some general features here. Once a vintage 50mm lens has been adjusted [if needed], it can produce sharp results.
Thanks, Raid. The image in your test taken w/ the Canon 50/1.8 suggests why I may hang on to mine. That lens is terrific and a great bargain these days.
Thanks, Raid. The image in your test taken w/ the Canon 50/1.8 suggests why I may hang on to mine. That lens is terrific and a great bargain these days.
Hi Steve,
With vintage lenses it is sometimes possible that a few lenses are not 100% optimally shimmed, but what I posted above was taken with "good" lenses that have been proven to have good performance. The Canon 50mm/1.8 is my own lens, and I can vouch for it. I have not sold this lens because it is so good and so inexpensive. A sale would not tempt me.
I just might be addicted to the 50 also.
I have the 50 Lux ASPH with the M8, the modern 50 Cron in the LTM special edition for my ZI & iiif, a 50 Coll. Cron for the iiif, 50 1.4 ZF Zeiss for the Nikon D300, and the Zeiss 50 2.0 Macro ZF for the Nikon D300. This is after thinning the line-up.
Basically in RF gear I have a 21, 28, 35, 50, & 90. I find that a 50 stays on one of the cameras much of the time.
On film the 50 is my primary lens. The funny thing is that I still like the 50 even on the cropped sensors of the M8 & D300. I really like how they draw. No gimmicky effects of extending or over compressing the background. It just gives a very natural look, but I can still do shallow DOF work if I want to.
Long live the 50!!!!!!!!!
Best,
Ray
Hi Steve,
With vintage lenses it is sometimes possible that a few lenses are not 100% optimally shimmed, but what I posted above was taken with "good" lenses that have been proven to have good performance. The Canon 50mm/1.8 is my own lens, and I can vouch for it. I have not sold this lens because it is so good and so inexpensive. A sale would not tempt me.
It certainly appears to be a good example, Raid, that you should keep, particularly given your fondness for older lenses. :)
I, too bounced all around during the great Zoom Scare of the '80s, but in '91 I came to my senses and started back using all primes. Then when all those Nikon lenses got too heavy for me, I started exploring the one lens approach using a 50, which in turn led me to RFs. First a Contax IIIa of my dear departed Dad, then the Leica M3 with the collapsible 'cron. Then I added a DR. My family thinks I'm nuts. I have nine 50mm lenses. Bless me Father for I have sinned...
Vic
Steve,
I have never regretted to stick with old lenses. They are timeless and they never get "out of date". I don't care for multicoating or super-duper sharpness from corner to corner that shows every mini pimple in everyone's face.
I often just place the lenses on the sofa in front of me, and I play with them during TV commercials.
As for the 50mm/1.8 lens, I certainly will not sell it.
I often just place the lenses on the sofa in front of me, and I play with them during TV commercials.
LOL!!! When RFF'ers refer to their cameras as toys, this must be an example of what they mean...:D:D:D
mike goldberg
12-07-2007, 06:51
Oh my!...
Guys & Gals, I opened this Thread several weeks ago and forgot all about it :o Let me tell you
what I'm excited about. A forum has just opened on doing pix "Close to Home," or within a two minute's walk from where one lives. Although I have a 90 and two 35's for R/F, I think I'm going to do this 'assignment' all in 50mm.
I opened the Thread, because in a year and then some, I've learned to love the 50. Ciao, Mike ;-)
Mike,
Most of my photos taken the past 4 years have been "close to home", and most images were taken with 50mm lenses.
moonwrack
12-07-2007, 08:13
I too have come back to 50mm after several years; on Nikon F3's and Leica M6's. It is a very under-rated focal length. However, what's the point in having an interchangeable-lens camera if you do not use more than one lens? With monochrome, a single focal length has more flexibility at the enlarging stage. With colour reversal, alternative focal lengths may be more desirable.
Cale Arthur
12-07-2007, 09:41
I love this thread, almost as much as i love all of my 50's. :)
Though i do occasionally enjoy something wider, i've never needed anything but a good & fast five-o. There's an extremely versatile 'immediacy' to be had at this focal length that i can't quite find elsewhere, and i don't believe i've ever left home w/o one.
--c--
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.