View Full Version : 50/1.5 or 75/2.5...?
I recently got the Rangefinder bug with the excellent R+35/2.5 offer, only problem is that now I find myself wanting more pristine glass.(I know some of you warned this was going to be an addiction..)
Now I have the 35/2.5 (which I'm very happy with by the way) I'm looking at expanding with either a 50 nokton or the 75 color.
Does any of you have this 35/50 or 35/75 combination? I'm thinking that the 50 might be too close to the 35, but I do like the results I've seen from this lens.
The 75 would give me a nice protrait lens, but I haven't seen that many pictures taken with it. (anybody some examples?) The dilemma is that the budget hardly allows for one lens, so buying both is out of the question....
How would these two lenses compare in optical quality, which one would be sharper/ more contrasty? I believe the weight is about te same, any QC issues with any of these lenses?
The 50 is not too close to the 35. The angle of view with a 50 is 46 degrees, with a 35, it's 63. that's a substantial difference. I have the 75/2.5 & it's very sharp. I don't have the 50/1.5, but when Popular Photography reviewed both in the same article, they liked the 75 better. Of course, the 50 is better at f/1.5 & f/2. Really though, they serve 2 different purposes. The Nokton is a low light lens, the 75 is not.
I find that I use the 35 & 50 a lot more than the 75. But if I only had 2 lenses, I think 35 & 75 would offer more versatility - unless of course you want the low light capabilities of the Nokton.
My advice would be to pick up the 75, as it's harder to get a good short tele, then get a Russian 50, like the Jupiter-8 (50/2). You should be able to get one for $30, max. They are great lenses with a wonderful character. The only issue is that the focus is slightly off at close distances wide open, using Russian glass on Bessas. It's an easy problem to avoid, though.
I agree with Huck's point about lens speed being the most important distinction b/w the two lenses. Which to buy depends on how you shoot. If you're looking to shoot frequently in low ambient light, the Nocton is the way to go. If not, you'll get a more significant change in perspective with the Color Heliar.
The fast Nocton complements your 35/2.5 by way of speed and low light capability.
The Color Heliar complements your 35/2.5 by way of perspective.
Which is more important to you? Having a tighter perspective than your 35/2.5 or being able to shoot in less light than your 35/2.5?
Putting fast film in your R and running the Nocton and then shooting "the dark" would be a lot of fun. Compressing the subject well and being able to get head and shoulder shots by running the Color Heliar would also be fun.
I think most RF shooters would find more use generally with a 50mm, but then having a longer RF portrait lens is very nice for the times when you want that perspective.
Think in terms of buying and trying used lenses because it's usually not too difficult to sell equipment around here. You won't lose much, if anything, on the resale.
I started with the 50, then got the 35, and now I have the 90. The Nokton 50 is a nice lens and it's fast, fast, fast. It's big too, especially compared to the 35, but it looks great on my camera, really good wide open. I was torn between the 75 and 90, but I wanted the extra reach, read Puts' reviews, and was swayed toward the 90. My vote is the Nokton, but Sockeye makes a good point about the Jupiter 8. I've seen some really nice images with that lens, and it's so affordable.
I was wanting the 50. Mainly cos I wear glasses and I can compose in the 50's frame lines better than the 75. But then I saw a 75 ex-demo for sale. So I am still torn. But then I went and got the 15mm lens.. So now I cant afford either ;)
IF you think you will stay with a 2 lens kit, then get the 75.
35/75 is a great combo.
IF you think that you will get more than 2 lenses into your kit, then either will do you fine.
i used to think that 35 and 50 were too close to make much of a real difference but now i walk around with just that combo. but i also have an 85 in the bag, just in case.
either way i would get the 75 first.
I would second Sockeyed's suggestion. Get the 75 and also pick up a Jupiter-8 for your 50. The J-8 is so cheap but find a good one and you are set. I love mine and only keep my Summitar 50 as it has slightly different character. I just got a VC75 yesterday and I am still on the first roll through my R3A with the 75. Will post some soon. But think of it: you have a great 35, you get the 75 (find a mint- one used for about $200, I posted a WTB here and on photo.net and was offered two) and nail a J-8 for $30 or so. A 35/50/75 set would be perfect. :D
My original kit was 35/75 and it worked well for me. I added a 50 later, and if I walk out of the house with two lenses it mostly is the 35 and 50 now, but still love my 75. I will jump on the band wagon and agree that if on a budget the J8 and CV 75 would be a great choice.
Oh, what the heck! Aperture, I can't see you suffer like this. I have a J8 in very nice condition and if you want to part with $30 plus a little to cover shipping from the UK, then I'll part with it, if it helps you out.
You can find some shots in the my gallery taken with it. It's very good but I'm not using it at the moment as I am playing with the 25/4 on my L. Who knows I may even regret it later but like I said, what the heck.
Just send a PM if interested.
First of all thanks for alll the advise, it's made it clearer on what I'm after. I really miss the ability of low-light photography I had with my previous camera, a Canon Ftb w/ 50/1.4 FD glass. Therefore I think I'll try and see whether I can locate a secondhand 50 nokton. Having had a look at the various pictures for both lenses I just feel more atracted to the point of view of the 50mm. Another feature I like about the large aperture is the ability to single out items in a slice of focus.
Paul, appreciate your offer of the J-8, really thoughtful, but I think I'll be on the look-out for a 50 Nokton (if a do change my mind I'll drop you a line) :cool:
You cannot go wrong with the 75mm/2.5 Color Heliar. I used to have it once but stupidly sold it to finance an Ultron 35mm/1.7. But I have redeemed myself as I have just ordered a new one from Dr Joseph Yao and I should receive it by next Friday! :)
with two lenses the 35/75 combo is great, particular if taken B&W. The 35 is 2x the picture size of the 50, whereas the 75 is 1/4 of the 35.
I had the Nokton 50 mm. Great lens. But so big. Now I have the Elmar. For me like Sonnar2, the best combo is 35/75 or 35/90. The 50 mm is good if you dont have the 35 mm. I see some photos of the VC 75 mm and I like the bokeh very much. Other suggestion is for have the best combo, for the 95% of the photos is add an 21 mm. Probably you will have the best combo 21/35/75
IMHO the 50 and 75 are no alternative. A 50 is not close to 35, is quite a step, looks like tele after some months of 35 use only. And it is much more versatile than the 75 which cannot replace a 50 cmpletely. The 75 is good for portrait and details and for all situations where you really NEED the longer lens.
Another question is if you need a Nokton, big, heavy and not cheap. A J8 is a nice alternative, a 2/50 cron, a Hexar lens too. About he 2,5/50 Skpar there are different opnions, some complain about pincushion distortion. Collapsible 50 Heliar is a class of it's own.
I own a Nokton, a 75 Heliar and a J8 and work with them since 3 years, means my advice is based on a certain experiecnce, it's not just an opinion.
If I were you I'd buy a small 50 next and would try to get it under control before I decide for one more lens. Maybe you decid to go wider instead of shorter ? 21 is a new world !
vBulletin® v3.6.8, Copyright ©2000-2013, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.