Who shoots with a 35mm lens only and why?

[kshapero]

I usually shot with a 50mm lens but started enjoying a 35mm lens. Both are appealing as a one lens kit but which should it be?

[jbf]

Thats a good question... I love shooting with the 50mm lens, but as of late i've been using a 28mm... and I gotta say... its a bit too wide for me. Sometimes I shoot in a style similar to winongrand (taking photos of people right infront of me on the street, etc) and so far I've had mixed results. Often times it is too far away. I'll see the image through the viewfinder and feel like it is close enough but when I've developed the shots generally they have been further away than I would have liked.

All of this, and I personally hate to crop my photographs. Sure, minor croppings I"m fine with but I do not like to crop a shot and lose a lot of detail, etc... esp since I mainly use 400 ISO.



So yeah, while I will keep the 28 for now, I'm looking for a used 40 nokton (that's been filed down) to buy now.



As far as a kit lens is concerned... I would probably think about where I am going to be and how the environment around me might keep me from being able to get a certain shot... and if it would be restrictive to use the 50mm then I'd go for the 35.

[ernstk]

I use my 35mm Summaron on my M2 just about 99% of the time. I find that it's a much more natural perspective than a 50. It seems to be more like a human field of view.

I have a GR Digital (28mm equivalent) and I find that it's just a bit too wide for general street photography. A 35mm fixed lens digital point & shoot would be perfect.

Ernst

[craygc]

Primarily I shoot with a 35mm lens, the only other I really use regularly is a 21mm. I find I can work with both a 28mm or a 40mm as a 35mm substitute but the 35mm is king. I have never been able to fathom most peoples' attachment to the 50mm angle of view - I like to work close and 50mm is way too narrow for my likings. Actually I use the same angle of view in 6x7 MF, 65mm and 43mm.

[OldNick]

I use a 35mm Jupiter 12 on my Leica IIIf RD very often because I enjoy photographing airplanes. With a 50, I have to stand back too far to get the framing correct, and often have to contend with people walking between me and the subject. With a 35, I am close enough to get it right without the distractions.

Jim N.

[nightfly]

I use a 35mm Summicron primarily. I find that what I envision is basically what I get and it has this really unique ability to appear wide or normal depending on how it's used. I rarely wish I had another lens.

Since I shoot primarily street and the overall atmosphere of the shot is important to me, I find 50mm too telephoto. It isolates things to a degree that feels sorta cold to me. I don't currently own a 50 actually. The only other lens I have is a 28 which I can use but I don't feel as comfortable with as the 35. I tend to use the 28 when I know I'm going out for something specific that could benefit from a wider field of view (graffiti for example) whereas the 35 is on my camera 98% of the time when I don't know what I will encounter.

The other advantage is that f2 is about as fast as I need and my 28 is 3.5. I can shoot in dark bars or in bright sunlight with the Summicron and I never worry I'm going to have the wrong lens. Also the rendition always impresses me. I find that's really the deal sealer for me. When I used to shoot with a Pentax MX, I shot primarily with the 50mm M1.4 because I really liked the lens whereas the Pentax 35mm F2 M never did anything for me. So I guess it's not just the 35 field of view but the Summicron that does it for me. Although prior to this I had 40mm Summicron which had just as good rendition but the field of view was too in-between for me.

[ChrisPlatt]

35mm best approximates the field of view of *two* eyes.
For me it gives the most natural perspective.

I use a 35-40mm lens for 100% of my RF photography (65mm on the RF645),
and ~85% of my SLR photography, changing to a short tele mainly for portraits.

Chris

[gb hill]

The other weekend I was in a downtown district with my camera. I was using an Industar 50 on my Bessa R. I quickly found the field of view to narrow for street, so I reached into my bag & switched out with the 35 color skopar. This gave me the detail I felt comfortable with & the distance so as to not get in your face like with a 28. For me the 35 is the perfect street lens, but I do always carry both the 35 & a 50 in my bag.

[raid]

I am trying very hard to like the 35mm perspective because so many people here seem to view the 35mm focal length as "the most useful". I am failing at liking the 35mm lens for everyday use. I find the 50mm perspective best suited for my photography.

During a trip overseas, I forced myself to use the Canon 35mm/1.8 and I took along on purpose a [slow] 50mm/3.5 to make myself use the [fast] 35mm lens at available light. It worked OK, but I may have had a better time taking photos with a fast 50mm lens.

It just depends how you like to take photos.

Also, I don't see the 40mm focal length other than a compromise for my liking.

[charjohncarter]

Probably not what your looking for, but I use only a 35mm lens with my Pentax K10d. One, it seems to be perfect for my style, and two, I never get dust. I leave a 35mm one my Bessa R over 90% of the time. One, I don't like changing lens, especially when I'm out, two, I like the 35mm full frame format using a 35mm lens.

[ferider]

I really like 28/50 or 28/40.

35 is always a compromise for me:

- either as a single lens, replacing two
- it's easier to control perspective than a 28 in a portrait situation
- a fast 35 is much smaller than a fast 28.

Roland.

[kipkeston]

On the SLRs I loved wide like 24 or 28 I think this is because looking through the glass I felt blinded by narrower lenses. But with a RF with .72 mag for example, I'm no longer blind on the sides which freed me to use narrower lenses.

the 35 is simply an easy lens to use. Most everything most people photograph easily fits into 35 lines. The problem is of course that you won't get that nice tight composition inherent with a 50. Anyway, I used a 35 until I realized my compositions could almost always be tighter so I went for a 50.

[photobizzz]

Probably not what your looking for, but I use only a 35mm lens with my Pentax K10d. One, it seems to be perfect for my style, and two, I never get dust. I leave a 35mm one my Bessa R over 90% of the time. One, I don't like changing lens, especially when I'm out, two, I like the 35mm full frame format using a 35mm lens.

I also have a K10D and if you use a 35mm lens it is actually a 50mm with the mag factor of 1.53.

I have a couple of 50's a 90 and a 40. I tend to use the 50 over the 40 and I got rid of my 35 Ultron. 50 just seems like home, I think it also has to do alot with what you get used to vs the difference in fov.

[alan davus]

I have 6 lenses between 21mm and 90mm but probably use the 35mm most of the time. I think it's the perfect lazy photog.s best friend and I put myself in that catagory.

[steve kessel]

Akiva

I alternate between a 50 and the 40/1.4 I bought from you. Having just one lens when going out is always a compromise. Sometimes I want a bit more width from the 40, sometimes prefer less perspecive distortion from the 50. I find a 50 also good when close to the action - makes one feel right in it.

Best wishes

Steve

[papasnap]

I find that what I envision is basically what I get and it has this really unique ability to appear wide or normal depending on how it's used. I rarely wish I had another lens.

Same here - 35mm just seems to fit me just right. It's wide enough to put your subject(s) in a context - which is usually very important for me - but not so wide they get lost at sea.

That, and the wonderful 35mm f1.2 nokton :)

[Ken Ford]

Lately I've been giving serious thought to selling all my glass except for the 35 and trying to get by with just that... it's what I use 90% of the time anyway!

[NickTrop]

Why a 50?

You can shoot portraits - not as good as a portrait lens, but acceptable. Not with a wider lens, which distorts facial features on tighter shots.

You can shoot indoors for those natural light candids in most or many situations, or outdoors, by "taking two steps back".

You can get faster lenses, there's a multitude of them from every manufacturer, f2 and below, very inexpensively. 35's of the same speed cost crazy money, typically and are much less common. An f1.7 35? Try to find one, see what if costs. A f1.7 50mm is considered mundane and you can get a very good "off brand" - like "Yashica" or a "Pentax" on the used market in good condition for - like $10 - $20.

50's over 35. Faster, cheaper, more choices (at fast focal lengths), more versatile. But - in certain situations, not as convenient.

[giellaleafapmu]

I usually shot with a 50mm lens but started enjoying a 35mm lens. Both are appealing as a one lens kit but which should it be?

Both lenses give sort of neutral look (not extremely deep or shallow depth of field, no distortion even with the camera tilted), which one is best is up to you.

Actually, (I think I already wrote this) when shotting I rather prefer the look of the 35mm and I often carry around only that lens plus a short telephoto (around 100mm) but when I look at the results I find quite a lot more picture I like which I toke with a 50mm lens.

I start thinking (opinions?) that it is because 50mm never quite fit naturally in anything (it is just too short for portrait and too long for landscapes) so one has to manouver around to find the right angle/distance and is sort of obliged to think more than one would usually do.

A few days ago I made the experiment to go out with just a 200mm lens to shot cityscapes and I got some interesting picture I would have never thought of taking had I not been "obliged" (it is also interesting to see something you like and start walking 50 or more meters back to have it fit into your frame) so possibly the same apply to any focal length if you has the discipline of practicing with just one focal...

GLF

[trittium]

I use the 35mm with my hexar rf because I find it is the best lens with the framelines and vf magnification.

When I use my M2, I use the 35mm for "no looks". It gives me a wider depth of field, larger target area, and slower shutter speed. When I am at a festival I use the 50mm where it is easier to frame, snap, and disappear.

[lewis44]

I don't know if this counts, but I find I only use my 50 on the M3 and the 35 only on my ZIkon. When you look through the Viewfinder on the M3, it almost demands a 50mm lens and the same can be said of the ZI with the 35. Your perspective shifts with each set-up and they each just seem the right combo. I've got a 90, but hardly ever use it and sold my 28 a long time ago. Usually just load B&W in the M3 and Velvia in the ZI. Makes life simple.

[jimi-the-jive]

if it wasn't for the fact that 50mm lens are normally faster then i'd never use them, its not telephoto enough for stealthy shots, its not wide enough for interesting size dynamics or distortion, i just find them slightly.....vanilla.

[Haigh]

WHen I first bought my M4 I could not afford a 28 so used the 35f/2 which i twas sold with. I got used to it and now it is my usual lens except sometimes indoors when I use a CV 29 1.9. I take pictures of people a lot and like to have more space around them than a 50mm lens provides; especially indoors.

http://www.leicaboutique.com/gallery/gary%20haigh/index.html


Hope this helps.

Regards,

Gary Haigh

Australia

[Chris101]

My 35mm Ultron is the only lens I have for my Leica M4P. It seems to work so well, I think it's a permanently attached lens, although I have taken it off once or twice just to convince myself that I can.

[skibeerr]

I want to get where you are, but GAS always wins.

[lZr]

I use my CV Skopar with Bessa R most of the time. If I need the context in, this is my solution. Perhaps, wider is better, but my 21 mm is pending down the list. My Industar L/D, 55 mm is the one I am shure I need for rest of the time.

[JeffGreene]

I prefer 35 MM. It feels more natural to me. I agree with others on this thread that 50 feels too constricted (i.e. telephoto-like.). 35 MM feels perfect on the M6, but not on my RD1 where it is essentially functioning as a 50. I prefer 21 MM on the RD1 which is effectively 35 MM (actually 32 MM effectively) but close enough for me to feel right. :D

[shadowfox]

Akiva, I'm another 50 to 35 "convert". So much so that I sold my Elmar-M 50/2.8 and now use an Ultron 35/1.7

On the SLR side, I now have two very useful and potent lenses: Zuiko 35/2 and Minolta Rokkor-X 35/1.8. I like both... a lot.

As to why, I find that 35mm frames one or more people nicely with their surroundings. It yields a very pleasant picture. I like 28 also and started to be comfortable shooting at close range, but 35mm is "just right" :)

In other words, with 50mm I often find myself wishing that I can capture more of the scene, never with the 35mm.

Hope this helps.

[ibcrewin]

I have a j3 but the throw is so long compared to the 35mm skopar. That's why I use the 35 almost exclusively. I think if I had a 50 that was easier to focus then I'd go with the 50 more often.

[skibeerr]

Has anyone expirience with the 35mm compared to 40mm?
On paper there seems to be little difference.

Groeten,
Wim

[dazedgonebye]

The 40mm is on the R3A most of the time. I tried and sold 50mm, 75mm and 90mm lenses. I just found I did not like them for the type of shots I use a rangefinder for.
I shoot landscapes with 15mm and 21mm lenses now and again.

Frankly, now that I have a Hexar AF, I find that's the camera I want to have with me at all times.
The 35mm fov seems right for the snaps of the things I see when walking around. I know you can step back 2 feet with 50mm and get about the same results. Thing is though, when I'm sitting at a table or in a group of people, stepping back is either difficult or attention grabbing. "Look, there he is stepping back and putting a camera to his face." It's less obtrusive to just raise the camera briefly and push the button (AF being another reason I've come to love that Hexar).

[Turtle]

35mm is just the right balance of wideness - being able to pull a fair amount in - with a lack of perspective distortion. It seems supremely flexible too in that one can make wide looking shots as well as very natural looking ones. I use plety of other focal lengths, but one I never leave home without is the 35. For me 28 and 50 and sometimes perfect, but are used less, in total, than the 35. As a compliment I am now convinced the 75 is the perfect second lens. You can do a LOT with those two FLs and nothing more. I dont have a 75 of course and so now want one having found I want more than a 50 and less than a 90.

35 Biogon. Great......