sparrow6224
Well-known
I have been intrigued by the one year - one camera - one lens movement or club or whatever -- and, as I often do just on my own trying to decide to leave the house with one lens, I find myself, contemplating even a couple of months, torn between 35mm and 50mm. I would guess the majority of RFF'ers are 35mm aficionados and I have had a long love affair with that focal length; but there is a strength, a kind of visual muscularity, to the 50mm that the 35mm cannot match and that I am coming to appreciate more and more.
So if you were doing the one year etc -- which would you use? I don't think any of us need to hear about the technical specifics, really -- although in the context of specific photographic aims they're always interesting -- but what would be most informative is your experience and your gut emotional visual aesthetic sensibility, explained.
So if you were doing the one year etc -- which would you use? I don't think any of us need to hear about the technical specifics, really -- although in the context of specific photographic aims they're always interesting -- but what would be most informative is your experience and your gut emotional visual aesthetic sensibility, explained.
Chris101
summicronia
If I were doing a year (which I won't - I'm not that stoic) wih an slr, I'd use a 50, with a rangefinder, then I'd use a 35. Can't say why, it's just how I roll.
Ranchu
-
50 without question. "a strength, a kind of visual muscularity" that's exactly why I like it the best, you put it very well. It's solid, without excuse or adornment.
kzphoto
Well-known
I'm in this boat, except reversed. I love a 35 on an SLR but I prefer to use a 50 on my RF.
back alley
IMAGES
i would choose the one that i could learn the most from.
for me, i prefer a 35 so the 50 would be the one to choose.
for me, i prefer a 35 so the 50 would be the one to choose.
coelacanth
Ride, dive, shoot.
I was doing close to that with 50mm (not that strict). I'll have hard time doing so with 35mm for 1 year period. Maybe a month or two...
Juan Valdenebro
Truth is beauty
35 for sure.
Cheers,
Juan
Cheers,
Juan
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
I've never gone in for the one year one camera one lens idea- though the discipline does appeal to me- but I do shoot with a 50mm lens for easily 80% of my photography. I just like the versatility of the focal length.
Much of the time I do carry just one camera with one lens, and it's generally a 50mm. I will confess that sometimes I do find myself wishing I had something wider. But when I carry only a 35mm, I find it to be wider than I want or need at least as often. This is why I tend to carry more than one lens (and often more than one body) most of the time when I think I'll be in a situation where I will really want to make photographs.
Much of the time I do carry just one camera with one lens, and it's generally a 50mm. I will confess that sometimes I do find myself wishing I had something wider. But when I carry only a 35mm, I find it to be wider than I want or need at least as often. This is why I tend to carry more than one lens (and often more than one body) most of the time when I think I'll be in a situation where I will really want to make photographs.
Phil_F_NM
Camera hacker
I'd use my 35 UC Hexanon on my M8, it winds up being right in the middle of the two and it's pretty damned close to perfection.
Phil Forrest
Phil Forrest
Frankie
Speaking Frankly
I picked a 40mm...the CV 40/f1.4.
In using a 35mm FL, the horizontal FoV equals to imaging distance...almost exactly.
If a 40mm FL is use instead, the 35mm FoV will be covered by stepping back a little...14% (40/35) more.
To cover the equivalent FoV of 50mm, the imaging distance needs to be 35/50 or 30% less...step forward a little.
Basically, if the most used imaging distance is 10', then one step back is a 35mm- and two steps forward is a 50mm...unless your back is against the wall or standing at the edge of a cliff.
If you are shooting at infinity, then it matters little at all.
In using a 35mm FL, the horizontal FoV equals to imaging distance...almost exactly.
If a 40mm FL is use instead, the 35mm FoV will be covered by stepping back a little...14% (40/35) more.
To cover the equivalent FoV of 50mm, the imaging distance needs to be 35/50 or 30% less...step forward a little.
Basically, if the most used imaging distance is 10', then one step back is a 35mm- and two steps forward is a 50mm...unless your back is against the wall or standing at the edge of a cliff.
If you are shooting at infinity, then it matters little at all.
sparrow6224
Well-known
I like 45 more than 40 but it's harder to find. Just a note on the one camera one lens or variations on photographic stoicism: Henri Cartier Bresson travelled south and east Asia in the 1940s, capturing Gandhi's death and the fall of Shanghai among other monumental events, with one Leica III and three lenses: a 35mm, a 50mm, and a 135mm. Eugene Smith, on the other hand, typically when working wore five and even occasionally six cameras around his neck all loaded with different focal length lenses. These are the photographers I most admire (along with Ansel Adams who had a Contax as I recall but didn't fool with it all that much) and the approaches were totally different.
Gregoryniss
Well-known
Definitely 50mm for me. I have a 35mm and enjoy it, but something about 50 just feels right to me. If I had the lens, i'd choose leica m2 w/ 50mm summilux pre-asph
mfogiel
Mentor
A 50mm is a bit more versatile in my opinion, in the sense that it serves well for general photography AND for portraits. Another important element, is how close are you willing to get to people in the street. I find that a 35mm lens forces you to get so close, that it becomes dangerous to shoot people, unles you are in some "friendly" environment. On the other hand, I can get by prety much unnoticed if I shoot the street with a 50mm, it gives me these 3-5 meters of distance, which is big enough not to stir the attention right away.
Have a look at this film (all 3 parts)
http://vimeo.com/6497905
and note how close Chris gets to people - I believe the checkers players were acting, it would be impossible to shoot from this distance unnoticed in reality.
Have a look at this film (all 3 parts)
http://vimeo.com/6497905
and note how close Chris gets to people - I believe the checkers players were acting, it would be impossible to shoot from this distance unnoticed in reality.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Definitely a 50mm!
I don't believe you can photograph any individual with a 35mm and do them justice ... and that's important to me.
I don't believe you can photograph any individual with a 35mm and do them justice ... and that's important to me.
Gary Sandhu
Well-known
I'd take a 28mm and crop when I had to.
Mcary
Well-known
I've found that when working small confined spaces that a 35mm work great for taking 1/2 to full length shots. Of course if I want something more along the lines of a portrait I use something in the 85-135mm range.
rolleistef
Well-known
it's always dangerous to shoot people! you can go to prison for
What I like with the 50 is that it's very versatile indeed. The 28 is nice as well because you can take people in their environment without directly aiming at them. Less intrusive.
1 year - 1 lens : buy a Rolleiflex!
Cheers,
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
On the contrary, I always take a step back if I'm using a 50mm now
So definitely 35mm for me:
xxloverxx
Shoot.
35mm just because I never want to be in a situation where I get too little in the frame — I'd rather crop.
Although I did shoot 50mm for almost a year with very few problems…
Although I did shoot 50mm for almost a year with very few problems…
Damaso
Photojournalist
A 50mm. I used to only use the 35mm but over the past few years I've found it a bit wide for my taste. Haven't missed using it much...