• Welcome to Photrio!
    Registration is fast and free. Join today to unlock search, see fewer ads, and access all forum features.
    Click here to sign up

If you could only have ONE lens..35mm or 50mm???

Do you prefer 35mm or 50mm focal length in 135 format?

  • Total voters
    87
  • Poll closed .
For landscapes, 35mm is perfect. Those of us fortunate to be Zuikoholics also have the 40f2 pancake to pick from. But even the slight difference between these two is quite apparent in composition and FOV.
 
i only have a 50 and have never seen the need for a 35.
if i could i would sell all my lenses but my 50 for my 35mm camera ...

too many lenses, too many cameras is a massive distraction.
 
Consider adding a " Pancake " lens to this argument.

CGW said:
Got a Nikon 45/2.8 Ai-P as a compromise.
Click to expand...

Now with the Introduction by Canon of a 40 mm f2.8 Pancake lens,
this lens should be included in your range of lenses as being a viable possibility.

In My Opinion...
 
jnanian said:
too many lenses, too many cameras is a massive distraction.
Click to expand...

Yes, this is absolutely true! I was up to something like 4 cameras and 10-12 lenses at one point and it drove me nuts. I sold almost everything and I'm down to 4 lenses right now. I feel much better

Ps - we're at a 50/50 split!
 
50mm without hesitation.

For me everything fits so nicely in the 50mm frame. Maybe it's where I live, but with 35mm I get some errant gum wrapper or power line in my compositions, which drives me nuts.
 
I guess I'm lucky, I don't get distracted by a lot of equipment. I've got lots of old 35mm cameras, and a 50mm lens for every one of them. So my choice would be the 50mm lens, from 1.2 to 3.5, I love them all!
 
It really depends on what I'll be shooting. If I *must* pick one, then it'll be 35mm.
 
Neither. Prefer 85mm as my "normal". However, at the moment, I have both the 35 and the 50, and no 85. I usually go out the door with one of my Nikon bodies and either my 55/2.8 Micro AIS, or one of my 50/2 Nikkor-H's attached.



My F4s, made in 1992 or 1993 with my 1967 vintage 50/2 Nikkor-H (complete with NOS AI conversion ring) on it.

-J
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Despite having a wide range of focal lenghts for both SLR and RF cameras, perhaps half of my photos over many decades were taken with 50mm. I often carry only the equivalent prime lens on a DSLR. Sometimes friends shooting the same scene with me will frame differently with other focal lengths.
 
58mm. That was the old 'normal' and was the very best. Like on Minolta 1.4/ 58mm PF or Helios M42 (USSR): both stellar performance. - David Lyga
 
I only own a nice multicoated 50mm for the Yashica SLR I've been using the most often lately. I have more for the Canon EOS, but I'm usually using the 50mm on that one too. It's all I need for 90% of my photos.
 
I chose 50mm because I don't own a 35mm prime, just a 35-70mm zoom. However I do own and love my Nikon AIS 28 f2. For the 50mm I have the Nikon AF 1.8D. It's the one that cost around $125 new and I like it.
 
I picked 50mm. It's closer to how I normally view the world and so if only one lens -- that's what I'd use.
 
agphotography said:
Yes, this is absolutely true! I was up to something like 4 cameras and 10-12 lenses at one point and it drove me nuts. I sold almost everything and I'm down to 4 lenses right now. I feel much better

Ps - we're at a 50/50 split!
Click to expand...

Humm, while I readily agree with the sentiment, those numbers aren't nearly high enough to qualify as distracting to me. Maybe (since this is in the 35mm section) they are if they are all 35mm - that I can see. You're bound to have a lot of stuff with overlapping usefulness.

I just added up the number of cameras I have (seven) that I actually use pretty regularly, not counting the one I got because I wanted another copy of my first "real" camera or the 620 old Kodak my wife bought for me or the ones I'm going to fix someday, and the number of lenses I also use regularly (nine, or eleven counting the non interchangable ones on two cameras.) But these are spread over 35mm, two flavors of MF (three if you count the 6x7 back for the view camera) and 4x5.

The only time it's ever distracting is when I know I want to shoot medium format and can't decide between the small and light and easy, but fixed lens and no mid roll back/film changes TLR and the Mamiya 645 Pro which offers those things and more but is much larger and heavier, especially with those extra backs and lenses.
 
Jerevan said:
I am a 50's man, the Nikkor-H 50/2 to be more specific.
Click to expand...

I know they're very good but the H'es are becoming a boutique lens. Right now at KEH an EX. 5cm f/2 H is almost 3x the price of an EX. 50mm f/2 H. The 50mm f/2 H does still lag behind the 50mm f/2 Ai (my fav). I think the 10.5cm and 105mm P's ramped up like this.

s-a
 
Late to the party, but 50mm. I don't really do landscapes. I shoot people, objects, flowers, signs, that kind of thing. You just have to be too close with the 35mm.
 
Another vote for the 50mm. However...a tough one to decide between the 50mm F1.4 ASPH for the Leicas...or the 50mm F1.2 AIS for the Nikons...
 
I just got back from an event at the Renwick Gallery of the Smithsonian Institution. Big, old (1880s) building with dim interior lighting. Had the 50 1.4 on the camera. I'm liking that focal length even more now - wide enough you can get a small group, and fast enough you can still see to focus what you're pointing at.
 
My Nikkor 35/1.4 AI-S and CV Nokton 58/1.4 are in about 60:40 split. If I had to choose one it would be the 35, but that would be terrible. I don't want to have only one lens, I want them all, twice.
 
I'm currently shooting with a Spotmatic with a really nice 35mm 3.5 Takumar, but the vast majority of my shooting is usually 50mm, so 50mm.
 
I would say 50mm as this is what I think is a general purpose lens. My first Minolta SRT-101 came with a 50 as a kit.
 
I find that between 50mm and 35mm lenses I can almost always get closer with the 35mm to get my composition but in many cases with the 50mm I can't get back far enough when I need a bit more in the shot. So for me it's definitly the 35mm.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register