Is the 50mm lens boring?

[Jim Jones]

Perhaps half of my 35mm rangefinder photos are taken with a 50, followed by a 90, 35, 135, and 21. The SLR favors longer lenses.

 

[Ko.Fe.]

So, it is third page, lets bring it here:

Question One:
"Is the 50mm lens boring?"

Question two:
"Just wondering how many people here use a 50 as their main carry-around lens and/or for street photography?"

As it was mentioned on previous pages "the boring" is not the lens characteristic it is capabilities of photographer. Not only HCB was able to use it as main lens. John Free might be closer to OP, because he is using Nikon F series SLR and Nikkor 50 mm lens for decades.

I used (as many others did) 50mm lens as the only lens for many years. It was not limiting, because if you have only one lens, you have to deal with it. Later on I switched to only 50mm lens again and it was not limiting also. In fact, I prefer 50mm lens on SLR cameras. It is portrait lens to me.

I don't use SLR for street photography, but RF. And I'm also using 50mm often. 50mm works just right for empty streets and for low light street photography. My universal RF lens is 35mm and if I want to work in the tough crowd and bring it close, I'm going wider. But in my current life, I'm dealing with empty streets and wide spaces most of the time. This is why I reach for 50mm lens more and more. M3 with Industar-22 (50 f3.5) on previous week and FED-2 with Industar-26M (50 f2.8) this week (for International Communist Camera Day).

You have to understand 50mm. For good pictures you can't use it as P&S. You really have to work on what is going to be in the frame and how it is going to be placed. Or you'll often call it boring.

 

[mooseontheloose]

I love my 50mm lens - I use it for probably 80% of my photos (the 28mm gets most of what's left). I travel a lot and sometimes have back problems, so having minimal gear is preferred. I find the 50 is great for many purposes - low light, little distortion, often gives me a closer feel when needed, etc. Plus it's small and light and fits in my pocket. Even with MF I prefer the equivalent focal length (75/80mm), depending on the camera.

 

[markbarendt]

The only boring part about a lens is the way it's used, creativity isn't dependent on Focal length.

Ian

I agree.

The tool isn't the issue.

 

[Luckless]

Rather depends on the subject matter and style of shooting.

If I'm using an SLR, I tend to find myself favouring longer lenses. My go-to focal length tends to be in the 100-150mm range, allowing me to back off slightly from the subject matter, but still very tightly capture it in a narrow field of view. I've tried working with lenses in the ~30-50mm range on an SLR, but they've never really worked all that well for me, and the images have rarely, if ever, truly clicked with me anywhere near as well or as often as they do in the longer focal length range.


However, if I compare the usage of the 80mm lens I have on my TLR, then things change a fair bit. - I find that the prism finder just doesn't click as readily as other cameras seem to, but the 80mm and waist level finder tends to click beautiful for me in ways that a similar angle of view just doesn't work for me when I'm using an SLR.

 

[HiHoSilver]

Lenses aren't "boring", however the way that some photographers who lack creativity use them can make them so. Speaking personally for street shooting I like to use a Canon FD 35mm f2 lens and leave the focusing on 10 feet at f8 or f11 depending on the lighting conditions and by using the lenses hyperfocal distance I have no need to focus for the first shot and if I have time I can focus more precisely later.

What Ben said. When I saw the thread title, I thought: its another way to ask if a photographer is boring. Sometimes yes, sometimes no. That said, if different perspectives have your imagination for the time being - why ignore that? Go with it. Perhaps don't sell your good regular lens - your imagination may find them useful in the future.

 

[MattKing]

It occurs to me that one of the characteristics of a near 43mm lens used with 135 film is that the focal length choice is inherently unobtrusive. One never looks at a photo taken with a 50mm lens and thinks "you must have used a 50mm lens!".
The 50mm lens is like the quiet person sitting in the corner at a party. Just because the lens doesn't impose its character on your photograph, doesn't mean that it is boring. Sort of like that quiet person who turns out to be really interesting when you take the opportunity to talk with them.

 

[RichardJack]

It's boring for some and not others, my guess is that if you don't already have an answer in your mind, it will be boring for you.
It depends on your subject.
I find it's too short for portraits, it does not give you the proper perspective and human features might not be proportioned well. A 85-135mm is usually best.
A 50mm is good for still-life and scenery. Before fast wide angle lenses were available they were the lens of choice for night street photography.
A 50mm macro is often a good lens to have for walking around, they are sharp from infinity to a few inches away.
They are cheap enough, buy one and make your own decision.

 

[MrBrowning]

I like the 50mm lens when shooting 35mm. As other have said it's a nice all around focal length.

 

[Michael Chapel]

My Oscillo-Paragon 56mm is 6mm less boring than a nifty. And the Marcos it takes on my Crown Graphic are...interesting.

Not sure if they make a 50mm for my graphic.

 

[Helios 1984]

If I want to do pictures of buildings facades, I will grab my 28 because I don't want to end up at the hospital because I was in the middle of the street with 50. If my intention is to take pictures of urban life, I will grab a 50 or a 58 because 28 is too close for my taste.

 

[daleeman]

On my M2 I pack a 35mm lens. On my Dad's IIIF RD STi a 50 50mm. I have other lenses, but this is just how I see with them.

Not boring

 

[Harry Stevens]

Did you know you can use your feet if it's not wide or close enough.

 

[Alan Gales]

If any lens would be considered boring, I think it would be one of those circular fisheye lenses. I've seen some nice shots of sports stadiums taken with them but really, how often are you going to use something like that?

A boring lens is one that sits around unused whatever the focal length may be.

 

[TheRook]

50mm lenses are awesome. If I had to give up all of my lenses but one, I would likely choose to keep the 50mm.

 

[flavio81]

If you think the Canon FDn 50mm f1.8 is good try the 50mm f1.4n I have both it's a better lens than the former, it's also multi-coated which none of the 50mm 1.8 Canon FD optics are, in fact the 1.4 is a much better lens than I'm a photographer.

yes I also have the FDn 50/1.4 and it's a more complete lens, but the 1.8 is cheaper and works just fine.

 

[flavio81]

50mm lenses are awesome. If I had to give up all of my lenses but one, I would likely choose to keep the 50mm.

My problem would be which 50mm to keep... i have too many!!

 

[darkosaric]

which 50mm to keep

Keep them all ! Only "problem" then is which one to take on a walk .

 

[benjiboy]

My problem would be which 50mm to keep... i have too many!!

I only have one of each, and I only keep the f1.8 lens
as a backup.

 

[Luckless]

Did you know you can use your feet if it's not wide or close enough.

Did you know that your feet have no impact on the angle of view of a lens?

Field of view is 'kind of important' with regards to perspective and how elements within an image fall in relation to one and other. "Zoom with your feet" only works if you have no care of complex 3D geometry and how you are projecting it onto a 2D plane.

 

[Michael Firstlight]

There is one lens that isn't boring.....

....the one that enables you to achieve the perspective and field of view needed to correctly render what is in your mind's eye.

 

[guangong]

The 50 mm lens and those From 45mm to 55mm, the normal lenses, are portable and convenient and can be made reasonably longer or wider by taking a few steps. I agree with Alan Gales that the most boring lenses are "fisheye". However, sometimes even a 50 can be inconvenient. For additional compactness a 35mm on my Leica or a pancake on my Nikon f makes them more pocketable, substituting convenience for versatility. Some may prefer the distortion provided by wider lenses for street scenes ( I remember this was very much in vogue during the 1970s) and no argument can invalidate personal preference.

 

[narsuitus]

At one time, I could not understand why the 50mm on my SLRs felt too telephoto for my taste but the 80mm lens on my 6x6 TLR cameras did not. After some analysis, I discovered that a normal lens is defined by the diagonal of its image. The diagonal of a 35mm image is 43mm. The diagonal of a 6x6 image is 79mm.

An 80mm lens is a lot closer to its 79mm diagonal than a 50mm lens is to its 43mm diagonal.

 

[narsuitus]

I have plenty of 50mm lenses for my 35mm SLRs but have none for my 35mm rangefinders.



Contax G1 by Narsuitus, on Flickr

 

[Alan Gales]

At one time, I could not understand why the 50mm on my SLRs felt too telephoto for my taste but the 80mm lens on my 6x6 TLR cameras did not. After some analysis, I discovered that a normal lens is defined by the diagonal of its image. The diagonal of a 35mm image is 43mm. The diagonal of a 6x6 image is 79mm.

An 80mm lens is a lot closer to its 79mm diagonal than a 50mm lens is to its 43mm diagonal.

There is something else to think about too. A 6x6 TLR produces a square image and a 35mm SLR produces a long rectangular image. The format can really make a difference in how a focal length looks on a camera.

I used to shoot slides with my 35mm camera and then print 8x10 Cibachrome prints. I'd really see this with my 25mm lens. The shot would really look wide on the slide but when I cropped it for 8x10, it didn't look as wide.