Is 35mm-ish the new normal?

cuthbert

cuthbert

Pugh Pugh Barney McGrew Me Dibble and Grubb
Suspended / Banned
Messages
1,918
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
Yes
As I've gotten older, I've fallen more in love with wide-angle lenses. I don't know if this is just my own journey or whether wider (pun intended) trends have pushed me in that direction. With iPhones, Pixels, Leicas, and X100s all favouring wider perspectives in the 24-35mm ballpark, I wonder if this shift is part of a larger movement with wider lenses becoming the new normal?

I haven't shot regularly with a 50mm lens in years. I still have one - the old Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 - but I find it far too tight for general use, 35mm just feels normal (though I actually prefer 24mm as my walkaround lens).

Has anybody gone through or felt this?
 
Last edited:
I shot mainly 50/1.4 on the Canon 5D2, that was 2010 until 2014/15. I then went to Sony A7 and settled on a Voigtlander 40/1.4 Classic M mount as my main go to for many years. I then replaced that with a Voigtlander 40/1.2 E mount for the next few years until the 35GM came out which is my most used on the A7Riii. I do still have the 40/1.2 though. I also use a Fuji X100f.

So for me, I have been slowly getting wider :ROFLMAO: 35/40mm is my focal length though and I think 28mm is a bit too wide for me.
 
Just ordered a Nikon 28/2.8 for my D300.
After noting I use 28-35 range often with my 18-55 VR on my D90
Yes I could use the zoom but gotta luv primes❗️
 
Can't say I've used a 35 much. Except that it is approximately 50 on my Fuji. I find a 28 with an equivalent of 42 works well for me. Film wise. It's either a 50. or a 28.
 
Back in film days I used the 35mm a LOT, it was my "standard" for a lot of stuff. Strangly with digital I find I'm not using it much.
 
cuthbert said:
As I've gotten older, I've fallen more in love with wide-angle lenses. I don't know if this is just my own journey or whether wider (pun intended) trends have pushed me in that direction. With iPhones, Pixels, Leicas, and X100s all favouring wider perspectives in the 24-28mm ballpark, I wonder if this shift is part of a larger movement with wider lenses becoming the new normal?

I haven't shot regularly with a 50mm lens in years. I still have one - the old Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 - but I find it far too tight for general use, 35mm just feels normal (though I actually prefer 24mm as my walkaround lens).

Has anybody gone through or felt this?
Click to expand...

This is all FF or FF equivalent not 35mm on APS-C or MFT.

I used to be a 50mm fan and for quite a while one was on my Canon 5D and although I still do use 50mm in recent years I've used 35mm more. I have a 40mm which I really like because it's such a good lens but I'd like it even more if it was 35mm.

I occasionally use a 28mm and I do like the perspective 28mm gives and 28mm can give a different look to 35mm but all in all 35mm has been and still is a favourite of mine.
 
Last edited:
With me it’s about portability. The 40mm Z lens or 28mm pancake lens on my ZII can be squeezed into a small bag, and the results are great. I can also crop in with satisfactory results, due to the big sensor and lots of megapixels.
I remember my Dad using a folding Voigtlander film camera with a 35mm lens which was very small and light. He used to carry it in one of his front trouser pockets!
 
GAS man said:
With me it’s about portability. The 40mm Z lens or 28mm pancake lens on my ZII can be squeezed into a small bag, and the results are great. I can also crop in with satisfactory results, due to the big sensor and lots of megapixels.
I remember my Dad using a folding Voigtlander film camera with a 35mm lens which was very small and light. He used to carry it in one of his front trouser pockets!
Click to expand...

I had a Bessa with a 35mm f2.5 which I sold and I always missed that lens so I bought another and now use it on my modern mirrorless cameras.
 
Back in the 90's my favourite Pentax lens was 43mm, a pretty unique focal length, but it just seemed right as a more standard lens.
Now, I find the 17mm on MFT (so 35mm equiv) is very nice to use, but on FF I love my Sigma 24-35mm Art zoom. (on Nikon D850) for many use cases.
 
So far as I can tell, there is no longer a "standard" focal length.

Most current cameras, if supplied with a lens, appear to come with a zoom that covers the equivalent of (roughly) 28~75mm.
 
lindsay said:
Back in the 90's my favourite Pentax lens was 43mm, a pretty unique focal length, but it just seemed right as a more standard lens.
Now, I find the 17mm on MFT (so 35mm equiv) is very nice to use, but on FF I love my Sigma 24-35mm Art zoom. (on Nikon D850) for many use cases.
Click to expand...
I have the FA43 Limited, which sits right between my 35/2 and 50/1.4 and 50/1.7 primes. I don't use that so much as it is literally wrapped in cotton wool to keep it nice and shiny...
 
Some people have put together this Wikipedia page on the subject of "standard lenses"...

Normal lens - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org en.wikipedia.org

They've gone with the old definition of a standard lens being the focal length that is (more or less) equal to the length of the image diagonal. Perhaps, for the purpose of this discussion, we should be using the term "default lens".
 
I can’t say I’ve seen a trend towards wider angles for ILC’s but for fixed lenses it definitely seems wider is preferred. I would hazard a guess with phones it’s because they were originally designed for more landscape type photos, also wider is good for the selfie crew who can only hold the camera at arm’s length.

As for the more enthusiast fixed lenses cameras I guess they’d prefer wider with the ability to crop rather than too narrow and not fitting in what you want.

As for myself I prefer 50mm for some things and 35mm for others, I wouldn’t say I prefer one over the other on the whole. I wouldn’t use anything wider than 35mm for ‘general’ photos, just landscape type in which the wider the better for me.
 
cuthbert said:
I haven't shot regularly with a 50mm lens in years. I still have one - the old Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 - but I find it far too tight for general use, 35mm just feels normal (though I actually prefer 24mm as my walkaround lens).

Has anybody gone through or felt this?
Click to expand...
The focal length favoured can relate to mindset - which to some extent can be modified or chosen - we are not entirely at the whim of the winds! Go out with any single prime and you might find that you adapt to it's view, bed into its reality at least for a day, even without thinking about it. Thinking's often superfluous and counterproductive.

However despite all that, my natural preference of focal length has migrated wider over the years as yours seems to have done, and to a similar sort of degree. I sometimes wonder if it relates to a natural mellowing, where when younger I was harder and more defined about what I wanted to extract & present, and have become more inclusive?
 
droj said:
Go out with any single prime and you might find that you adapt to it's view, bed into its reality at least for a day, even without thinking about it.
Click to expand...
This is something I used to do often, when I went through my "Rolleiflex period".
droj said:
I sometimes wonder if it relates to a natural mellowing,
Click to expand...
My mellowing has taken the form of always carrying a zoom, with the greatest range of focal lengths I can find. ;)
 
AndrewFlannigan said:
My mellowing has taken the form of always carrying a zoom, with the greatest range of focal lengths I can find. ;)
Click to expand...


Only this morning I wish I had been carrying a 15-800mm zoom at F1.4

With 200mm Macro in there somewhere as well
 
I find these days I nostly shoot either wide 24mm ish or longer 85mm or 135mm ish. No idea why.. I took out the 85mm and a 35mm a few months back for a long walk, pretty much all my shots were on the 85mm. No reason, just what seemed to suit me at the time.
Yet I used to love the 35mm. Strange how our tastes/styles change over the years.
 
When I switched from Canon to Fuji I also switch from a 50mm main lens to a 35mm (equivalent) lens, and found I preferred it. To the point that I bought an X100v - which is fixed at that focal length. However, I then swapped prime lenses on my inter changeable lens cameras, as didn't see the point in having 2 set ups at 35mm, so I got a 50mm equivalent, and I find myself using that a lot. If I only had to choose one, I think I would go for the slightly wider option though.
 
lindsay said:
Back in the 90's my favourite Pentax lens was 43mm, a pretty unique focal length, but it just seemed right as a more standard lens.
Now, I find the 17mm on MFT (so 35mm equiv) is very nice to use, but on FF I love my Sigma 24-35mm Art zoom. (on Nikon D850) for many use cases.
Click to expand...
I'm another who loves the Sigma 24-35mm f2 ART lens. I now use mine on the Nikon Z8 or ZF mirrorless cameras with the FTZii adapter.
 
cuthbert said:
As I've gotten older, I've fallen more in love with wide-angle lenses. I don't know if this is just my own journey or whether wider (pun intended) trends have pushed me in that direction. With iPhones, Pixels, Leicas, and X100s all favouring wider perspectives in the 24-35mm ballpark, I wonder if this shift is part of a larger movement with wider lenses becoming the new normal?

I haven't shot regularly with a 50mm lens in years. I still have one - the old Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 - but I find it far too tight for general use, 35mm just feels normal (though I actually prefer 24mm as my walkaround lens).

Has anybody gone through or felt this?
Click to expand...
I've been taking photographs for nearly 50 years, and until recently never owned a 50mm (for 35mm cameras).

"Standard" lenses on roll film and sheet film cameras are wider than a 50mm on 35mm cameras and this has meant I've always found a 50mm too long to use as a general purpose lens. 43mm is meant to give the same perspective as the human eye and the standard lenses on roll film and sheet film cameras are close to the equivalent of this focal length.

However, the eye has a focal length that changes and is constantly scanning, so although 43mm gives a natural perspective, the slightly wider 35mm, possibly gives the most "natural" angle of view. For as long as I can remember, my "standard" lens has been a 35mm.

I have also always had a 55mm, 58mm or 60mm as a short telephoto. My third most used focal length has been an 85mm or 100mm/105mm. More recently I got a 50mm and have been using the 35 and 50mm more equally. Even more recently, I've got a 40mm and I'm now using this almost exclusively as my everyday lens.

I've also had 20mm, 24mm and 28mm lenses, but generally, I don't like the wide angle "look" they can often give, unless used very carefully. Having said that, my current companion to the 40mm is a 26mm.
 
interesting that the Leica Q3, (latest model) have released a 43mm, alongside the 28mm ..........all the Q's to date were, (are still), 28mm....... now with the 2 option Q3

I suspect that many found the 28mm, (probably a little wider by some accounts), maybe too wide, although the sensor size on the Q3 would allow good res crops, plus the camera has frame lines to indicate what the crop would look like.

I still reckon most for general photography would prefer 50mm, just my option, (I use a 50mm lens on my M more than a 35mm)
 
New normal? New? :p

Am I ahead of the curve? lol

rCsSNl5.png


pI7VtVd.png
 
droj said:
The focal length favoured can relate to mindset - which to some extent can be modified or chosen - we are not entirely at the whim of the winds! Go out with any single prime and you might find that you adapt to it's view, bed into its reality at least for a day, even without thinking about it. Thinking's often superfluous and counterproductive.

However despite all that, my natural preference of focal length has migrated wider over the years as yours seems to have done, and to a similar sort of degree. I sometimes wonder if it relates to a natural mellowing, where when younger I was harder and more defined about what I wanted to extract & present, and have become more inclusive?
Click to expand...

I think I've tried and experimented, sold and re-purchased all sorts over the years - trying to find something that felt right, I went between 24, 35 and 40 primes (I've had four 50mm lenses, I think lol), before finally landing on 24 as kind of default. I had a 24-70 quite early on in my photography journey and sold it, I never really got it as a lens. I wasn't mature enough. I was all about bokeh at the time.

I think this natural mellowing is also a growth and maturity, I think I had to kind discover the emptiness of photographing everything at f1.4. Now, don't get me wrong, there is a time and a place for that - and there are many photos that can only really work when shot like that, but the journey is knowing what does and what doesn't, and it's of course been fun getting there. But I do look at some of my earlier work, and know I missed the point of what photography was really about - capturing some moment, and keeping it forever.
 
Last edited:
Screenshot 2025-03-29 at 22.50.12.png
From the results so far scanning all my pics. To be fair is a close race between the primes 24mm 1.4, 50mm 1.4, 85mm 1.4 and 200mm 2.0 are all 11-12k and still 1m images to process.
 
cuthbert said:
I missed the point of what photography was really about - capturing some moment, and keeping it forever.
Click to expand...
But not entirely. Nothing is for ever, we are merely mortal. It's all about consciousness, and the journey ...
 
mstphoto said:
35mm is a lens I've been tempted by for many years but never got around to buying.
Recently I bought a Sony 24-50 and find I'm liking it more than I thought I would.
Click to expand...

If you aren't worried about big apertures, I think that G lens is a good purchase. But, I do think they missed a trick (for more prime based shooters) by not having a little 'stop' (like an aperture click) at the 35mm mark ;)
 
LeeRatters said:
If you aren't worried about big apertures, I think that G lens is a good purchase. But, I do think they missed a trick (for more prime based shooters) by not having a little 'stop' (like an aperture click) at the 35mm mark ;)
Click to expand...
f2.8 is enough for me - I doubt if I will shoot many images at F2.8 except Auroras if I'm lucky enough :D
 
It depends on what you're shooting. Over the years I've moved from ultra wide angle lenses being my favourite to telephoto lenses. But I've gone from shooting landscapes to kids doing activities at a distance. For a quick lightweight grab and go combo I'd pick either a 50mm.1.8 or a 24-70 f4 depending on circumstances.
 
cuthbert said:
As I've gotten older, I've fallen more in love with wide-angle lenses. I don't know if this is just my own journey or whether wider (pun intended) trends have pushed me in that direction. With iPhones, Pixels, Leicas, and X100s all favouring wider perspectives in the 24-35mm ballpark, I wonder if this shift is part of a larger movement with wider lenses becoming the new normal?

I haven't shot regularly with a 50mm lens in years. I still have one - the old Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 - but I find it far too tight for general use, 35mm just feels normal (though I actually prefer 24mm as my walkaround lens).

Has anybody gone through or felt this?
Click to expand...

My FAVE lens for the last few years has been a 50mm f1.8 (FX)

When not using that, my wider stuff seems to usually be at the 24-30mm of my 24-70mm; which I guess means that, for me, 35mm is neither long enough nor wide enough :)
 
cuthbert said:
I wonder if this shift is part of a larger movement with wider lenses becoming the new normal?


Has anybody gone through or felt this?
Click to expand...
Owing to a combination of indecision and man maths, I have ended up owning a 16-35mm f/4, and a 24-85mm f/3.5-4.5 (full frame).

There's no denying that the 24-85 is a fine 'standard' lens option, and frankly there's not much I do that absolutely necessitates the use of the 16-23 range. Funny thing is, the 16-35 is the one I tend to leave on the camera and use the most at the moment. I think it's the perspective I like at the wide end.

Decades ago I bought a Pentax K1000 that came with the 40mm f/2.8 pancake lens. Ever since then I've felt that 40mm is more natural for a fixed focal length standard lens than 50mm which, for me, is a compromise that's rarely optimal for anything (I must be wrong about that because it is practically the only lens that Cartier Bresson ever used, but this is subjective).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top