50mm Angle

[Afterswift@aol.com]

Fellow Leicaphiles,

As everyone knows, I'm something of a purist in photography. Lately I've been
comparing lenses in the 35mm format. The 50mm is considered 'normal' as you
know because it approximates the perspective of the human eye. If we use it
and print its negatives full frame, chances are that a viewer will not notice
any extraordinary distortion.

So, from the viewer's point of view, 50mm is comfortable -- the 68 degree
sunny optical day. It's shows how things really appear to the human mind. I
usually use a 50mm with an ancient Leica M3. It's an admirable companion to a
RF camera like the M3. 

If you live and work in a crowded city like NY, the 50mm isn't all that easy
to accommodate. The 35mm is the most convenient. My question to you all is:
Now that you have most of the options re focal length via the medium zooms,
which focal length do you find yourself using most of the time?

I admit that I find myself always edging back to the 50mm. For those who do
their own traditional darkroom work, do you find, as I have, that enlarging
with a 50mm negative is much easier than any other? What I mean by that is I
never have trouble with excessive grain to 8x10 and even wallet-size prints
are interesting.

50mm for interiors is difficult because it can't furnish a location shot in
most cases.
It's great to depict people, not spaces. If you were limited to a 50mm lens,
how would you shoot the average room so the viewer could get a good sense of
it? I'm really asking if there is any way to compensate for the limitations
of the 50mm. 

Sometimes it's worth trading off those limitations for 50mm's speed and
mechanical ease -- almost no one except Leica makes anything slower than f1.8
these days -- and perspective. Or is it?

Bob