[Leica] Re: Why a 35mm lens?

["David Kieltyka" <daverk@email.msn.com>]

Alan Hull <hull@telia.com> wrote:

> John and others. I find it interesting that so many luggers
> seem to prefer the 35mm lens. When I was starting out in
> photography the most common advice was ... Fill the frame.
> Followed by ... but do not get too close because of
> perspective distortion.
>
> May I ask those luggers who use the 35mm (or shorter) lens
> MORE than any other, if they can explain why they do so.
> For instance, is it ease of use or do you actually like the
> results.
>
> For me, I find that anything less than 50mm is an "in your
> face " style.

The first time I ever used my dad's M2, back in the early '70s, it had his
35mm Summicron attached. (Both camera and lens now belong to me.) I was
struck by how naturally when I pointed the camera at something a composition
appeared within the 35mm framelines. With other lenses, even wider ones, I'm
always conscious of what I feel needs to be excluded from the frame. But
with the 35 the elements of a picture just seem to fall into place. I don't
know why this is exactly, but rather than question it I just go with the
flow. :-)

Now I also enjoy taking photos of buildings, and for this I tend to use a
50mm or 90mm lens (or switch to the Leicaflex and go way long). I bring out
the 35, lately a pre-ASPH Summilux, only when I need to "get it all in" or
want subtle wideangle distortion. I chose this particular subject matter
partly as a way of staying fresh, getting myself out of my comfortable way
of seeing. Most of the time, though, the M2 accompanies me with only one
lens...the 35.

- -Dave-