Using the 35mm on a rangefinder

[Rob Skeoch]

I think the 35mm is my favourite lens on a rangefinder.

It lets you move a step or two closer to the subject than the 50mm and gives a nice working distance between the subject and the shooter.

This is a quick snap of my wife with the Zeiss Ikon with the 35mm. I find this lens length the most natural with a rangefinder camera.

Most likely about F5.6. Shot on XP2 and scanned from neg.

-Rob

[Richard Wasserman]

I agree. I have been using Leicas for about 35 years and probably have used a 35mm lens 85% of the time, they do just about everything I need and fit the way I see. That said, the 75mm Summicron I got recently takes my breath away...

Richard Wasserman

[Pinholemaster]

I have a rangefinder with a 35mm. Never comes off the body. It's the work horse.

The other body is for my 24mm, 75mm, or 135mm.

[Chazzy]

I think the 35mm is my favourite lens on a rangefinder.

Are you finding the f2 speed to be adequate for your purposes?

[Roger Hicks]

I think the 35mm is my favourite lens on a rangefinder.

Couldn't agree more. I bought a Summilux about 25-30 years ago. It was stolen a few years later. I replaced it immediately and am still using the lens for the vast majority of my Leica film shots. The perfect outfit for me is two bodies, one with the Summilux, the other with a 75 Summicron.

[MattKing]

I don't know that it necessarily has anything to do with the cameras being rangefinders. I think it is the focal length and field of view.

35mm is my standard lens on my Olympus OMs and 55mm is my favourite lens on my Mamiya 645.

It is how I see.

Matt

[Rob Skeoch]

Chazzy - I find the F2 lens fine. I'm sure they'll add a F1.4 to the lineup one day but really I think the 35 F2 is great.
-Rob

[Roger Hicks]

I don't know that it necessarily has anything to do with the cameras being rangefinders. I think it is the focal length and field of view.

Partly, yes; but 35s are a lot easier to focus on RFs. And fast 35s are a LOT smaller on RFs and most will either deliver better quality or be cheaper (sometimes both).

[elekm]

I was using a 35mm Color-Skopar on a Bessa-R. I really liked the combination. These days, I'm shooting a lot with a 40mm Sonnar on a Zeiss Ikon. It's another combination that I really enjoy.

I don't shoot a lot of low light stuff these days, so the f/2.8 speed is more than adequate. And I don't demand that I shoot everything wide open.

[MattKing]

Partly, yes; but 35s are a lot easier to focus on RFs. And fast 35s are a LOT smaller on RFs and most will either deliver better quality or be cheaper (sometimes both).

Roger:

It may be so, but my Zuiko 35mm f/2.0s (yes, that's plural) do well in the contest (at least in respect to the size and quality tests).

Matt (30+ years in the Zuiko family, and not reluctant to admit it)