Hi Everybody,

 

I would like to know which is you favourite lens for street photography,

in particular 35 mm lens or 50 mm. Please specify, if you want, the lens you like (I mean 35 L 1,4 canon or ....).

 

Thanks,

Ciao

G.

 

p.s.:

I know that is a topic very well discussed all over the world photographic's forums but I want to know what the 1x members think about it.

Hi Gennaro!I use the Nikkor f 1.4 50mm lens in a FF camera.I think that it's perfect for my shot (35mm is too "wide" for me).

The choice depends on you, on your way to do street photography!So this is a very personal opinion!

 

best

 

Francesco

Even I want to know the answer to this long asked question.Actually I am a student and more importantly a man of limited means, I want to concentrate on street photography since that is the one that draws me most. I know this might seem to be very basic a question which comes down to personal choice in the real world.......but I would be really happy if somebody could tell me the pro and cons of each lens an how that would affect my pictures.....

 

Thanks in advance

Aalok

 

Hi Aalok

First I would advise you to browse the gallery of street pictures here on 1x and elswhere, second try to get a clear idea on what type of 'street' you would want to do, third develop an idea on how you would like to do that and finally what type of equipment would suit you best to get the result and style you're looking for. The outcome might be that the camera in your cellphone is all you need, or something completely different.....

 

I understand what you said but my question is: "Please tell me the lens (35 or 50 mm) that you prefer in doing street photography". Clear and simple.

 

Ciao

G.

 

A "clear and simple" question that has no clean and simple answer. So just read what folks write and then make your own decision. And understand that for some your premise is flawed. Some might think a 200mm or a 20mm should be included in your question....

Everything is good between 24mm and 50mm... for my taste, much wider is and more you feel into the frame when you look the photo. What I use is often a 40mm or 28mm, with compact, or 50mm with a DSLR.

 

Cheers

 

I understand what you said Clyde, but my question was just to know how many of you prefer a 35 mm instead of 50 mm lens to take "street" pictures. However, if you reply at this question you can add "why" you prefer that lens.

 

Tanks and bests,

 

G.

Nikkor 50mm f/1.8 D on full frame

Nikkor 35mm f/1.8 G on APS-C

i go for the 35mm, even if i'm using a 28mm all the time. 50mm is too long for my taste, i thinks wideangle always adds a lot of drama.

I'm not sure how anyone can answer this question without knowing what camera you are shooting with.

 

What camera do you shoot with?

I use Nikon 50 mm f1,4 and Canon 50 mm f1,2 but sometimes also the Nikon 24 f1,4.

 

Hi Steve,

 

I'm just curious to know the lenses preferences in street photography inside 1x site, nothing more.

Like you said, it is also important if you mention the camera you are shooting with, if FF or APS-C !

no, the perspective does not change with the sensor size. so the camera does not matter in my opinion.

True! only the coverage is changed not the perspective. More coverage on FX less on DX. My "normal" Lens is and has been 35MM on FX for many years and while I have 50 mm it is seldom if ever used.

 

Yes we have all right but as Will said "More coverage on FX less on DX".

Then, something changes !

 

Ciao

I recently decided to switch from my Canon D5 and, 16-35 mm and 70-200 to an Olympus MD5 , a fantastic camera, light, unobtrusive, discreet and great in low light. I shoot almost everything - street and documentary - with a 17mm (which is a 34mm). I bought a 35mm (70mm) but that's for about 10% of my shots.

Carla

 

 

Yes, there is a big difference using a full frame with a 50mm and on a 1.5x crop body. I couldn't use the 50mm on my older crop body cameras (D70, D200, D300).. as I hated it. I could almost never get what I wanted in frame and now with a D700, it's glued to the body.

 

I find when I teach Workshops and I grab a students camera to show them something, looking through their viewfinders, it's a different world. So, recommending a 50mm 1.8 I also need to let them know it WILL be harder to get a full scene if you are too close to the action and maybe 1 out of 30 students are aggressive shooters that move around quickly or at all so, "foot zooming" is an option that many people will never put into play.

I have to say that the 50 is seldom on my full frame camera. I prefer 35 or shorter on the streets, but I am not afraid to get in close. I have enjoyed the 35mm perspective of the Fuji X100, and the 20 mm on a micro 4/3rd camera (40mm equivalent). But I think one has to consider in advance what sort of shooting is intended. While I have yet to try it, i could see using an 85mm on full frame just for the fun of trying something different.

Here's a decent example of a shot I love but did get clipped by the 85mm's focal length...

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/21847753@N02/5431297582/in/photostream

 

The 85mm can be used in the Street and I did for about a year BUT I wasn't able to capture scenes fully. Unless you were quick or in position you could easily lose so much and I did lose things that might have a made a difference in the image but I didn't care either way. I also shoot with a 17-35mm 2.8...

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/21847753@N02/5719712476/in/photostream

 

Different vibe, distortion and overall a completely different feel. Also, using a wider lens is a different practice mentally and technically.

 

And that's a good example of a shot you probably would not even have gotten with a 50 or 35 because you would have to get too close and the moment and scene would be changed by your proximity. So there is no real answer to the OP's question...

I think I will try the 50mm next time I go to NYC, or even Charlotte, since I have not given it any street time up to now.

 

What I missed and probably would have captured with the 50mm is the blunt like mix the kid was rolling and some visual breathing room...

http://www.flickr.com/photos/21847753@N02/5431270185/in/photostream

 

but that element doesn't matter as much as the rat kissing the dog and Moms loving smile. A 50mm would have been perfectly fine but some attention would have been taken from the main point of attention with more info in frame, though a dude rolling a joint would have added a lot to the image imho.

 

I was more saying that perhaps the rat would have looked at you instead of kissing the dog or the guy would not have lit the blunt if you had moved in that close. That your proximity would have probably lessened the moment somehow not that the focal length would not have worked better.

I enjoy using my 28mm 1.8 more than my 50mm 1.8. I can get closer, but I feel the main reason is because it is quicker and quieter when autofocusing.

 

Clyde - Not to be or sound argumentative and yes, any change in the way the image turned out would make it a "different shot" no matter how small. Probably not in this case, however. For the record, I would not have moved in closer as I actually wanted more info, in frame BUT my back was flat against a pillar (of the Church) where the image was taken and the 85mm limited what I could do from 4ft (1 meter plus?) away. I had nowhere to go. With the 50mm I would have been in the same position and just caught more of what I truly wanted. It's important to note, I am perfectly fine with what I got... life's imperfection and Street Photography go hand in hand... as they should. It's a craft/art form that embraces and sometimes even celebrates less control.

 

eta:How you shoot, what you shoot, where you position yourself, your comfort zone, how you see the world are also important technical's to consider and play a big role in answering the OP. So, when this question get's asked, these things need to be addressed, up front in the OP and of course the full-frame/crop factor issue is right in there, as well. Otherwise, you get this silly peppering of responses that don't tie together critical elements that play a part in creating the images you wish to capture.

One word: 50mm f1.4 ... or is that several words ;-)

I'm a former 'telescopic' lens user, and initially the 50mm took some getting used to (ie. move into the subject, not bring it to you via a tele lens), but I far rather the sharpness/quality of image, and it's low light friendliness ... oh, and it's size is a whole lot less noticeable or intimidating (if you get caught out!) than a near fully extended tele ;-))

It's the only lens I took/used during our 2011 five week visit to Europe, with two image topic exceptions: my fella's Sigma 10-20, when I couldn't fit in one frame all of the Eiffel Tower or Arc d'Triomph within the 50mm ;-))

Ell :-)

35mm I use.

Mainly Fuji X100S. It's pretty good.

 

Oh ja! :-)

I use the 35mm for everyday street since the purpose of my shots usually include whole-body frames. I must say that this isn't quite impossible when using the 50mm as well, I just find myself using the 35 more :)

 

I'm total agree with Clyde! Or what about the zooms. A lot of people use 35 or 50mm and then they have to crop in post processing to create a more interesting result, as "nobody" explain:

 

 

I'm learning so I haven't a clear answer... in fact I think there isn't only one or two answers as Ckyde says.

And furthermore, we never stop to learn, so along the whole life, our answers can change too...

I've never used a 35 or 50mm, I always use my canon 17-40 f4 or the Canon EF 70-300mm f/4-5.6 on my Canon 40D, or my FujiX10, but I still love street photo.

 

What matter the lense while your capture explains and shows something interesting?

 

I captured this two pictures with my canon 70-300mm and my Canon 40D:

 

http://1x.com/photo/91970/all:user:254788

http://1x.com/photo/143379/all:user:254788

 

Maybe some people don't consider a real street photo because the lense, I don't know, what I really know is that without this lense it couldn't be captured!

 

I'm not agree in to close a whole photography style in only a couple of lenses, this is my opinion today.

35mm

Since I'm a beginner I find it easier to use a zoom it easier to compose the photo.

 

I use a 70-200 lens on a full frame body.

 

MC

I was tempted many times to contribute to this topic and every time i hesitated until now. Gennaro, there are no rules on this subject just a matter of preferences. I use to love my 20 mm lens for street shooting in the 80s and later as a pro, my favorite for about 85% of my work was the 18-35 f/2.8 zoom with Canon film cameras. Today i use mostly the 18-55 in DX and often I miss the wider angle. If I had to chose between the 35 and 50 mm on FX this would be the 35 for sure. I hope this helps.

Gianni

I usually use the Leica Summicron-M 50mm or the Leica Summicron-M 35mm ASPH. both F/2 lenses.

 

Mostly 35mm on digital fullframe but for some reason I end up using 50mm on film more.

 

35mm or wider for me.

i like the summilux 35/1.4 Asph FLE mostly but... ( there is always a but ) i am enjoying the summicron 50/2.0 APO ... i have a Leica MM

 

Ricoh GR is out now. It's 28mm. I want this! Maybe it fits well for street shooting.

Hi Tatsuo, it sounds like a great small size camera and possibly ideal for your kind of work.

Phyllis Clarke informed me that you are now using a Nikon V1 and I would like to hear first hand what are your thoughts about it' s performance in low light.

Thanks in advance !

Gianni

group admin

For the V1 perhaps i can jump in. Pretty smart small camera with excellent low light behave. Quick and easy to deal with and excellent picture quality. 60 frames a second and till ISO 6400 almost perfect.

 

35mm.

 

It allows us to get closer, and it is wide enough to capture the whole environment, without too much distortion.

The Nikon 50 mm is a great lens, however, my standard "walking around" lens is the Nikon 24-70mm, it's sharp and fast. Only problem is that it is a larger lens and not inconspicuous.

I would say either very wide (20mm and 24mm) or long lenses (135mm and 200mm) are the best choice for me. The reason for this is that I'm a bit shy, and I don't like when subjects know you're photographing them anyways.

I've been shooting with a Fuji XPro1 and had good results. It's very inconspicuous. Only prime lenses at this point and I'm a little disappointed with the low light capabilites. Otherwise, its a great travel/street camera.

i'll go with the 35mm.

 

but i think if the intention is for street photography, i think the best is to find a silent small, light and non-intimidating camera like the DSLR.

 

I 2nd Tatsuo Suzuki's opinion. I am using Fuji X100s with 35mm focal length now and it works wonders. it is silent, discreet, fast and with superb low light capability for night shooting on the street. in other words its all-round camera and if you are a big guy like me, this little beast can fit to your cargo pants pocket and therefore you always have "her" everywhere............. and please don't get me started with the sharpness and image quality it produce :) LOL

 

Hope it helps.

I'm amazed how a dinosaur like question can evolve into something good. Everyone here as added a great opinion. Two years ago If I had read this question the obvious thought would be a lens that can operate a full frame camera. A weaker support system of fellows would agree simple behind the fact that they can afford that type of camera system. There are other factors which support a bigger camera with a 50mm or 35mm unit attached. As I've learned its a question of sociability status, or some form of Impressionistic deception to your ability to nail the true intent of a shot on to your camera sensor. Wither you are in stealth mode, or just sticking out like a sore thumb, the moment you press the shutter button something happens between you and the subject with your camera and lens of choice.

 

We tend to forget how comfortable we are at home in our city, state or country when thinking about street. You can relax , pick up calls on your iPhone, listen to music and text as you go. We can be a connected breed of shooters. To supplement this thought, one has only need to check into a Starbucks, or restaurant for some social chow. Time passes and you are ready to go it the road shooting or call it a day behind light shooting. As to appose traveling to a different country you find yourself on your feet for the entire day with uncertainties to find a good restaurant you can trust or a Starbuck like coffee place. A big camera and a heavy lens will turn your street shooting into a hell week. Once fatigue sets in to your limbs You can really begin to feel the muscle burn while lifting a big camera.

becomes slow and you find yourself late on the shot. If it gets real bad you just say "that's the one that got away".

 

I believe there are only two good cameras to shoot with that are small. The Nikon 1 V1 has been a camera of choice for he past two years.. It fits in the breast pocket of my shirt if I use the 10mm f2.8. Lens. Another small camera and lenses I work with is the Om EM5 and E-PL-5 from olympus. The low ability to expose and focus is unreal and exact should you use the touch screen. It's a no fear camera. However you need the 12mm f2 or the 17mm f1.8 attached. The glass is equal to the Nikon Nano glass found in their 24mm f 1.4 and 35mm f 1.4 lens at a fraction of the cost.

 

The Nikon 1 V1 ( N1 V1) has a different feel with its 10mm lens that is equivalent to a 28mm for a full frame camera. In normal light the N1 V1 has no weakness. In low light You really have to be patient and hit the moment before the subject allows his body to be one with his, or her moment into the law of kinetic energy. I only submitted one image of a girl lifting a bucket of water in india. It's a good example for twilight shooting or low light like conditions.

 

If any one asks why not the nikon 1 v2. The answer is simple. Nikon just missed the boat by building a bigger camera that requires you to work with the side grip on the camera which causes it to loose it's stealth factor for camera handling.

Robert mentions the 60 frames a second. Its a cool concept. the Ni V1 also offers 30 frames and 10 frames. The painful thing is that the camera locks into an auto mode which cranks your iso to 3200. Sorry Nikon can't punch it's way out of paper bag made in China with on glue on the seams at that high iso. Beside 1x is not a big fame on camera noise from an extreme high iso level. It's best to work the camera in manual at a lower iso and pray you nail the shot. However if you rely on the remark ability of the camera's electronic shooting mechanics you could be looking at a few hundred images of the same subject with very minute differences out side of the fact the image is out of focus. With that said we can all imagine going cross eyed looking for the one image to submit jam-packed with noise.

 

Yeah!! Really!!! Like waiting up a dinosaur from the past!! Hello my old friend and welcome back here!!

Re the "little Nikons" :: I went for the Fuji because it was the closest thing that I could get to a Leica-style rangefinder without paying Leica prices. I liked the on-camera controls that made it feel like an old rangefinder. I also liked the fact that when I depress the shutter, the camera takes a photograph -- good, bad, mediocre -- there's no lag. How does the Nikon compare? Seems like all exposure calcs are either controlled by the camera or by an electronic menu -- is that right? Has that been an issue? I think you can buy an adaptor for f-mount lenses for the Nikon. So if you're into the Nikon system, it may be a nice little thing to have in a bag. Please -- tell me -- inquiring minds want to know....

50 mm, almost always. That's the good balance for me in terms of composition and proximity. 35 mm usually "dilutes"…

i dont get along with the 35mm (on full frame) that well. im probably just not getting close enough, but i always find to much things in my pictures, its very hard to compose with the 35mm, at least for me. 50mm on full frame (or 35mm on apsc) are perfect for me, while 50mm on apsc are too long, i definitely prefer a full frame equivalent of 50mm!

I use a 20mm (40mm on a DSLR) prime lens on my Lumix GX1. It works for most shots, even portraits. It also has the advantage of being particularly small and insconspicuous (adding to the fact that the camera itself is also quite small). Perfect for moving around, handling quickly and not being noticed. :-)

 

Yes ! Sure !!

 

But the topic is different from your reply !

The question was simple, what did YOU prefer Daniel and why ?

 

Sorry Daniel I don't understand what are you saying.

I only opened this topic (but sure I'm not the boss !!) and for that I reply in that way, I guess not so offensive.

Then, what you means with "Do you actually want answers? What are you trying to do here?" ?? Can you explain in a better way ?

 

I doubt HCB would have been happy with his 50mm on a 1.5x or worse a 1.6x crop factor camera. He would lose the "foreground" that he enjoys in his compositions and my guess is that he would jump to a 35mm.

 

As for stealth I know he mentions it every now and again but I believe it probably entered his mind far less or much less than it enters the conversation in all these Street threads. Personally, I rarely if ever have a had a single stealth problem and never anything than being a little clever couldn't overcome. I will say that a 70-200mm gets a lot of attention and anyone trying to shoot raw, old school Street might not have a good time using one.

i am useing 35mm and 50mm . and its not a Fullframe and it seems to work.

but looking forward to haveing me a A99 some time. :)

I like to use 50mm, but I always bring a 70-300mm just in case.

I prefer 35mm (35L from Canon) on a FF camera. I do have a 50mm but normally leave it at home, where I use it just for portraits.

I decided 40mm 2.8 pancake. I am not sure I guess for a shy person 50mm is good other wise 35 is good. I pick the middle on cause not always I am much comfortable on street :)

I prefer the 50mm on my nikon d90 camera (1.5 crop factor), I have no distortion and I can be away in the portraits do not invade the space of people and I can take their pictures without any change his attitude.

The 50mm f:1,8 is sharp, cheap, light, simple, less distortion and fast enough. I think it can be good choise. (i am using AF Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D)

I'm using a 35mm and a 18mm to go more wide on Fujifilm X-E1 (1.5x crop factor). Mostly using the 35mm but i like also the ability of catching a wider view. Probably will get also a 60mm to use in those cases in which you can not (or don't want) to get so close.

Nikkor 50mm f/1.8D is very good choice, he is very small, good autfocus, minimal image distortion.

Shooting 50mm f1.4 with Pentax Super ME and I find it amazing.

 

I shoot also 50mm F/1.4 with my APSC Canon, and I would love to shoot with a fast 35mm on my APSC because I have a 18-135mm (which covers 35mm) but is just to bulky for street. So saying this, I prefer 50mm with my APSC because of the size, but I would difenetly love to shoot with a prime 35mm.

 

I'm glad you focused just on two lenses, I find that the closest you are to the scene, the greater the feeling you get while shooting.

 

Cheers.

 

 

 

Hello

I personally use most often a focal between 24 and 35 mm on my Canon 5D evec goal 24-70

I also have a Fuji x 100s with 23 mm optical

Regards

AF-S NIKKOR 50mm f/1.4G on FF.

 

Should there be rules

You can have a nice picture with 35 mm and 200 mm

Salut à Tous

I found my perfect street combination: 35/85.

 

Hi Clement !

I already chose my lens for street photography 6 months ago.

The discussion here is then just to know the preferences of the 1x community members.

 

Ciao

G.

 

Should there be rules

You can have a nice picture with 35 mm and 200 mm

Salut à Tous

 

No real rules BUT... if you are talking "Classic Street" there is a very particular look and also important, a feel... an ENERGY to images shot, in-close with a wider lens (35mm, 50mm, 17-35mm). It's a completely different practice, in approach, mentally, physically, the surge of adrenaline... and takes courage that bursts through the image which is generally not found within images shot using a 200mm or 300mm.

 

In Street... not to make a hard definition, one of the nice things that comes through, as well is the particular energy the Photographer captures when they are within the center of the scene as opposed to being outside or removed... looking in from a distance or a comfortable distance. There is a nice sense of truth, authenticity in those shots, though not every Street image possesses that... or needs to.

 

This question is asked so often and poorly posed... every time I hear it. People NEED to be a little more specific what they are after in terms of look, feel... crop sensor of the camera etc. etc. etc......

 

I have never used the 35mm so far. I just have the Canon eos 1000D camera with the 50mm f/1.8 Lens and I have to admit that I'm impressed with this one. Though, I would like to check out more lenses in the future.

I find I think differently depending on the lens I have and thus the way I shoot. I use a 50mm f1.4 lens on my 600d but because of the crop its not as wide as it should be. I find this limit gives you more distance on the street from a subject or scene.

 

I also shoot with an old Canonet QL17 GIII which has a 40mm fixed lens. When walking with this camera I consider the scene much more as it is wider. IMO its more of a story with the setting when using a wider focal length.

I used a Nikon 50mm f/1.4 D on a FX Camera and I was not very pleased with this focal lenght. It was always to far or to close for my taste. Now I don´t have a FX Camera anymore and use an existing Nikon 24 f/2.8 D on a DX camera, which works like a 35mm lens now and I like it very much! 35mm it´s a great focal lenght, fit´s in my eyes for almost all situations.

For me the 35mm is my favorite focal lenght for street photography.

Greetings Dietmar

Hi,

When I was very shy doing street with 105mm, now became reckless and use the 28mm!

http://1x.com/photo/446379/

This is not a great photo of mine but was taken with a 36mm equivalent prime, and I think it illustrates what Steve Hill said (see below). Wide angle tends to take the viewer into the situation.

 

 

No real rules BUT... if you are talking "Classic Street" there is a very particular look and also important, a feel... an ENERGY to images shot, in-close with a wider lens (35mm, 50mm, 17-35mm). It's a completely different practice, in approach, mentally, physically, the surge of adrenaline... and takes courage that bursts through the image which is generally not found within images shot using a 200mm or 300mm.

 

In Street... not to make a hard definition, one of the nice things that comes through, as well is the particular energy the Photographer captures when they are within the center of the scene as opposed to being outside or removed... looking in from a distance or a comfortable distance. There is a nice sense of truth, authenticity in those shots, though not every Street image possesses that... or needs to.

 

This question is asked so often and poorly posed... every time I hear it. People NEED to be a little more specific what they are after in terms of look, feel... crop sensor of the camera etc. etc. etc......

 

 

I would say 28mm sice you can zone focus and not have to move camera up to eyes.

One difficult question with no answer !!!

 

Agree with Fabs the ideal street lens, for people images, would be the 28. Distortion is minimal and has enough depth of filed for the mentioned zone focusing.

 

It becomes a point and shoot. All your images will be taken at a close range, nothing further than three feet with some closer.

 

For classical street not involving only people, would say a 50mm since its the angle our eyes can see.

 

Always do better when going out with one lens only, makes me work harder and think. btw most of the last street we have done, all has been with a 17mm with off camera flash for slight fill set manually.

 

al

For long long time i have used 28 to my old minolta camera - results, easy way of work is kind of things that makes me really happy about this lenght. Following Alfred - incredible easy to shoot from hip and you will exactly know where is your target, you have looooong zone focus, so nothing to care about. Before my 28mm period I have been using 50mm - its good to have it for some situations, but for me its too narrow. Now im using 35 mm (everything for full frame lenght!), and its really versatile, but to be honest, i would prefere to have 28 as prime and for some situations 50 but for rare usage. For me most important was to have zone focus scale on lens ring ( so thats why good for this was minolta lens, you can takie it from Leica, and some old Nikons but E series - which is very good and cheap except this loss of dof scale).

Since this thread has been resurrected heres my contribution.

 

Shorter focal lengths help with zone focusing. You get more of the background as part of the overall capture. Makes you more courageous with strangers.

 

Longer focal lengths makes you more discrete. Removes the main element from the background. Heard of up to 300mm being used.

 

I'm comfortable with the 35mm. Sometimes I wish I have a wider lens and other times I need a longer focal length. I have learned to love the restrictions of a single focal length and I doubt any single focal length is the best but my guess is anything between 21mm and 50mm.

Hi All,

Fuji x100 s 23mm (35mm equivalent)

Canon 5dMK2 using Canon 50mm f1.4 or Canon 24-105mm f4

Cheers

Phil

What ever focal lenght you are using, 28/35/50 and so on does not really matter. Its the fotographer and how he feels with it. At the end the image counts!

28mm 1.8 works great on street ;)

 

Why just those two FLs?I like 24mm. But usually use 24-70 zoom for flexibility. Sometimes I like SWA 15-27 zoom. The focal lengh is not really important, but how your eye interacts with it.

... what a silly question, it always depends ....