Jump to content

35mm vs 50mm FX


pittosporum_tobira

Recommended Posts

<blockquote>

<p>You also don't have to get quite as close in order to fill the frame. Eric, if you'd been using a 50 you might have taken a step back, and then your dancer wouldn't have a spider hanging from her right elbow!</p>

</blockquote>

<p>lol, that's not a spider, that's her hair! i dont know if you've ever shot flamenco, but the hair is often subject to as fast/unpredictable motion as the arms, head, and legs. you really do need to not crowd the frame as the movements can be sudden. also, stepping back would have been impossible as this was a seated show and i was at the front. light was low enough that i needed sub-2.8 just to get a decent shutter speed, so i didnt use the slower 24-70 zoom. so the 35/1.4 proved the perfect lens for this task. FWIW, i've shot a lot of live performance with a 50 too, and it's great when it works out, but there have been many times the hand or foot was outside the frame in an otherwise great shot. if you dont shoot things that move fast often, this may not matter as much, but for me it does. BTW the dancer liked the pic so much she used it for a flyer for a workshop she was teaching.</p>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

<p>I will echo the folks saying it depends on his vision and what he shoots. I can shoot all day with a 35, 85 and 135. I use a 50 when I am in tight quarters for the 85. Both have killer bokeh. Rent a 28-70 and shoot the way you like then check the metadata. I like the 35 for environmental portraits. Like someone said above, the 50 is ok but the 85, so useful and the 135 my headshot and personal favorite. </p>
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...