The thing about 35mm is that it is really close to the normal area of human sight with two eyes. That’s the reason 35mm feels so comfortable, relatable and aesthetic. 50mm is like one eye closed and more focused and intimate, but still very versatile. It depends on how you see the world. None of these lenses are better than the other. 85mm is something I really like, it’s very concentrated and on the edge of everyday usability. 24 on the other hand is also a very strong if not the strongest Storytelling lens.
45mm in human field of view so 50 is much closer to how humans see. 35mm is a good bit wider very good for cinematic video allowing u to have wide enough frame to record everything.
@@slurp3194 when I tested this I covered one eye with my hand and compared it to the viewfinder of my camera when 50mm was mounted. Same with 35mm only with both eyes. From what I can find of the Internet 43cm should be the one. But it’s probably one eyed. If you take the blurry parts of your vision, you might even get down to a 15mm like field of view. But honestly, who cares😅
@@christianvolkner2028 the thing is most of our human field of view is out of focus. Like we see it from the corner of our eyes thats not really part of our field of view. It gives the illusion of a larger field of view just look straight and u will see how narrow it is
We can see about 180 degrees around us, so our fov is much, much wider than 35mm. Focal length changes both the fov AND the perspective or visual signature of a lens. Our vision’s perspective is closer to 43mm than anything else. I find a using a zoom at 43mm or even a 40mm prime to have a really amazing look. It looks, real, honest and humble even. Compare 35mm to 40 images on something like flikr to get a sense of this!
Recently I needed to choose only one lens to walk the Camino de Santiago in Spain. Weight restriction is important when walking 15-20 miles a day over mountains, and you don't have sensor cleaning equipment. Dust or rain on the sensor is not acceptable. So it was 23 mm ( 35 equivalent ) on a APS-C Fuji all the way. One observation: When you carry only a 35 mm lens, you start to approach the scene with 35mm options popping up in your brain. It changes how you see the scene, which I found to be a revealing experience..
I’ve bought the 50mm 1.2 GM as my first prime and i think Joris is right. I find myself needing a wider lens a lot. BUT, i only think this view holds up if you’re just going to use one lens all the way. I’m now saving up for a 24mm to go alongside the 50 and will eventually round the primes out with a 135mm. That way i can swap them out to whatever the shot needs just like i did with my two zooms. I don’t think i’d ever ditch the 50mm because the look of it is just *chef’s kiss*
24 mm is really landscape and interior lens. To shoot it in cites and on streets you need to be a master. The wide angle is the hardest to master. I would rather go for 28 mm, it is much more suitable for street photos than 24 mm. But if you want to shoot street style, with 28 mm you really need to be close to people you are shooting, which can create a problem.
For me, the holy trinity for all day walk around are the 24mm, 40mm and 85mm, in FF terms (or a zoom that covers this range). In APS-C that's 16mm, 27mm and 56mm. But for only one lens for me it's the 40mm FF equal. But what anyone will chose for their 'one lens' will be determined on how they 'see' the subject.
You had me with the thumbnail 🤣🤣🤣 I personally love the 35mm - although I am currently in the middle of a 365 day photo challenge...and I can only use a kit lens!! I am also using a Canon M50 (Mark II...which means absolutely noting 🤣) so one of your earlier videos on getting good shots with a kit lens has been awesome #thankyou Great video as always, Joris - cheers man 🙏🏻🤟
Had to learn this lesson the hard and expensive way on a friend’s wedding day. Fortunately it was his third ceremony (don’t ask) and I didn’t give up my day job. Thank you for making my learning clear, Joris!
When I started to shoot in the mid-80s all I had was a Takumar 35mmf3.5 and I used it exclusively for about a decade before buying any other lenses. Still think it's the best all-round focal length for street and most things. But a nifty fifty is also a great all rounder, as is a 28mm.
When you are talking about this 35 vs 50, are you taking about the full frame equivalent or APSC? Because your sample photos for your 35mm preference looks like a 50mm in full frame.
You can always crop in from a 35mm to get a 50mm look, but not the other way around. Even with a 24mp sensor, there is more than enough to work with in post.
As someone who did documentary too, i agree. I could shoot an entire video with 35mm FF equivalent (except maybe for shooting wild animals which i never got any job within). And like you said, moving forward isnt a problem, but moving backward is hell of a problem. We cant spend too much time arrange the ambients or room around us, or maybe we just cant do it. 35mm is a perfect spot for wide enough and we can get closer to get close up enough.
I currently use the Sony 14mm 1.8 GM. Finding it really good for video so far. Slight distortion on edges if close to objects or doing vertical. But I found once you enable a7iv 4k60 crop, active stabilization etc. You can push it to around roughly 24mm-ish and still get more pixels than you'd typically need to edit with for 1080p/social media. Also have the Sony 90mm Macro 2.8 lens for portrait stuff. Looking for a good in-between prime. Tour video has me leaning for the 35mm as it seems more versatile (can push it close to the 50mm in crop mode too). That 50mm 1.2 seems dreamy for night photography though. Hard choices lol
This was very helpful, and addressed some of my uneducated suspicions. I feel more free filming on my phone indoors, compared to something better with a larger lens. I will upgrade when it makes sense for my goals. Thank you for helping me not waste money.
I acknowledge that this is a subjective personal thing, but I've had two 'nifty fifties' in the past 40+ years - I still have one - and I must have used them half a dozen times, at most, during those four decades. I've just never got the 50mm focal length, and every time I dig it out of the mothballs and try it again, I'm just completely at a loss as to why it's so beloved. 35mm is by far my favourite focal length for general use, and yes, you're right, it's just MUCH more versatile.
Take a 35mm gmaster ( my favorite) put any a7r series camera in crop mode and voila you get a 50mm perspective. Ots muych easier to do it in camera and using your feet than guessing what it will look like in post cropped
50mm fans are generally just photographers and not filmmakers, lol. 35 mm is the most telephoto you can do while still showing the environment. Also, I shoot 50mm on medium format, so it fixes the distortion problem quite nicely with the same field of view!
Nothing wrong you said. 35mm is definitely more versatile than 50mm. Bcos of shorter focal length, more field of view and... Not so much distortion as 24mm. It depends upon usage after all.
Some people “see” the works at 35, others at 50. Personally, I’m a 35 guy but I totally get that it’s not for everyone. I don’t use my 35GM often enough.
Good info , I’m considering getting a prime I can use for my videos . For the Sony autofocus issue you had ; have you tried “ face registration “ in the settings ?
yeah.. I seriously watch every video of you till the end... till after you decompressed.... lol... Sony is so smart that even faces with sunglasses can be detected whilst my M50 couldn't even detect faces with reading glasses... Is there any suggestion for the setting in M50 for better face detection? I already bought the 30mm Sigma prime f1.4.... Updated the firmware...
I have a 35, 50 and 85 in my kit. I just can't seem to find something the 50 can do that the 35 can't. And the 85 rocks portraits compared to the 50. I WANT to like the 50 more but I just can't find any reason to.
Hey, Joris. I know we've only interacted due to your frame rate videos and that this video has nothing to do with that, but I was thinking the other day... Why do you choose 24 over 25 especially when being in a PAL country, anyway? If you went with 25, not only would ALL shutter speeds work for you without flickering, but you also wouldn't have any encoding weirdness when uploading 23.976 to TH-cam. (which I've heard re-encodes to true 24) Not only that but in my experience, YES, even that ONE extra frame makes a tiny difference in subconscious smoothness without affecting the filmic look, in this case AT ALL as compared to 30p's noticeable (beneficial to me with no downgrades) smoothness gain. Also, 25 is technically more versatile for post-production than 24 and especially 23.976. If you ever NEED it to be 24 decimal, you can re-encode it from 24 (dropped frame from 25) and send it off. If it needs to be 25, it's already there and won't suffer any audio bugs by being played at 25 when it was intended to be 24. Quick note, if your camera by some miracle shoots true 24, then you can ignore the encoding part of my question, but everything else still stands. Aside from that, I really like your reasoning for 35mm lenses. Sometimes, especially when traveling, simplicity is king. I mean, society made a whole acronym around simplicity; KISS, so there's probably some photographer or videographer out there who needed to hear this.
Hello sir, I have sony zve10 with kit lense I shoot youtube videos like you are making,talking head vids,and some time reels and outdoor My room size is 12×12 feet Which lense should i buy?plz reply? 35mm f1.8 or 50mm f1.8 or 15mm f1.8? I can buy one lense only Which lense should i buy
Could you make a video where you show how to take a product video sequence or a short b roll with almost no gear? I want to do unboxings/reviews and put brolls in the start to show off the product but i have no clue how to do it:( all i have is a iphone 13 pro or a budget of 600€ to buy a camera
I also agree with Joris. I bought a relatively inexpensive nifty fifty for a Canon dlsr many years ago and very quickly realised that it was only usable in very limited scenarios. It spent most of the time in the bag and rarely saw the light of day. I now have a Sony A7 iii and am looking to add a prime lens to my collection and will almost certainly opt for the 35mm option. The image is high resolution and cropping an option if required with no loss of detail.
If someone say 50 mm is more versatile then 35...then he don't know what versatility is .....in a tight crowded place good luck to shoot with 50mm in apsc body 😂😂😂😂😂
I wish I had discovered this channel before just to see that go ffffff yourself disappear from the short lol Sometimes you just have to look closely at someone's work (like your photos in this video) to know for sure "this guy knows what's he's talking about, just what he did with a 35". Same for me, I really like the 28-35 (more 35) range. It's very versatile.
The 50mm is kind of a boring focal length for me. The 35 and the 85 combo has always been the best for portraits and street photography from my experience. If I were to just have one lens, it’s definitely the 35mm.
@@thomasackermann6097I couldn’t agree more. If I’m walking around with a camera, it’s almost always with just the lens attached, and 99% it’s a 50mm. Period. But that’s just my preference!🙏🏼
I had a 35mm and 85mm combo which was nice at first but I got tired of changing the lenses. The 50mm is the perfect sweetpot and has been glued to my camera since I got it. More versatile and useful than people give credit for
Finally! I thought I was alone in thinking the 35mm is better and more versatile than the 50mm. And I agree, the 35mm is not really a wide-angle but it’s still wide enough. I was so disappointed with myself the other night when I went to a friend’s going-away and I only brought my 50mm to document the occasion. Well, it was terribly tight inside the space and getting shots was difficult. I’ve got a new 35mm on my Christmas list - but I might have to get it a little bit early. 😆
I constantly run into this issue, and it is one of the main reasons why I can never commit to using only a prime lens. I always use a zoom lens, unless in a very specific use case; usually tripod type stuff.
I like 35mm for video, 50mm works pretty good for very general photography. But yea you need space. If you’re just walking around or traveling, 28 or 35mm is going to get most if not everything you want.
Make sense dude! I like both 35 and 50. 16/18 for landscape/architecture/group(of people, esp in wedding), 23 for documentary/street, 35 for portrait/details, and 85 for close-up(half-body) portrait. Hard to say one beat or replace the other. It's like rifle can never replace pistol. These are classic focal lengths for different purposes. Yes, 35mm is unbeatable on versatility but it can never replace 50mm. If you can only carry 2 prime lens + 1 camera, it never go wrong with any two mentioned above.
Man I have canon M6 and bought a 22mm F2 based on your suggestions with M50. I am still a beginner but that lens gave me every reason to use it whenever I want. From beautiful portraits to banger wide lens images and videos. That's how I became a fan of your suggestions.
as a photographer with an a7r3, I can get away with just having a 35mm and just cropping in to sorta have a 50mm. I still love 50mm though for portrait or more focused on a single subject
I agree with most arguments - a 35mm/1.8 is very versatile for environmental portraits, because you can go relatively close to a person, and displaying also their close close surroundings. On the other hand: Remembger Henri Cartier-Bresson who became a world famous photographer with his images from the street mostly taken with the Leica 50mm F2.0 Summicron ...
I don't think, I like distortion in a person's face - so I don't use the 35mm for portraits of ppl period. Cityscapes, landscapes, street photography it is good for that, but I still prefer the 50mm; even though, I own both. Also, to come-back and fix it in Photoshop seems to me like you're creating an extra step for yourself that you could just avoid by switching to a 50mm when your doing portraits / close-up of people. Again, it's not flattering to distort a person's face, in my opinion. I agree no lens is perfect, and no lens is a 'One Size Fits All' situations.
At some point in my journey I started preferring the 35mm as well. Your video is the most comprehensive material I've seen on this topic. It makes a lot of sense too the part about indoor vs outdoor, and having a lens that works in bright light and low light. Thanks!
You just answered all the questions I had. I have a 50mm which I love. But I struggle indoors.. Could not decide 35mm or 25mm.. And you just gave me the answer
I gotta agree. I've been using a 50mm equivalent for a year now since I've been doing photography on my Canon M50. I upgraded to the Sony A7IV and got a sony branded nifty fifty. 🤣I enjoy the standard look of the 50mm for many types of photography portraits included. Once I've switched to a vintage zoom lens that had 35mm as its lowest focal length. The look of the 35mm looked so different in a way I enjoyed. Its like wide but not that wide and it feels like a balance. Once I'm able to get my hands on a true 35mm prime I'll be using it way more than my 50mm
Joris, I agree with you, choose the focal length that works best with your style of shooting, the environments you're shooting in, and your subject matter of choice. Like you, I do a lot of documentary, photojournalism, and street photography. I shoot Leica and Fujifilm in those instances and I've found that 40mm and 42mm respectively work best for me with those camera systems. I shoot with the Voightlander NOKTON Classic 40mm f1.4 on my Leica M240 and the Voightlander Ultron 28mm f2 on my Fujifilm X-Pro3. Most photographers don't talk about the 40mm focal length except when discussing vintage lenses. I think that's largely due to there not being too many lens manufacturers making 40mm lenses. Voightlander is the only company I know still making new 40mm lenses. If you haven't tried that focal length you should let us know what you think about it compared to 35mm.
Tbh,a 35mm,85mm & 135 mm is the right way to go as it makes you extremely versatile. The 50 mm difference between all these focal lengths give you a perfect spot to change the nature of the photo completely. Difference between a 35 mm to a 50 mm is too small in terms of a drastic change,atleast that's what I feel:) I like to keep the 50 mm gap between the focal lengths to change up the variety of my shots. For me too,I deem the 50 mm as something useful but not extremely necessary for most situations:)
As much as I love the 50, I have to agree with you, Joris. There’s something very special about the 35mm focal length. Love your style, too. New sub here from Australia. 👍🦘
What beginning photographers don’t realize is that near-far perspective is function of relative DISTANCE to near and far object not focal length. For example if photographing a subject who has one eye that is noticeably larger than than the other in full face view I will instead pose the face obliquely to the camera with the larger eye further way then move in and out from the face until the near-far perspective changed via distance makes the two eyes look the same size in the photo. It is a technique I learned back in 1972 apprenticing with Monte Zucker who was a Zen Master at analyzing faces like that finding the most flattering facial angle - full / oblique left or right / profile left or right. What focal length does after finding the ideal near-far perspective via shooting distance is control the in-camera crop. Cinematographers are much more aware of this because they much crop in camera. Because I understand the actual cause and effect my favorite portrait lens is a 24-70mm zoom. For most faces the most flattering near far perspective is from around 8-9 feet from the tip of the nose. A 24-70mm allows capturing in-camera crops from full-length to head and shoulders from that same distance so the size relationship between nose and ears and size of cranium behind the eyes stays the same in all crops. If needing a tighter crop I switch to my 70-200mm if the goal making the face look as slim and symmetrical as possible. When the goal isn’t to make a face look as slim and symmetrical as a super model when it is actually lopsided the none of that applies. But if learning to shoot portraits of ordinary people with less than perfectly symmetrical faces what I suggest above, which I learned from my mentor many years ago is a good starting BASELINE for understanding how to use near-far perspective to flatter a face, or not depending on on the intended body language you want the subject to project in the photo.
Good discussion and I agree. 35mm is my alternative to a standard zoom when I want keep size down for personal shoots. For events I'll use a standard zoom along with a flash for versatility.
I have a Sony ZV-E10 camera with Sony 11mm f.8 lens for landscape videography I need a lens with blurry effect for real estate hosting video please suggest which budget lens should I buy like Viltrox 35mm or 50mm, Sigma 30mm or tamron 17-70mm zoom lens ?
35mm is the most versatile for indoors and better for video movement, 50mm is more versatile for outdoors :) if I could use only 1 focal length, probably ~43mm would be my choice :)
A wide angle lens is any lens in which the focal length is less than the longest side of the negative (or sensor). As 35mm negatives are 36mm by 24mm, a 35mm just scrapes into the category of wide angle. A modern FF sensor is the same size as a 35mm film negs. An ultra-wide is categorised by the focal length being less than the short side of the negative. So 24mm and under. When you have smaller sensors, the same rules apply to the physical dimensions of the sensor - on Canon APS-C for example (22.3×14.9), it means FF lenses in focal length of 22mm and under are wide, and those 15mm and under are ultra-wide.
You explained the 35mm perfectly and really helped me with my lens choices when doing video. I used two cameras on one gimbal: one cam has a 50mm 1.8 and the other has a 35mm 1.8. The 35 gets everything but the 50 does not. And using an 35 with an 85 is a better choice but again, no need for the 85 unless you want really close and personal shots which the 85 is perfect for. So that said, you r so correct, a 35mm 1.8 is all you really need. It took me a while to figure this out and now watching you my choice will be the 35mm only. It is so nice to see others, such as your self, choose the 35mm over all the other lenses. Through trial and error, i did the same. Its 35mm for life for me. Great job and thank you for all your work...
New generation came to photography from smartphones, which only have 24-26 mm focal length, and jump to wide angle because they never experienced anything different. There are literally thousands videos on youtube "why 35 mm is better than 50 mm". It is not.
Because of your videos I'm thinking of buying the Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 Macro IS STM Lens for my Canon EOS RP. My question is the lens has a f/1.8 which will give me a nice shallow depth of field... but what about the maximum depth of field? I take pictures and videos of outdoor products (product reviews) and many times in the video I want to show the beautiful surroundings so I don't want the shallow depth, I want to take in everything behind me or the product. Why don't they list what the maximum depth of field is for that current lens? Thank you for all your videos, they've helped me out a great deal.
I use the Nikon 40mm f2 in that range. Super light, sharp and dirt cheap. My favorite prime lens is the 85mm f1.8. My favorite all time is the 70-200mm f2.8.
1:55 I think there's a kind of odd thinking around distortion that's reinforced by the way it's talked about in this video: that distortion is somehow a "bad thing" when it comes to portraiture. For fashion, and commercial work, where the objective is to get the most flattering proportions and look possible, I can understand why distortion is something to be avoided. However, the subtext of a 35mm kind of distortion (even up close) vs 50mm, is that you are more intimately in the space of that subject. I, myself, absolutely love and prefer a 50mm, but I often notice a slight sense of "distance", coldness and objectification of the subject - like there is an invisible wall between the viewer and the subject. THAT'S the benefit of wider angle distortion when it comes to portraiture - it subconsciously signals to the viewer a sense of closeness, intimacy and presence that is lost with longer focal lengths.
What's your favorite lens? (There are NO wrong answers! 🙃)
I’m a novice shooter and do mostly video, so I really love the Sigma 16mm 1.4.
The Nifty Fifty seems to work for me in most situations so I guess it's my favourite lens FOR NOW.
My answer is Chris Nichols
Who's that? 🤔
35mm
70-200
200-600
The thing about 35mm is that it is really close to the normal area of human sight with two eyes. That’s the reason 35mm feels so comfortable, relatable and aesthetic.
50mm is like one eye closed and more focused and intimate, but still very versatile. It depends on how you see the world. None of these lenses are better than the other.
85mm is something I really like, it’s very concentrated and on the edge of everyday usability. 24 on the other hand is also a very strong if not the strongest Storytelling lens.
45mm in human field of view so 50 is much closer to how humans see. 35mm is a good bit wider very good for cinematic video allowing u to have wide enough frame to record everything.
@@slurp3194 when I tested this I covered one eye with my hand and compared it to the viewfinder of my camera when 50mm was mounted. Same with 35mm only with both eyes.
From what I can find of the Internet 43cm should be the one. But it’s probably one eyed.
If you take the blurry parts of your vision, you might even get down to a 15mm like field of view.
But honestly, who cares😅
@@christianvolkner2028 the thing is most of our human field of view is out of focus. Like we see it from the corner of our eyes thats not really part of our field of view. It gives the illusion of a larger field of view just look straight and u will see how narrow it is
@@slurp3194 So THAT is why I like 30mm on my APS-C so much, TIL! (30mm x 1.5 = 45mm)
We can see about 180 degrees around us, so our fov is much, much wider than 35mm. Focal length changes both the fov AND the perspective or visual signature of a lens. Our vision’s perspective is closer to 43mm than anything else. I find a using a zoom at 43mm or even a 40mm prime to have a really amazing look. It looks, real, honest and humble even. Compare 35mm to 40 images on something like flikr to get a sense of this!
Recently I needed to choose only one lens to walk the Camino de Santiago in Spain. Weight restriction is important when walking 15-20 miles a day over mountains, and you don't have sensor cleaning equipment. Dust or rain on the sensor is not acceptable. So it was 23 mm ( 35 equivalent ) on a APS-C Fuji all the way. One observation: When you carry only a 35 mm lens, you start to approach the scene with 35mm options popping up in your brain. It changes how you see the scene, which I found to be a revealing experience..
I’ve bought the 50mm 1.2 GM as my first prime and i think Joris is right. I find myself needing a wider lens a lot. BUT, i only think this view holds up if you’re just going to use one lens all the way. I’m now saving up for a 24mm to go alongside the 50 and will eventually round the primes out with a 135mm. That way i can swap them out to whatever the shot needs just like i did with my two zooms. I don’t think i’d ever ditch the 50mm because the look of it is just *chef’s kiss*
24 mm is really landscape and interior lens. To shoot it in cites and on streets you need to be a master. The wide angle is the hardest to master.
I would rather go for 28 mm, it is much more suitable for street photos than 24 mm. But if you want to shoot street style, with 28 mm you really need to be close to people you are shooting, which can create a problem.
@@dimakor5914 28mm works great in some busy city, but it is a pity there are not many great modern 28mm lenses available.
For me, the holy trinity for all day walk around are the 24mm, 40mm and 85mm, in FF terms (or a zoom that covers this range). In APS-C that's 16mm, 27mm and 56mm. But for only one lens for me it's the 40mm FF equal. But what anyone will chose for their 'one lens' will be determined on how they 'see' the subject.
You had me with the thumbnail 🤣🤣🤣
I personally love the 35mm - although I am currently in the middle of a 365 day photo challenge...and I can only use a kit lens!!
I am also using a Canon M50 (Mark II...which means absolutely noting 🤣) so one of your earlier videos on getting good shots with a kit lens has been awesome #thankyou
Great video as always, Joris - cheers man 🙏🏻🤟
Had to learn this lesson the hard and expensive way on a friend’s wedding day. Fortunately it was his third ceremony (don’t ask) and I didn’t give up my day job. Thank you for making my learning clear, Joris!
This makes a lot of sense to me, my Brother!! Awesome talk, and my favorite lens at the moment is the Helios 44-3 58mm. 😎 Many Thanks, Joris
Nice point about zooming with the feet inside a room. Sometimes you just have space to walk in
When I started to shoot in the mid-80s all I had was a Takumar 35mmf3.5 and I used it exclusively for about a decade before buying any other lenses. Still think it's the best all-round focal length for street and most things. But a nifty fifty is also a great all rounder, as is a 28mm.
55 1.8 Zeiss one of the best lens! If not the best! 3d Zeiss pop
I love you 3D poppers xD
When you are talking about this 35 vs 50, are you taking about the full frame equivalent or APSC? Because your sample photos for your 35mm preference looks like a 50mm in full frame.
You can always crop in from a 35mm to get a 50mm look, but not the other way around. Even with a 24mp sensor, there is more than enough to work with in post.
As someone who did documentary too, i agree. I could shoot an entire video with 35mm FF equivalent (except maybe for shooting wild animals which i never got any job within).
And like you said, moving forward isnt a problem, but moving backward is hell of a problem. We cant spend too much time arrange the ambients or room around us, or maybe we just cant do it.
35mm is a perfect spot for wide enough and we can get closer to get close up enough.
I currently use the Sony 14mm 1.8 GM. Finding it really good for video so far. Slight distortion on edges if close to objects or doing vertical. But I found once you enable a7iv 4k60 crop, active stabilization etc. You can push it to around roughly 24mm-ish and still get more pixels than you'd typically need to edit with for 1080p/social media. Also have the Sony 90mm Macro 2.8 lens for portrait stuff. Looking for a good in-between prime. Tour video has me leaning for the 35mm as it seems more versatile (can push it close to the 50mm in crop mode too). That 50mm 1.2 seems dreamy for night photography though. Hard choices lol
This was very helpful, and addressed some of my uneducated suspicions. I feel more free filming on my phone indoors, compared to something better with a larger lens. I will upgrade when it makes sense for my goals. Thank you for helping me not waste money.
Got a new camera lately - fast 50 and 35 equivalent primes were the first 2 lenses in the bag. Can easily bring both with compact APS-C.
I acknowledge that this is a subjective personal thing, but I've had two 'nifty fifties' in the past 40+ years - I still have one - and I must have used them half a dozen times, at most, during those four decades. I've just never got the 50mm focal length, and every time I dig it out of the mothballs and try it again, I'm just completely at a loss as to why it's so beloved. 35mm is by far my favourite focal length for general use, and yes, you're right, it's just MUCH more versatile.
Take a 35mm gmaster ( my favorite) put any a7r series camera in crop mode and voila you get a 50mm perspective. Ots muych easier to do it in camera and using your feet than guessing what it will look like in post cropped
Absolutley correct !!! agree with you 100%. I use a Fuji X100T with a fixed 35 mm f 2.0 lens on it. Love it.!!! Thanks for the video.
50mm fans are generally just photographers and not filmmakers, lol. 35 mm is the most telephoto you can do while still showing the environment. Also, I shoot 50mm on medium format, so it fixes the distortion problem quite nicely with the same field of view!
Nothing wrong you said.
35mm is definitely more versatile than 50mm. Bcos of shorter focal length, more field of view and... Not so much distortion as 24mm.
It depends upon usage after all.
Some people “see” the works at 35, others at 50. Personally, I’m a 35 guy but I totally get that it’s not for everyone. I don’t use my 35GM often enough.
Since 1985, my standard lens is the 35mm; recently I use also a 40mm, but never felt comfortable with the 50mm.
Good info , I’m considering getting a prime I can use for my videos . For the Sony autofocus issue you had ; have you tried “ face registration “ in the settings ?
you are right no wrong answers. informative lens based 7.5mins.
May I ask what lens is being used for the talking head perspective in this video?
Sony 35mm f/1.8
yeah.. I seriously watch every video of you till the end... till after you decompressed.... lol...
Sony is so smart that even faces with sunglasses can be detected whilst my M50 couldn't even detect faces with reading glasses...
Is there any suggestion for the setting in M50 for better face detection? I already bought the 30mm Sigma prime f1.4....
Updated the firmware...
Don't shoot 4k. Other than that the face detection is what it is I'm afraid 🤷🏻♂️
What are you using to shoot this video???
Sony 35mm f/1.8 🔥
Well concluded! If I were to keep only one (prime) lens, it’s gonna be a 35mm. And an all-rounder 24-70mm.
I have a 35, 50 and 85 in my kit.
I just can't seem to find something the 50 can do that the 35 can't.
And the 85 rocks portraits compared to the 50.
I WANT to like the 50 more but I just can't find any reason to.
We think the same then 🫡😎
“You’re blocked btw”😂😂😂
Great video, good info in a lighthearted way, love it.
Henry Cartier-Bresson and Robert Capa did ok with a nifty 50 ;)
Doesn't lens correction fix the distortion anyway?
Hey, Joris. I know we've only interacted due to your frame rate videos and that this video has nothing to do with that, but I was thinking the other day... Why do you choose 24 over 25 especially when being in a PAL country, anyway? If you went with 25, not only would ALL shutter speeds work for you without flickering, but you also wouldn't have any encoding weirdness when uploading 23.976 to TH-cam. (which I've heard re-encodes to true 24)
Not only that but in my experience, YES, even that ONE extra frame makes a tiny difference in subconscious smoothness without affecting the filmic look, in this case AT ALL as compared to 30p's noticeable (beneficial to me with no downgrades) smoothness gain. Also, 25 is technically more versatile for post-production than 24 and especially 23.976. If you ever NEED it to be 24 decimal, you can re-encode it from 24 (dropped frame from 25) and send it off. If it needs to be 25, it's already there and won't suffer any audio bugs by being played at 25 when it was intended to be 24.
Quick note, if your camera by some miracle shoots true 24, then you can ignore the encoding part of my question, but everything else still stands. Aside from that, I really like your reasoning for 35mm lenses. Sometimes, especially when traveling, simplicity is king. I mean, society made a whole acronym around simplicity; KISS, so there's probably some photographer or videographer out there who needed to hear this.
Leica Summilux-M 50mm f1.4 - makes incredible pictures...35mm will never create the same
Hello sir,
I have sony zve10 with kit lense
I shoot youtube videos like you are making,talking head vids,and some time reels and outdoor
My room size is 12×12 feet
Which lense should i buy?plz reply?
35mm f1.8 or 50mm f1.8 or 15mm f1.8?
I can buy one lense only
Which lense should i buy
Could you make a video where you show how to take a product video sequence or a short b roll with almost no gear? I want to do unboxings/reviews and put brolls in the start to show off the product but i have no clue how to do it:( all i have is a iphone 13 pro or a budget of 600€ to buy a camera
I loved this natural video!
I think the same way when indoor 50 mm it’s not that suitable That is when 35mm is better when you don’t have room enough
When i used 50 mm in 2016 i loved it but in 2021 bought 35mm 1.4 now its attached 80 % time on my camera body
28mm summilux f1.4 for conventions mostly
90 macro elmar f/4 for mostly portraits
at least a unbias review, Ken Rockwell says the same as u. 35 is his fav, me 2 , that was 1st lens. nice video man, just to the point!
It's not science 🤷🏻♂️ use the tool that works best for you! 💯 I can only share my experiences. 🫡
What if im using an original black magic pocket cinema camera that has super 16 crop factor of 2.8 that makes my 35mm a 70mm?😢
Just curious what lens are you using for this video?
Sony 35mm f/1.8
You have to switch to Pentax. They have a 43mm best of two worlds 😉
I also agree with Joris. I bought a relatively inexpensive nifty fifty for a Canon dlsr many years ago and very quickly realised that it was only usable in very limited scenarios.
It spent most of the time in the bag and rarely saw the light of day.
I now have a Sony A7 iii and am looking to add a prime lens to my collection and will almost certainly opt for the 35mm option.
The image is high resolution and cropping an option if required with no loss of detail.
shout out to joris for wearing a sonic youth Tee!
🤘🏻🎸🍻
I heard lots about inside and video. I do more outdoor and 50m is great untill i get enough money for a 24-70 or 24-105 lol
I like that recommendation: "When your back's against the wall, go for a 35mm!"
While i agree with your opinion... also i wann ask: Have you ever tried 28mm?
I have the 50 and 35, I use my 35 almost 95% for wedding and portrait some timeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeessssssssss
Where are your photos as a photographer? I mean your portfolio, where to find it?
On my website of course 😉 www.jorishermans.com
@@JorisHermans Thx, are they taken with smartphones?
@@elwirastadnik No.
I was a 50mm fanboi until I got a Sony rx1r. I have finally seen the light 😂
“I’m getting pretty close” 😂
🤫😎
35mm is good but I love 24mm the best
You are me, in different universe
If someone say 50 mm is more versatile then 35...then he don't know what versatility is .....in a tight crowded place good luck to shoot with 50mm in apsc body 😂😂😂😂😂
This was great
🙏🏻🔥
Best Answer to this - just buy the Tamron 35-150mm F2 to 2.8 is Bright enough for 99% of people
In my opinion; you are right!
Yey! 🙏🏻😁
I wish I had discovered this channel before just to see that go ffffff yourself disappear from the short lol
Sometimes you just have to look closely at someone's work (like your photos in this video) to know for sure "this guy knows what's he's talking about, just what he did with a 35".
Same for me, I really like the 28-35 (more 35) range. It's very versatile.
35mm in APS-C = 50mm full frame.
alright you could have said just "i like 35mm here are the reasons"
yup 50mm just too thight in small space
50 / 35 are my votes.
Everybody's a "photographer".
This might trigger some 🙈🙈
I hope so 😅
@@JorisHermans 😂🙈
35mm beats 50mm because you often shoot indoors... Genius logic
Well, I am am genius so... 🤷🏻♂️
Sony = 🤦♂️👎🏼
I have never used a 35 but I love the 50mm..I will check out a 35mm
And you tell me this one day after spending my life's savings on a 50mm lens. Bugger.
The 50mm is kind of a boring focal length for me. The 35 and the 85 combo has always been the best for portraits and street photography from my experience. If I were to just have one lens, it’s definitely the 35mm.
I prefer 50/135. 50mm used to be "boring". Nowadays I find the range between 24 and 28 most boring as most smartphones have them as main camera.
35/135 perhaps?
Yesssir 🤝
Genau das machen viele, deshalb ist 35 85 LAAAAANGWEIIIILIG 💤💤🥱🥱🥱 !
@@thomasackermann6097I couldn’t agree more. If I’m walking around with a camera, it’s almost always with just the lens attached, and 99% it’s a 50mm. Period. But that’s just my preference!🙏🏼
I had a 35mm and 85mm combo which was nice at first but I got tired of changing the lenses. The 50mm is the perfect sweetpot and has been glued to my camera since I got it. More versatile and useful than people give credit for
Finally! I thought I was alone in thinking the 35mm is better and more versatile than the 50mm. And I agree, the 35mm is not really a wide-angle but it’s still wide enough. I was so disappointed with myself the other night when I went to a friend’s going-away and I only brought my 50mm to document the occasion. Well, it was terribly tight inside the space and getting shots was difficult. I’ve got a new 35mm on my Christmas list - but I might have to get it a little bit early. 😆
I fully agree. The 50 is always too narrow for me, unless I need something narrow, than it becomes too wide….
Well phrased.
I constantly run into this issue, and it is one of the main reasons why I can never commit to using only a prime lens. I always use a zoom lens, unless in a very specific use case; usually tripod type stuff.
I like 35mm for video, 50mm works pretty good for very general photography. But yea you need space. If you’re just walking around or traveling, 28 or 35mm is going to get most if not everything you want.
Make sense dude! I like both 35 and 50. 16/18 for landscape/architecture/group(of people, esp in wedding), 23 for documentary/street, 35 for portrait/details, and 85 for close-up(half-body) portrait. Hard to say one beat or replace the other. It's like rifle can never replace pistol. These are classic focal lengths for different purposes. Yes, 35mm is unbeatable on versatility but it can never replace 50mm. If you can only carry 2 prime lens + 1 camera, it never go wrong with any two mentioned above.
@@georgechen1124 I’m talking if you only bring one lens. I’m not always carrying a bunch of different lenses.
Man I have canon M6 and bought a 22mm F2 based on your suggestions with M50. I am still a beginner but that lens gave me every reason to use it whenever I want. From beautiful portraits to banger wide lens images and videos. That's how I became a fan of your suggestions.
That 22mm is glued to my M50. Love it! 💯🔥
as a photographer with an a7r3, I can get away with just having a 35mm and just cropping in to sorta have a 50mm.
I still love 50mm though for portrait or more focused on a single subject
I agree with most arguments - a 35mm/1.8 is very versatile for environmental portraits, because you can go relatively close to a person, and displaying also their close close surroundings. On the other hand: Remembger Henri Cartier-Bresson who became a world famous photographer with his images from the street mostly taken with the Leica 50mm F2.0 Summicron ...
I don't think, I like distortion in a person's face - so I don't use the 35mm for portraits of ppl period. Cityscapes, landscapes, street photography it is good for that, but I still prefer the 50mm; even though, I own both. Also, to come-back and fix it in Photoshop seems to me like you're creating an extra step for yourself that you could just avoid by switching to a 50mm when your doing portraits / close-up of people. Again, it's not flattering to distort a person's face, in my opinion. I agree no lens is perfect, and no lens is a 'One Size Fits All' situations.
At some point in my journey I started preferring the 35mm as well. Your video is the most comprehensive material I've seen on this topic. It makes a lot of sense too the part about indoor vs outdoor, and having a lens that works in bright light and low light. Thanks!
You just answered all the questions I had. I have a 50mm which I love. But I struggle indoors.. Could not decide 35mm or 25mm.. And you just gave me the answer
I gotta agree. I've been using a 50mm equivalent for a year now since I've been doing photography on my Canon M50. I upgraded to the Sony A7IV and got a sony branded nifty fifty. 🤣I enjoy the standard look of the 50mm for many types of photography portraits included. Once I've switched to a vintage zoom lens that had 35mm as its lowest focal length. The look of the 35mm looked so different in a way I enjoyed. Its like wide but not that wide and it feels like a balance. Once I'm able to get my hands on a true 35mm prime I'll be using it way more than my 50mm
@@thurim_69 I'm sure others would feel the same way as me
Joris, I agree with you, choose the focal length that works best with your style of shooting, the environments you're shooting in, and your subject matter of choice. Like you, I do a lot of documentary, photojournalism, and street photography. I shoot Leica and Fujifilm in those instances and I've found that 40mm and 42mm respectively work best for me with those camera systems. I shoot with the Voightlander NOKTON Classic 40mm f1.4 on my Leica M240 and the Voightlander Ultron 28mm f2 on my Fujifilm X-Pro3.
Most photographers don't talk about the 40mm focal length except when discussing vintage lenses. I think that's largely due to there not being too many lens manufacturers making 40mm lenses. Voightlander is the only company I know still making new 40mm lenses. If you haven't tried that focal length you should let us know what you think about it compared to 35mm.
I love my 50! I also love my 35. Each have their place and best-use scenario.
Tbh,a 35mm,85mm & 135 mm is the right way to go as it makes you extremely versatile.
The 50 mm difference between all these focal lengths give you a perfect spot to change the nature of the photo completely.
Difference between a 35 mm to a 50 mm is too small in terms of a drastic change,atleast that's what I feel:)
I like to keep the 50 mm gap between the focal lengths to change up the variety of my shots.
For me too,I deem the 50 mm as something useful but not extremely necessary for most situations:)
As much as I love the 50, I have to agree with you, Joris. There’s something very special about the 35mm focal length. Love your style, too. New sub here from Australia. 👍🦘
Wrong 85mm is perfect
What beginning photographers don’t realize is that near-far perspective is function of relative DISTANCE to near and far object not focal length. For example if photographing a subject who has one eye that is noticeably larger than than the other in full face view I will instead pose the face obliquely to the camera with the larger eye further way then move in and out from the face until the near-far perspective changed via distance makes the two eyes look the same size in the photo. It is a technique I learned back in 1972 apprenticing with Monte Zucker who was a Zen Master at analyzing faces like that finding the most flattering facial angle - full / oblique left or right / profile left or right.
What focal length does after finding the ideal near-far perspective via shooting distance is control the in-camera crop. Cinematographers are much more aware of this because they much crop in camera.
Because I understand the actual cause and effect my favorite portrait lens is a 24-70mm zoom. For most faces the most flattering near far perspective is from around 8-9 feet from the tip of the nose. A 24-70mm allows capturing in-camera crops from full-length to head and shoulders from that same distance so the size relationship between nose and ears and size of cranium behind the eyes stays the same in all crops. If needing a tighter crop I switch to my 70-200mm if the goal making the face look as slim and symmetrical as possible.
When the goal isn’t to make a face look as slim and symmetrical as a super model when it is actually lopsided the none of that applies. But if learning to shoot portraits of ordinary people with less than perfectly symmetrical faces what I suggest above, which I learned from my mentor many years ago is a good starting BASELINE for understanding how to use near-far perspective to flatter a face, or not depending on on the intended body language you want the subject to project in the photo.
Good discussion and I agree. 35mm is my alternative to a standard zoom when I want keep size down for personal shoots. For events I'll use a standard zoom along with a flash for versatility.
I have a Sony ZV-E10 camera with Sony 11mm f.8 lens for landscape videography I need a lens with blurry effect for real estate hosting video please suggest which budget lens should I buy like Viltrox 35mm or 50mm, Sigma 30mm or tamron 17-70mm zoom lens ?
35mm is the most versatile for indoors and better for video movement,
50mm is more versatile for outdoors :)
if I could use only 1 focal length, probably ~43mm would be my choice :)
A wide angle lens is any lens in which the focal length is less than the longest side of the negative (or sensor). As 35mm negatives are 36mm by 24mm, a 35mm just scrapes into the category of wide angle. A modern FF sensor is the same size as a 35mm film negs.
An ultra-wide is categorised by the focal length being less than the short side of the negative. So 24mm and under.
When you have smaller sensors, the same rules apply to the physical dimensions of the sensor - on Canon APS-C for example (22.3×14.9), it means FF lenses in focal length of 22mm and under are wide, and those 15mm and under are ultra-wide.
You explained the 35mm perfectly and really helped me with my lens choices when doing video. I used two cameras on one gimbal: one cam has a 50mm 1.8 and the other has a 35mm 1.8. The 35 gets everything but the 50 does not. And using an 35 with an 85 is a better choice but again, no need for the 85 unless you want really close and personal shots which the 85 is perfect for. So that said, you r so correct, a 35mm 1.8 is all you really need. It took me a while to figure this out and now watching you my choice will be the 35mm only. It is so nice to see others, such as your self, choose the 35mm over all the other lenses. Through trial and error, i did the same. Its 35mm for life for me. Great job and thank you for all your work...
New generation came to photography from smartphones, which only have 24-26 mm focal length, and jump to wide angle because they never experienced anything different.
There are literally thousands videos on youtube "why 35 mm is better than 50 mm". It is not.
Because of your videos I'm thinking of buying the Canon RF 35mm f/1.8 Macro IS STM Lens for my Canon EOS RP. My question is the lens has a f/1.8 which will give me a nice shallow depth of field... but what about the maximum depth of field? I take pictures and videos of outdoor products (product reviews) and many times in the video I want to show the beautiful surroundings so I don't want the shallow depth, I want to take in everything behind me or the product. Why don't they list what the maximum depth of field is for that current lens? Thank you for all your videos, they've helped me out a great deal.
I use the Nikon 40mm f2 in that range. Super light, sharp and dirt cheap. My favorite prime lens is the 85mm f1.8. My favorite all time is the 70-200mm f2.8.
Another 40mm fan. There aren't many!
I'm proud to be a member of the cult of 40!
What do people dislike about it? I just bought one @@gordonbrown5901
I like 40mm f2 and I am affraid that if I buy 35mm f1.4 I will stop using it.
1:55 I think there's a kind of odd thinking around distortion that's reinforced by the way it's talked about in this video: that distortion is somehow a "bad thing" when it comes to portraiture. For fashion, and commercial work, where the objective is to get the most flattering proportions and look possible, I can understand why distortion is something to be avoided.
However, the subtext of a 35mm kind of distortion (even up close) vs 50mm, is that you are more intimately in the space of that subject. I, myself, absolutely love and prefer a 50mm, but I often notice a slight sense of "distance", coldness and objectification of the subject - like there is an invisible wall between the viewer and the subject. THAT'S the benefit of wider angle distortion when it comes to portraiture - it subconsciously signals to the viewer a sense of closeness, intimacy and presence that is lost with longer focal lengths.