So I have finally come to an understanding about my relationship to 35mm vs 50mm focal lengths or their equivalents.
35 mm is a focal length of action. Deeper DOF and the angle of view help capture fleeting moments. Compositions are tough to nail to perfection because there's so much included in the frame. But if you're out there to capture situations and expressions, perfect composition is not as important. In this regard, 28 mm is also a strong action FL.
From 50 mm upwards the narrower view helps to make tight compositions, making them a great candidate for art.
50 mm sits at a crossroads being a good FL for art but also allowing for some action.
Most people I guess would think of a 70-200 mm lens, or a 300 mm, when I say "a lens for action". I let people interpret this as they want. Even more so for the definition of a "lens for art".
As such, in my bag there's room for both of these focal lengths.
So what about you? Any new (or rehashed) takes on the age-old comparing these two common FLs?
35 mm is a focal length of action. Deeper DOF and the angle of view help capture fleeting moments. Compositions are tough to nail to perfection because there's so much included in the frame. But if you're out there to capture situations and expressions, perfect composition is not as important. In this regard, 28 mm is also a strong action FL.
From 50 mm upwards the narrower view helps to make tight compositions, making them a great candidate for art.
50 mm sits at a crossroads being a good FL for art but also allowing for some action.
Most people I guess would think of a 70-200 mm lens, or a 300 mm, when I say "a lens for action". I let people interpret this as they want. Even more so for the definition of a "lens for art".
As such, in my bag there's room for both of these focal lengths.
So what about you? Any new (or rehashed) takes on the age-old comparing these two common FLs?