Old European Cities: 25mm/50mm or 35mm?

Old European Cities: 25mm/50mm or 35mm?

  • Total voters
25mm seems the most useful in an inner old-town environment. Just as an example, I traveled to Spain, staying near Malaga and visiting Granada, Seville, Marbella, Ronda, and Tangier. We had a rental Fiat so traveled around the area. I took a CLE and Bessa-L with 15mm, 25mm, 40mm, and 90mm. The 90 was used once. The 40mm was used a few times. Finally, I settled the 15mm on the Bessa and the 25 on the CLE as those were the two more-used lenses, and especially the 25. In the narrow streets and building interiors I felt I needed context.
Well I am glad we have been able to close out this 2013 problem. I think post 2020 covid, travel will be with 70-200mm zoom lenses?
In old European cities?
I would always choose a zoom which starts at 24mm or wider
like a 24-70/105 or a 16/35 as walk-around lens.
or the Panny-Leica 10-25 1.7 for mft users, single lens with lots of possibilities
Not the smallest, I admit, but they all will do the trick
Mark T was being ironic: social distancing....

I used 28/50 in the old city of Nice. Wish I'd taken the 21. The ZM 25 is pretty big for an RF lens with f2.8 aperture, but the light and colour are magnificent.
I love how these old threads re-emerge, that you might have missed the first time around.

For me, a 25 and 75 - and if a third, a 40. The thing about old European streets & cities (and I am thinking pre-1800 architecture especially) is just not the narrowness of the streets, but actually the height of buildings. If you're trying to take a picture of an old tower (e.g. in Sienna) you can't really stand back and so you need the wide lens (just acquired a 21 so don't really have any experience of that yet). Never found 28 quite wide enough.

Why a 75? Architectural details - slightly better than a 50. I have an 85, but somehow doesn't seem to work for me. Have the older Voigtlander 75, was looking at the newer 1.5 - but read an article that quoted Stephen as saying it was really only for portraiture. Has anyone tried that as a travel lens?
Not that the OP still needed opinions, but lens choice bs'ing is fun! I'd skip the 24, I find it awkward. It's wide enough to show obvious artifacts often, but not wide enough to get it all in in narrow streets or to play with the absurdity of wide angle perspectives. My one lens would be a 28 (which to me is moderate enough to get the wide angle weirdness under control most of the time) and a two lens kit might include a 21 (where things start to get get fun in a wide way) or wider.
This thread was started in 2013.
The overall question on which lens to use is still useful to discuss.
I agree with Bingley. I have used a 28mm (or it's equivalent in non-full frame cameras) in cities in Germany, Czech Republic and Italy almost exclusively. I usually carry a 50mm and a 200mm, but I rarely put them on the camera.
It’s really personal preference - a balance between anticipating getting the view which “looks right” to you versus having so many choices you’re really not experiencing the real life around you.

I travel very light. In Europe I used just one lens all the time: 50/2. I don’t want to think about lens choices when on vacation.

For this poll I chose 35/2. I would not carry more than the one lens - that is, I’d just use the single lens that’s on the camera. I also think f/2 lenses are perhaps slightly better than f/1.2 lenses and often are smaller. I could just as well take only the 50/2.

I wouldn’t take or ever use anything wider than 28mm unless I were a realtor and making photos for the website or yard flyer. :D

With the 21 & MP in Bolzano. Lens choice and vision is such a personal thing. I tried to love the 28 & had Elmarits & 2 of the delightful & tiny CV 28 3.5 ....but they never stuck my default is still the 35mm followed by the 21mm
I find that when traveling with film, the lens that is on the camera is the one most used. If I could pick any one lens, it would be a close focusing 35mm (like down to at least 0.4m), which are found on SLRs. A close focusing 35 can replace a 50mm - you just have to get closer to your subject. Also, it is close enough for detail shots. I really like the 21-35 Konica Dual for rangefinder use when the environment is unfamiliar.
This thread got me thinking about my lens/camera choices for my trip to Venice later this month. I've been there before so it's more of a decision what pictures I want to take. My first bet was Moskva 5 and Fomapan for some tighter frames suitable for nice darkroom prints. But I also have some Ektachrome in 35mm and slides from holidays are always great, "small framed memories" as I call them. So I almost conviced myself to take Canonet with me... until I start playing with my Nikon F2 and some wides.