Re: [Leica] Re: Which third lens? 24 or 50

[RBedw51767@aol.com]

Fernando:

Please don't overlook the wonderful 21mm Aspheric.  I haven't decided which is
my favorite lense, the 21 or the Noctilux.  The 21 is extremely easy to use
because of the viewfinder and it's clarity.  The only negative part of the
viewfinder is that you need to go back to the M6 viewfinder to check meter
readings.  There are no rangefinder images to align.  The depth  of field is
so deep that focusing accuracy is not an issue.  You can take marvelous
pictures in the tightest of places and the sharpness is right there with the
35/1.4 Asph.  Needless to say, I love it.  Regardless, you can't make a bad
decision between the 24 and the 21.  As for the 50mm, if it weren't for the
Noctilux I wouldn't even own one.  Personally, for my kind of photography I
find the focal length awkward.   However, the Noctilux is very special and I
get over the awkwardness of the focal length very quickly.   I agree with Jim
that you cannot compare a 24 with a 50.

Enjoy,

Bob Bedwell

<< You cannot compare a 50 and a 24. That's like comparing an apple with a
 tomato. A 50 is a normal lens. Actually longer than normal. A 24 is a very
 wide angle lens. The way you photograph with these lenses is completely
 different. You will end up with both. So choose which you want first. I'm
 going to sell my 24/2.8-R, because I use my 28PC far more. It's my WA of
 choice. And I just got a 21 ASPH for my M, which will take care of the
 very-wide stuff. I also have a 15mm Super-Elmarit which takes care of the
 super-wide stuff.
 
 Jim
 
 At 05:31 PM 12/15/98 -0700, you wrote:
 >Some of you have the 24, (and many more the 50). So, is it worth to wait
 >till I find a good deal on a 24, or should I go for the 50? I know both
 >lenses are superb, it depends on the kind of pictures you take, etc, but
 >anyway, I'll be happy to read your experiences.
 >Regards,
 >
 >Fernando Moreno, Madrid
 
  >>