Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/12/03
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Thomas Kachadurian wrote - > I also agree that from 75mm to 100mm it's pretty much the same skills > emp[loyed, the same sort of vision. I'm not so sure. The 75 IMHO is closer in feel to the 50 than to the 100. And I know it's a 25 mm difference in both directions. :-) But I'm comfortable with the 75 on an M, but by 100 I'd rather use a reflex and really see the magnification and depth of field effects. As to 20-21-24, I think the differences there are really just a matter of taste..some people like the distortion of the 21, which is much less pronounced with the 24, others don't. There are certainly situations in which a 24 is "not quite wide enough," but virtually none in which a 21 can't be used and cropped down to a 24 view.. > Interestingly, it's the 35mm or 50mm choice that trips me up. They > are such very different lenses. When I want one of them, the other > just will not do. Well, yes and no. When I want the 35, the 50 won't do. When I want the 50, in many cases I can make do with the 35 - which is why the 35 is now my "standard" lens, and the 50 is a lens for special situations when the 75 is a bit too long, and I can't get close enough with the 35. B. D.