Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/03/11
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Henning- I have used the 38mm Biogon SWC for weddings, but it is such a rectilinear lens, that it doesn't have any of the 'vestiges' you find in most wide angle lenses! A friend of mine uses a Contax 645AF, and when my son got married, he used the 40mm on it, and I was surprised to see those vestiges- the little distortions- that are missing from the Biogon.... Admittedly, the Biogon can cause distortion, but I always used it on a tripod, and levelred it carefully.... the hard thing is the 35mm format which is so light and small, the very attiributes that make it a favorable format work against it when using wide angle lenses! You saying the 38Biogon is much like the 21 on the Leica makes me wonder if the 21SA or Elmarit might be the one I am looking for! It is not too far off from the 20 that I am playing with now, and might be worth the effort to get! Thanks for your insight! Dan - ----- Original Message ----- From: "Henning Wulff" <henningw@archiphoto.com> To: <leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us> Sent: Saturday, March 10, 2001 6:59 PM Subject: Re: [Leica] Friday FS- NOT!!! Thread change rant....ROWRLBAZZLE! > At 1:46 PM -0800 3/10/01, Mark Rabiner wrote: > >"B. D. Colen" wrote: > >> > >> Dan Post posted... > >><Snip> verticals from going all catty-wumpus, but I think I am > >>missing something. > >> > >> What do you mean by superwide - 20/21, or are you refering to the Cosina > >> 15? I have had no experience with the 15, but the 20/21 is one of the > >> focal lengths I use the most, and get the best results from. > >> > >> B. D. > > > >Mark Rabiner marked... > >When i think superwide i think the 38 Hasselblad Biogon. A 96 degree diagonal > >viewing angle. > >On a 35mm camera that would be a 19.4mm lens. > >So that splits the dif between a 21 and a 15 almost. > >I think 21 is where superwide starts. > >24 is very wide > >28 is pretty darn wide > >35 is thinking about being wide > > > >But i think we should call the 12 ultrawide. > > > >Mark R. > > Actually, the Biogon covers about 92 degrees on the diagonal, which > is very close to the 21 on 35. For width, the Biogon covers about 73 > degrees, which is almost exactly what a 24 covers on 35. That feels > right to me, as I use the Biogon a lot like a 24 with a bit of > 'shift' if I'm intending a horizontal layout. > > The 12 and 15 are completely different in what they can do and how > things feel doing them. 112 degrees and 100 degrees side to side > respectively means that you can stand in the corner of a room and get > _all_ the walls in. I've used a 15 for over 25 years and I've had the > 12 for nearly 5 months now, but taming the 12 is still going to take > a while. > > Even wider is a 35 (actual focal length 36.1mm) on 4x5. This gives > dark corners, but it can still be quite effective. 120 degrees side > to side, and 105 degrees top to bottom, and all rectilinear. It > covers 6x12 easily, with some movements. > > -- > * Henning J. Wulff > /|\ Wulff Photography & Design > /###\ mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com > |[ ]| http://www.archiphoto.com >