Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/10/14
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Alastair Firkin wrote: > > > > > > >The 21mm is fantastic! No doubt about it, I would love one, but I can't > >justify the six thousand+ dollars it would cost to buy the bloody thing. > >As many of you know I use my 50mm for most of my work and the 35 and 90 > >rarely. For portraits the 21mm would probably sit in the bag. Pity! > > > >Rob > > the 21mm range need not cost 6k+. There are older lenes, and used do > come up. Keep dreaming and somehow one will appear --- especially > when the school fees are over ;-) I was finding as i found with my old Nikon system last decade that the angle of view i got with the 24 was not wide enough for certain things. I toyed with the idea of getting the classic and compact Super-Angulon 3.4 which is also a lot less money than the aspheric. .. And might be better for architectural considerations. I'd have no problem with metering hand held. But I got the modern workhorse as i see it, the 21 Asph. My friend Larry has the older non Asph and he's got no problem with it until he reads a review. I got the lens not at all for conceptual reasons as to function: landscape lens, portrait lens… and it is certainly neither. I got the lens because it has a wider angle of view than a 24. I also have the goal of shooting with a complete Leica M system. And the 21 focal length is a very classic focal length for the system. A Leica M system without a 21 is like an architect without wings. I read an article in a better photo mag ten or twenty years ago about the white house photo staff who all had 3 Nikons each hanging from their necks and one Leica each. Each Leica had the 21 3.4 on it. For getting into those hard to reach places. Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.markrabiner.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html