Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2007/04/11

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] 21 % 24 Lenses
From: henningw at archiphoto.com (Henning Wulff)
Date: Wed Apr 11 10:08:30 2007
References: <200704102256.l3AMsA4Z032498@server1.waverley.reid.org> <461C631F.7070004@verizon.net>

At 12:25 AM -0400 4/11/07, Stan Yoder wrote:
>I did the math on the diagonal of the 18x27mm sensor of the M8. 
>Turns out to be 32mm near enough, which is what the 24 becomes on an 
>M8. So the 24 is the theoretical "normal" for the M8. However, the 
>50mm 'normal' lens on 35mm film cameras would be better matched by a 
>28mm on the M8 (=37mm.)

Stan, I think you're doing a double conversion there. The theoretical 
'normal' lens, ie, the diagonal, is the actual diagonal. In this case 
it's 32mm. Therefore if anyone made a 32mm lens, that would be a 
'normal' lens on the M8. The 24 is a wide on the M8.

The field of view of the 50 on 35mm film is matched by a 37.5mm lens 
on the M8. A 28mm lens gives the equivalent of a 37mm lens on 35mm 
film.

>Actually, the 28 framelines of the M8 VF include slightly more than 
>the 50 lines of my M2's VF.
>
>And, since a 35mm lens is/was the functional 'normal' with film for 
>many of us, a 21mm lens would be the near-equivalent on an M8.

Again, you're doing a double conversion. The closest common focal 
length equivalent to the angle of view of a 35mm lens on 35mm film is 
the 28mm lens on the M8.

>
>Or am I all wet?
>
>Stan Yoder
>Pittsburgh
>
>_______________________________________________
>Leica Users Group.
>See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information


-- 
    *            Henning J. Wulff
   /|\      Wulff Photography & Design
  /###\   mailto:henningw@archiphoto.com
  |[ ]|     http://www.archiphoto.com

In reply to: Message from s.yoder at verizon.net (Stan Yoder) ([Leica] 21 % 24 Lenses)