Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2008/09/12
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]I also find the 21 Asph ideal for shooting, especially in low light. Huge? Not at all! Gene -------------- Original message ---------------------- From: Jeff Moore <jbm@jbm.org> > > 2008-09-11-12:55:57 Mark Rabiner: > > But the 21 and 24 asphs are not small. They are big and quite heavy. > > What's needed is an F4 like the kind of stuff CV is making. > > Sez you. Over and over again. Because that's what you like -- teensy > light pancakey little lenses for wandering around during the day. > > But I don't take most of my pictures outside in the daylight. At least > half of my best stuff happens inside in the dim. My most-used lens > these days during normal vampire hours is the 35/1.4 ASPH, and it stays > stuck on f/1.4 for the most part. How useful would an f/4 lens be to > me? Basically not at all. That's the difference between ISO 320 (which > looks great) or 640 (which looks almost great) and trying to pull an > image out of the raging snowstorm which is ISO 2500. > > > And ultra fast ultra wide? > > Boy I sure hope not. > > Boy I sure hope so. Or if not ultra-wide, then wide-ish. Like 35 > divided by 1.33 wide. Which would be 26mm. So a 24mm Summilux would be > loverly. Or even 28mm. But 24mm would be spiffers. And even works > with the M8's framelines, if I start using my contact lenses again > instead of the glasses. > > -Jeff > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information