Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1995/12/16

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

To: Ed Reading <ereading@oz.net>
Subject: Re: 35mm vs. 50mm Summicrons
From: Eric Welch <ewelch@gp.magick.net>
Date: Sat, 16 Dec 1995 22:36:53 -0800
Cc: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
Organization: Grants Pass Daily Courier
References: <199512170045.AAA26689@emerald.oz.net>

Ed Reading wrote:

>Even if you compared film shot on test charts, with working distances
>adjusted for magnification, and were able to determine resolving power and
>contrast for each--for, say, the two best examples in the world--where would
>you be? Would you refuse to use the 35 (or the 50) because the other was
>sharper? 

Truer words were never spoken. They are two different lenses. The 
results justify owning both, if you can afford it. For some reason, many 
people report that the 50mm lens on an M6 causes them to shoot 
differently than with an SLR. Mabye it's the ability to see outside it's 
frame and makes it easier to compose with what some call a mild 
telephoto. <g>

-- 
Eric Welch
Grants Pass, OR

In reply to: Message from Ed Reading <ereading@oz.net> (35mm vs. 50mm Summicrons)