Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/11/13

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] which wide angle lens?
From: "B. D. Colen" <>
Date: Fri, 13 Nov 1998 12:15:38 -0500

Hi, Buzz - Ditto. I found the built-in meter to be virtually useless with
the 21. And you're right about the incredible DOF giving you a way to get
closer than the 28", but that's a pretty iffy way to live. I'd kill for an M
21 or 24 that could focus down to about a foot, like the reflex lenses. BTW,
can one of you LUG technophiles please explain why the rangefinder lenses
don't focus closer? I assume it's a simple explanation.

Thanks...B. D.

> -----Original Message-----
> From:
> []On Behalf Of Jeffrey
> Hausner
> Sent: Friday, November 13, 1998 11:53 AM
> To: ''
> Subject: RE: [Leica] which wide angle lens?
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:	B. D. Colen []
> > Sent:	Friday, November 13, 1998 11:09 AM
> > To:
> > Subject:	RE: [Leica] which wide ange lens?
> >
> > However, and I throw this out for discussion, I find that while
> the wider
> > lenses are easier to focus on the rangefinder than on a non-autofocus
> > reflex, they have one very distinct disadvantage - and that's their
> > inability to focus close. With a 24 or 20 on a reflex, you can usually
> > focus
> > down to about 13", which means you can really fill the frame with a
> > subject - sorry to sound like a one-man-band, but take a look
> at what Gene
> > Richards does with the Olympus 20 f2....Because the M lenses only focus
> > down
> > to about 28", there's less ability to do those "in your face" kind of
> > shots....
> 	[Buzz]
> 	Greetings, B.D.--
> 		You are right about the close focus matter.  However, what I
> very often do is use the smallest aperture that I can on the 21
> and trust in
> the DOF.  More often than not, I do get the effect I want, even if the
> framing is a tad haphazard.  The bigger problem I have with the 21 on an M
> is exposure.  I find that I can't at all trust the camera's
> reading since I
> can never guess the area covered by the reflective spot with the 21,
> especially when shooting fast.  So, more often than not, I estimate the
> exposure.  With a film like XP-2 or Tri-X, more often than not I
> guess well
> within the film's latitude for the area I want to be 16%.  I never had the
> patience to master the Zone System.
> 			Buzz