[Leica] Re: 24mm vs 21mm

[drodgers@nextlink.net]

Walter

>>I am considering the purchase of the 21mm ASPH or the 24mm ASPH.<<

That's a tough call. I really like the 24mm focal length. But I like the 21 too.
There's probably more difference between a 21 and 24 than there is between a 90
and a 180. I seems to me that lenses became more difficult to use as the focal
length becames shorter.

I've noticed that photographs I make with the 21 are better -- i.e. have more
impact -- if they are enlarged more. Whereas most of my prints coming from a
normal to moderate WA -- and I consider the 24 moderate -- hold up  at 8X10 or
even 5X7, prints coming from a 21 really don't look good until they're enlarged
to 11X14. I shoot mostly b/w, but it's the same with color neg. And a good slide
made with a 21 has major impact when projected. A bad (boring or lacking
interest) slide looks really bad.

It becomes more difficult to isolate a subject as the focal length shortens. One
thing I do to emphasize an element is to make it larger in relation to other
elements. You have to get quite close with a 21 to do that. And there's a fine
line between not close enough and too close. I usually err in not being close
enough. In that respect the 24 is easier to use.

OTOH, the 21 can be a really fun lens to use. And it's challenging to master.
The 24 to me seems much closer to a 28. That's the reason I haven't gotton one.
I love my 28/2.8 Elmarit, although the newer 24 is probably even better. I use
my 28 much more than my 21 ASPH. When I used Nikon SLRs, and had a 20/2.8,
24/2.8 and 28/2.8, I used the 24 far more often than the others.

Dave