Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/08/13

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] 21mm vs 24mm
From: "Hans Pahlen" <hans.pahlen@mark.komvux.se>
Date: Fri, 13 Aug 1999 22:40:55 +0200

Austin,

I assume that you have a 35 mm lens. If so, the 28 is too close in my
opinion, so  you should decide between 21 or 24 mm. I have never used Leicas
24 mm, but I have made good use of the Nikkor 24 mm.
I have also used Leica 21 mm lenses for many years. I agree that the 24 is a
more "ordinary" lens, easier to use than the 21 mm when doing photos of
people. The strongpoint of the 21 mm is when you are photographing people in
crowded places, with lots of people all around. In this context, the 21 mm
is really outstanding.
If you like, look at my web page
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Oracle/5799/ where you will find a picture I
made with the 21 asph. This picture would have been impossible with a 28 or
24, as I had to be very close (1 meter), or else someone would get between
me and the object.
But then, how often does this happen? To get a good picture of one or a
small group of persons with the 21, you will have to go very close, and not
be shy to take photos from a very close distance.
This is why I feel that the 24 mm lens is easier to use on most occasions.
If you go back a little (well, not always possible, but anyway...) you will
get the same picture as with the 21 mm. The 24 mm is also a more flexible
lens than the 21 mm in my opinion, because you can also move a  little
closer, to get the picture you would get with a 28 mm lens.

The reason why I stick to my Super Angulon 21 is that I am very used to it,
as it has been THE Leica-M wide angle lens for so many years. But now, the
choice is so much harder.

Best,
Hans

>
> I am indeed looking for an 'ordinary' lens (albeit very wide) for
> general use, mostly for photos of people with lots of context.
>
> AUSTIN.