Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/01/04

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

Subject: [Leica] Complementary focal lengths
From: Robert Appleby <>
Date: Thu, 04 Jan 2001 09:12:59 +0100

On Wed, 03 January 2001, Martin Howard wrote:
> This got me thinking: Maybe Ted's 15mm/400mm photo project isn't as mad as
> it initially seems.  I know the classic is 35/90, or maybe 35/50/90, but I
> found that having a wider spread was actually useful and more inspiring.

Surely, Ted's 15/400 combo is a bit extreme, but availability of many
lenses, including zooms made us forget that we actually have legs so that
we can move around.  Your subject doesn't fill the frame with a 35mm lens?
Instead of switching to a 50mm lens, move a bit closer.

However, I've usually found that carrying more than one lens ensures that I
have a wrong lens on the body at all times.  I usually restrict myself to
one lens and work with it.  I find a camera bag full of lenses a little
distracting.  For my Leica, that's usually the Noctilux or the Summilux
75mm.  With my 4x5, it's usually the Rodenstock Sironar-N 210mm.

Well, I just found the perfect complementary lens for my 35 - the new
Voigtlander 12/5.6. I just looked through the viewfinder of one of these
yesterday at a friend's house and it is really stunning. The perfect
wide-angle view, plus focus to 30 cm. The ideal complement for the 35.
Maybe the 24 will be getting less use from now on?!

one of the canonical Leica lenses, as it were

Shouldn't that be "one of the c*****ical Leica lenses"?

Robert Appleby

Replies: Reply from Ted <> (Re: [Leica] Complementary focal lengths)