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 <robert.appleby@tin.it>
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"?

Rob.
Robert Appleby

Replies: Reply from Ted <tedgrant@home.com> (Re: [Leica] Complementary focal lengths)