Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/01/29

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

Subject: Re: [Leica] Tips on using 24mm M lens
From: Henry Krzciuk <>
Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 18:59:14 -0800 (PST)


This is a very helpful tutorial for me.  With your use
of the photos, I can understand what you mean by the
spatial aspects of the lens.  This is something that I
am going to try.

I also wish to work the photojournalist side of the
lens trying to capture people in their environment.

What film did you use.

Your shots are wonderful and that includes one of the
nicest shots I have seen of the metro.

Thanks to you and the others that are providing input.

- --- Guy Bennett <> wrote:
> >During a weak moment, I purchased a 24MM for my
> M6TTL.
> >I now have the 24mm, 35 f2 asph, 50 f2, and 90mm f2
> >asph...
> That was one hell of a weak moment! An expensive
> one, too, but since you've
> already taken the plunge, there's no looking back.
> Re: 35 vs 24, for me. Like another Lugger who
> responded to your post, I'd
> say that the 35 Summicron is the lens I use most. It
> feels comfortable to
> me and is very easy to use. My mind and eye do not
> need any adjusting with
> the 35 focal length - the compositions come
> spontaneously and are not
> cluttered by unwanted elements that sometimes creep
> in with a wide angle
> lens. I'd say that the 35 is my "normal" lens; for
> me the 50 serves more as
> a moderate tele.
> The 24 is another story. Though in another life I
> had used a 20mm lens and
> was rather at home with it, getting used to the 24
> has been a difficult
> task. I haven't mastered it yet, but I'm getting
> more familiar with what it
> has to offer, and am figuring out how I can best
> exploit it's potential.
> I tend to choose the 24 over the 35 when I want to
> emphasize and/or
> exaggerate spatial relationships in the picture. The
> 24 can really push
> certain things to the foreground and other things
> into the distance, and
> this is a major charm of this focal length for me.
> In the following shot,
> the near/far relationship is emphasized:
> This next shot, taken with a 35, doesn't demonstrate
> any of the
> exaggerating potential of the super wide angles; the
> space is rendered
> naturally:
> I also use the 24 to "pull apart" the inside of a
> space. For me, it works
> best on spaces that already have a kind of "open"
> structure, like this
> shot, for example:
> Here the 24 seems to grab the floor and ceiling and
> just pull them apart,
> which is an effect I find thrilling. Notice, too,
> that this lens is sharper
> than hell (and that's *sharp*, for those of you who
> have never been to hell
> and seen how sharp it is down there) wide open,
> which is how I tend to use
> it. Compared to the above, an interior shot with the
> 35 looks normal indeed:
> The 24 is a fantastic lens, but I agree with those
> who say that it's
> difficult to master. I'm still at it and hope one
> day to feel completely at
> home with this focal length. Thus far, I'm happy
> with what it has to offer
> and am doing my best to live up to the challenge.
> Good luck!
> Guy

Get personalized email addresses from Yahoo! Mail - only $35 
a year!