Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2006/09/10

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

Subject: [Leica] Re: Leica] M8 lens dilemma
From: don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory)
Date: Sun Sep 10 19:10:24 2006
References: <9b678e0609101802h5dc0459en68b262ef238929a1@mail.gmail.com> <C12A3503.15269%bd@bdcolenphoto.com>

B.D.
You and I represent the far end of the curve as it relates to typical use.
Even journalist are using flash(war zones excepted).  Because I use the 50
more than any other focal length the transition to the 35 Summilux will not
be a problem except in the wallet.  But for folks like you that eat up the
28 F2 the lack of fast wides will keep you away possibly.  Which is why I
posted the problem about fast wides for a 1.3X sensor.

With all that said, I suspect that the usefulness of 3200 will be there
whether as a RAW conversion or just bootleg 1600 underexposed and just deal
with it.

Photographically, we live in very interesting times.

Don
don.dory@gmail.com


On 9/10/06, B. D. Colen <bd@bdcolenphoto.com> wrote:
>
> If shooting at 800 and 1600 eliminates the need for fast glass, why have
> so
> many of us invested so much in fast glass over the years, given that we
> routinely shoot at 800 and 1600?
>
>
> On 9/10/06 9:02 PM, "Don Dory" <don.dory@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > Leica faces an interestin conundrum.  If they bite the bullet and make
> > lenses for cropped sensors they will relcaim the small camera/high
> > performance position they held in the thirties and beyond.  However,
> > thousands of Leicanistas will shriek in rage at being betrayed.  So, in
> all
> > probablity no F1.4 26mm lens or for that matter no 21mm f2 lens.
> >
> > On the bright side, the ability to shoot at 800 to 1600 ameliorates the
> need
> > for fast lenses as far as capturing the image but we still have issues
> with
> > limiting DOF intentionally.  On the down side, I am going to have to
> bite
> > the bullet and acquire a 35 F1.4 as the 50mm perspective is the one I
> use
> > most.  Possibly the C/V 40mm F1.4 with the crop the edges won't matter.
> >
> > Don
> > don.dory@gmail.com
> >
> >
> > On 9/10/06, Aram Langhans <dnaplasmid@compwrx.com> wrote:
> >>
> >> 35!    32!  37!   What's a few millimeters among friends???
> >> Aram
> >>
> >>> Date: Sun, 10 Sep 2006 17:04:45 -0400
> >>> From: Stan Yoder <vze2myh5@verizon.net>
> >>> Subject: [Leica] M8 lens dilemma
> >>> To: lug@leica-users.org
> >>> Message-ID: <45047DED.7050007@verizon.net>
> >>> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
> >>>
> >>> So what are yunz (Pittsburghese for 'you-all') planning to do for the
> >>> equivalent of a 35 on a film M?
> >>>
> >>> The 24 Elmarit-ASPH becomes a 32, and a 28 becomes a 37.
> >>>
> >>> Stan Yoder
> >>> The Burgh
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Leica Users Group.
> >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
> >>
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Leica Users Group.
> > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>

Replies: Reply from scott at adrenaline.com (Scott McLoughlin) ([Leica] Re: Leica] M8 lens dilemma)
In reply to: Message from don.dory at gmail.com (Don Dory) ([Leica] Re: Leica] M8 lens dilemma)
Message from bd at bdcolenphoto.com (B. D. Colen) ([Leica] Re: Leica] M8 lens dilemma)