[Leica] 28/2.0 24/1.4 ... why?

[tgray at 125px.com (Tim Gray)]

On Mon, Dec 15, 2008 at 12:24 AM, Mark Rabiner <mark@rabinergroup.com> wrote:
> The differences between the focal lengths tend to be roughly 20 degrees of
> separation.
> Between 50 and 90
> 50 and 35
> 35 and 24
>
> The difference between 28 and 24 or 28 and 50 is roughly ten degrees of
> separation.
> Less of a big deal. You can lean in with your whole body to make up for the
> other ten degrees.
> Me I don't have a 28.

I personally really like 28.  Then again, I really only shoot with a
28 and a 50, and have decided to  forgo the 35mm focal length.  I've
not really tried 24, but 21 I think would be too wide for how I
typically tend to use my 28.  28 (to me) is wide with out getting too
much into a lot of perspective distortion.

On my Canon SLR, I also shoot with a 28 and a 50.  At some point if I
want a something of higher quality than the 28/1.8 and/or a 1.4 lens
for my wide, I will probably be forced to use pick up the 24/1.4.  I
think you are right in the fact that I most likely won't notice that
much of a difference between the 28+50 pairing and the 24+50 pairing.

However, I think that a 28/1.4 would be too big to use on an M without
an external viewfinder.

Most people who seem to not really care for the 28mm focal length too
much, and who seem to go for the 24 or 21 seem to shoot 35 a lot.