Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2002/06/02
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Nope! ;-) Nikon 17-35 2.8 AF at 17....But I rarely use that lens set below 21 ...and am far more likely to use the 21 asph on the M than I am that lens on the Nikon.... I'm sure that I will, one of these days, get the 15 for the M...but I will be getting it as something to play with, not as a lens to use regularly, so I haven't yet rationalized buying it. On the other hand, I've seen what various LUGers can and have done with it, and a little voice keeps saying, 'buy it! buy it!. (One of the things that keeps me from getting it is the fact that I do so much low light shooting, that in many situations it would just be too slow for my purposes.) B. D. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of J. Gilbert Plantinga Sent: Saturday, June 01, 2002 4:50 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] Shooting With a Super Wide Angle Lens? B. D., Out of curiosity, in the excellent series you posted today, is the shot of the guy with his hands on the edge of the pool taken with the 21? Gilbert On Saturday, June 1, 2002, at 04:26 PM, B. D. Colen wrote: > You will rarely be in a circumstance - including in an automobile or > aircraft cabin - where you need more than a 21 mm lens. The 15 is fun, > but > very very optional.;-) - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html