Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1995/12/11

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

To: jredfern@intacc.net (Jae Redfern)
Subject: Re: 35 vs. 50 summicrons
From: msmall@roanoke.infi.net (Marc James Small)
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 1995 23:35:14 -0500
Cc: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us

Jae Redfern says:


>Wide angles are trickier to use but when used well produce a much more
>"dynamic" composition, allowing greater use of leader lines. IMHO the
>longer lenses are dull by comparaison. The restricted angle of view allows
>for a more selective and leisurely "pick and shoot" mentality but the end
>result is nearly invariably a compressed 2 dimensional stamper of a shot.
>
>        The choice between a 50 and 35 is tricky and indeed highly personal
>but to dismiss wide angles as boring leaves me "bafflegabbed" (but
>obviously not speechless  ;>  )


Well, this all depends on the photographer.  Me?  I don't like backgrounds
and  graphics and all that -- cartoonists can do it, too, and can do it
better.  I want the cracked lines in the old man's face, the sweep of the
girl's chin, the line on the car's fins -- I want REALITY in my pictures.
Great scenery I can see any day, which is why I live in the mountains of
central Virginia (tourist hint:  visit here and fall in love!), but people's
faces and suchlike details I wish to live forever.

I am not familiar with "bafflegabbed" and suspect that I would prefer to
remain so ...

Marc
msmall@roanoke.infi.net  FAX:  +540/343-7315
Cha robh bas fir gun ghras fir!