Re: RE: [Leica] which wide angle lens?

[Walter S Delesandri <walt@jove.acs.unt.edu>]

Hello,

I also like the close/"in your face" effect with W.A. lenses at times.  I use 
Nikon slrs, and have found the plain old split image screen to work well with 
the 20mm!!  Normally, I absolutely HATE split finders, prefering a plain ground 
screen for the "snap" with teles, but try the split for wide angles -- I think 
you'll like it!

This of course assumes that you have >something< to use a split screen on in your 
photograph -- sometimes may not be the case, but try it out.

BTW, I understand the "science" of the split prism so-called range finder screen, and 
I know it's not very accurate with small aperture lenses, but it gets closer than my 
forty year old eyes do with a plain screen !!

Cheers, Walt

On Fri, 13 Nov 1998 11:52:30 -0500 Jeffrey Hausner 
<Buzz@marianmanor.org> wrote:
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From:	B. D. Colen [SMTP:bdcolen@earthlink.net]
> > Sent:	Friday, November 13, 1998 11:09 AM
> > To:	leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us
> > Subject:	RE: [Leica] which wide ange lens?
> > 
> > However, and I throw this out for discussion, I find that while the wider
> > lenses are easier to focus on the rangefinder than on a non-autofocus
> > reflex, they have one very distinct disadvantage - and that's their
> > inability to focus close. With a 24 or 20 on a reflex, you can usually
> > focus
> > down to about 13", which means you can really fill the frame with a
> > subject - sorry to sound like a one-man-band, but take a look at what Gene
> > Richards does with the Olympus 20 f2....Because the M lenses only focus
> > down
> > to about 28", there's less ability to do those "in your face" kind of
> > shots....
> 	[Buzz]  
> 	Greetings, B.D.--
> 
> 		You are right about the close focus matter.  However, what I
> very often do is use the smallest aperture that I can on the 21 and trust in
> the DOF.  More often than not, I do get the effect I want, even if the
> framing is a tad haphazard.  The bigger problem I have with the 21 on an M
> is exposure.  I find that I can't at all trust the camera's reading since I
> can never guess the area covered by the reflective spot with the 21,
> especially when shooting fast.  So, more often than not, I estimate the
> exposure.  With a film like XP-2 or Tri-X, more often than not I guess well
> within the film's latitude for the area I want to be 16%.  I never had the
> patience to master the Zone System.
> 
> 			Buzz