Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/07/24
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]
On 24 Jul 99, Roger Beamon wrote, at least in part:
Plus, I did the arithmetic and learned that a normal lens for 35mm
film is a tad over 43mm. (Still closer to 50 than 35mm, but it
makes me feel better)
> Interesting, Dan, cause I went just the opposite way. Used 50mm
> as my 90% lens all during my many years with Nikon, then
> Canon. I figured, "normal lens, I'm normal (stop laughing, Walt!),
> so why not? Well, when Leica finally came into my life with an M6
> several years ago, I bought the 35 Summicron pre ASPH with it,
> changed to the ASPH a year later, and now, I see in a 35mm way!
> Until, that is, I view more of HCB's work, then jealously, I want a
> 50 again. Such a life!
>
> > I know I went through a stage where I had not used a 50mm lens for over
> > a year. It was fun playing with wide angle perspectives and it gave
> > what I percieved as "drama" to some otherwise plain stuff.
> >
> > After a while I started carrying a 50 again, and once again it has
> > become my most used focal length. The plain old 50 is still great for
> > pictures of people, and it leaves the "drama" up to me.
> >
> > I hope there is a resurgance of this "straight" photography. Could it
> > be that the blandness of a standard focal length forces the photographer
> > to think more about the content of the shot?
- --
Roger
mailto:roger@beamon.org
Thought for the day:
Work is accomplished by those who have
yet to reach their level of incompetence.