Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1999/09/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]The new 21 aspheric is a fabulous lens. Even, corner to corner sharp. The M lenses do indeed hook up with the rangefinder, it's just that you need an external viewfinder with the 21 and 24, although some LUG members swear that they don't really need the external finder for the 24. While the Nikon 20 is a nice lens, as is the Olympus 21 f2, there are two terrific advantages to using the wides on the M as opposed to any reflex: 1. Because you are looking through a picture window, you will see a much brighter image that you do through a 2.8 or even f2 lens in low light. What you see in terms of brightness is very close to what you'd see with your unaided eye, rather than what you see through the diaphragm, mirror and prism; 2. Again, because you are looking through the picture window and focusing through it, focusing is both easier and more accurate with the rangefinder and wides than it is with any reflex. The reflex, after all, is giving you a wide but very small picture of the world, while the rangefinder is giving you a close to life-size picture....and a bright focusing area. As to 21 v 24, having just wrestled with the same dilemma myself and ended up with the 24, I have to say it's a matter of personal taste. If you can get both, you have the problem solved. :-)...But it's always easier to move in closer with the 21, or, God forbid, crop the image later, than it is to back off with the 24, where, in certain situations, it just won't be wide enough... Good luck... - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us]On Behalf Of Ruralmopics@aol.com Sent: Wednesday, September 15, 1999 11:58 AM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: [Leica] Scared of 21mm Well, not scared, really, but . . . Anyway, in my SLR experience I've pretty much adopted the 24mm as my normal lens. I do carry a 35mm but don't use it a whole lot. We also have 20mm at work but I find it too wide for most situations. So, Leica-wise, I've got a M4-p coming and I bought a 35mm f2 as my first lens (taking my own advice to new photographers because I consider myself new at this Leica thing). But I'm wondering about the wide angle specifically 24mm vs 21mm. I'm thinking I want a 24mm but the 21mm has been the Leica standard for so many years. Is there any reason to expect I would like the Leica 21mm better than the Nikon 20mm. Wouldn't they be pretty similar. Also, I know you can't view these wide angles through the viewfinders but does the focus link up?