Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/04/01

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

Subject: RE: [Leica] 28mm vs. 35 mm lenses
From: "Peter Jon White" <PeterJonWhite@PeterWhiteCycles.com>
Date: Sat, 1 Apr 2000 17:46:42 -0500

Paul wrote;

> PeterJonWhite writes the most intelligent response to a "what
> shall I get"
> question I have seen on the LUG in over a year.
>
> << When you're out taking pictures with your 50mm or 90mm, all
>  you have to do is move the frame selector lever to the 28mm
> or 35mm position
>  to see what you would get with either lens.
>
> Except, it is not really true that you get to see what the
> lens will display
> on film. I think you have to look at the pictures taken with
> each lens to see
> the real difference. Everything looks the same through the viewfinder
> regardless of what lens is mounted.

I couldn't agree more, but it should not go unmentioned that the view
through the viewfinder is at least as good if not better, the shorter the
focal length used, since the 35 and 28 have greater depth of field than
either of his other lenses, the near infinite depth of field in the
viewfinder causing a greater divergence from the final image in the longer
lenses than with the shorter.

So if the Leica viewfinder is a sufficiently useful tool in composing a shot
with the 50 and 90 lenses, it's (IMO) an even better tool with the shorter
lenses.

PJW