Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/11/07
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Robert Appleby wrote: > > >>>> > Date: Tue, 7 Nov 2000 00:20:32 +0100 > From: "Alan Hull" <hull@telia.com> > Subject: Re: [Leica]Why a 35mm lens? > Message-ID: <200011070621.HAA10357@d1o915.telia.com> > References: > > > From: John Collier > > find that I use an M body with a 35 lens for about 99% of my > shooting. I > - --------------------- > John and others. I find it interesting that so many luggers seem to > prefer the 35mm lens. When I was starting out in photography the most > common advice was ... Fill the frame. Followed by ... but do not get > too close because of perspective distortion. > > May I ask those luggers who use the 35mm (or shorter) lens MORE than > any other, if they can explain why they do so. For instance, is it > ease of use or do you actually like the results. > > For me, I find that anything less than 50mm is an "in your face " > style. > > TIA > Alan > <<<<< ><Snip> Recently I've been going out on my treks with more than the lens than the lens on my camera. I've gone out with both the 50 Summicron and 35 Summicron Asph. The 50 feels like my telephoto. And the 35 is seldom not as wide as i need. I anticipate having this be my mini kit often for the next 50 years. mark rabiner