Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/11/08
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]B.D. The 21/2.8 ASPH is unquestionably a super super-wide. I'm just now scanning some Neopan 1600 negs that I shot with that lens. Photos of a practicing drama company practicing for a stage production. The lighting wasn't great. A few hot spots. Not much light at times. A couple of instances with nasty back lighting, yet no problem with flare. I rated the Neopan at 1000 and developed 7 min Xtol 1:1. It was definately the right stuff to use. As was the 21. However, with that lens I never seem to get close enough. I always tell myself to move closer, and I do. Still, it's never close enough. The thing I really like about that lens is that it's so versatile. I can use it close in and far away. I can use it for architectural work or street shooting or any number of situations. I can use it at f11 or f2.8. Great lens! Dave At 11:39 AM 11/8/2001 -0500, you wrote: >Alistair - Can't tell you about the 24, but the 21 ASPH is nothing short >of amazing, in terms of lack of flare, edge to edge sharpness, AND, for >a 21, comparative lack of distortion. I originally had the 21 pre-ASPH, >and while it is a nice lens, the additional investment is well worth it >- the improvements are apparent to the 'nekid' eye. I also use a Sigma >20 1.9 ASPH on my F100...It has two definite advantages under certain >circumstances - it focuses down to 8 inches - from the film plane. And >it is a full stop faster than the M lens. On the other hand, there is no >question the M lens produces less distortion than the Sigma, and then >there are the other obvious advantages of the M... > >B. D. - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html