Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2005/09/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Good point, Didier. I shouldn't have tried to copy with the 50 what I did with the 35. Different lens, different use. So, I guess I'll have to buy a 35/2 of 1.4 :-) Or spend some time getting used to my 50 again. Strange thing is: I only have this problem with a RF and not with a SLR. Must be because the SLR is more a wysiwyg principle. I just like an RF more. > From: Didier Ludwig <rangefinder@screengang.com> > Reply-To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> > Date: Sat, 17 Sep 2005 22:32:37 +0200 > To: Leica Users Group <lug@leica-users.org> > Subject: Re: [Leica] That 50 > > Philippe > > Being used to the 35 does not mean that you should try to have the same > framings and compositions with the 50. So dont step back - look for another > framing (or use the 35). Or go even closer! > > But I agree the 50 is a "difficult" focal lenth. Too short for a tele, too > long for a wide. Maybe that's why it is "universal". Personally I use the > 40 > and 75 more than the 50. > > Didier > > > >> The last year I shot almost a 100% of my photos with a 35. Sometimes a 90. >> Never the 50. My eye just naturally seems to pick the 35. >> I went out tonight to take some shots, so I needed my fastest lens. The 35 >> is 2.5 (a Color Skopar) and the 90 is 4 (a Rokkor). My 50 is a Summicron >> so >> the logical choice. No, no 'Lux and Co here. >> >> I had do 2 or 3 steps back for every single photo I had to make. >> Lost the shot almast every time, I'm sure. >> >> Damn that 50 is hard to getting used to again! >> And difficult to master, too. > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >