[Leica] Choice of lenses

[rangefinder at screengang.com (Didier Ludwig)]

I'm less picky on the exact field of view. I look through the finder and 
just use the frameline of the actually mounted lens, and step for or 
backwards - no more philosophy on my side. The only lens that could really 
fit my field of view needs would be a f1.4/28-75 zoom. But then I'd have a 
bulk issue... and a SLR pentaprism finder...

I bought the 40 Nokton as 35 subtitute because of the size/price/performance 
relationship. It became the standard lens on the M6, and I have never cared 
about the 5mm difference. Though, on the newly aquired R-D1 with a 1.5 crop 
it's FOV became a bit too long (60mm), that's why I have bought a fast 35 to 
have something 50-like on that camera. The 75 and it's FOV is another lens I 
like, as well as 15 and 28. If there's a fast 24, 25 or 28 in the future, 
I'll consider it for the R-D1.

But as said, the shot counts, not the focal length. Gimme any glass and I'll 
shoot right on. 

Didier



>Hello to both CVUG and LUG,
>
>I have been seeing the occasional discussion of 40mm lenses for  
>rangefinder cameras.  I have used the Leitz that was standard on my  
>CL and the Voigtlander on a Voigtlander body.  Both were wonderful  
>lenses, sharp, minimal flare, (despite their difference in age) but I  
>didn't really like the field of view.  It was neither medium wide,  
>like both eyes open, nor the more selective 50mm one eye open view.   
>For wide I like the 35mm for recording the scene on the street.   
>Wider I like the 28 and wider yet the 21.  I haven't used my  
>Voigtlander 15mm enough to really get the hang of it yet.  If I want  
>a tighter view the 50 will do it.  As an aside I have been using a  
>50mm on my R-D1 that gives, more or less, the tighter view of a 75mm  
>on a 35 film camera.  I can see why people like that field of view.   
>It has been useful to me on the street.
>
>So that is just my two cent opinion.   What are your thoughts?
>
>Happiest with rangefinders, Richard