[Leica] New 28mm Elmarit M Lens and the vignetting saga

[hoppyman at bigpond.net.au (G Hopkinson)]

Yes the background perspective and the foreground DoF are what made me say 
it was the 28. I was close to the shore. I had no 35 on
that trip. I shall delve further into the archives here!
Thanks for being interested.
Cheers
Hoppy

-----Original Message-----
From: lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org 
[mailto:lug-bounces+hoppyman=bigpond.net.au@leica-users.org] On Behalf Of
Lottermoser George
Sent: Thursday, 18 January 2007 10:02
To: Leica Users Group
Subject: Re: [Leica] New 28mm Elmarit M Lens and the vignetting saga

Now that you mention it - it does have a "normal" look rather than a  
"wide" look. But I wasn't there. I don't know the distances involved.  
If it were the 28 you'd have to have been pretty close to the shore  
to have the trees cut off. By the same token - the background trees  
are significantly smaller than the foreground trees - but how far  
away are they? The more I look at it the more it looks like a 50 (35  
at shortest).

Regards,
George Lottermoser
george@imagist.com



On Jan 17, 2007, at 5:54 PM, G Hopkinson wrote:

> What do you think, could this be the fifty?


_______________________________________________
Leica Users Group.
See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information