Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2013/01/19
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Does my 2 thousand dollar Leica 24 have the same distortion as my 2 hundred dollar Nikon 24? I think its psychological that we think not. The reviews I remember reading seem to vindicate that along with my prints. it seemed to me I had more distortion with my Nikon 28 than I did with my Leica 24 asph Elmarit. Not sure if you're saying that's suspect or not. But that was the delusion I was working under at the time; from 1999 to maybe 2005. I think they put more into a lens the less distortion you get out of it most the times that's what the countless lens reviews seem to be telling me. On 1/19/13 1:11 PM, "Henning Wulff" <hjwulff at gmail.com> wrote: > Mark, the drawing of spherical objects in the corners of wideangle shots > depends almost solely on the level of linear distortion - the more > distortion > (within limits) the less spherical objects are turned into oblongs. So if > you > have a low distortion lens, like the 21 SEM or even more so the 21/4.5 > Biogon > or 21/3.4 Super Angulon, heads in the corners don't look very good. A > 'poorly' > performing lens with high levels of barrel distortion will do better with > heads. Unfortunately, the lenses with severe 'mustache' distortion do > worst. > > Henning > > > > On 2013-01-19, at 2:27 AM, Mark Rabiner <mark at rabinergroup.com> wrote: > >> You shoot a crowd of people with a 28 you turn them all into a bunch of >> midgets. Some people don't take to this especially people who are not real >> tall to begin with. . I had a client get irate about that once. I've had >> very few irate clients. But he was right. After that if I used a 28 in a >> crowd I'd not get the people from head to foot only the top half of them. >> Waste up. If your using Leica not Nikon optics the heads at the edges are >> less watermelon like. >> >> On 1/19/13 5:19 AM, "Frank Dernie" <Frank.Dernie at btinternet.com> wrote: >> >>> I have read that often over the last couple of decades, but personally I >>> find >>> 28 too wide to be of use unless in -very- crowded situations, which I >>> avoid >>> due to claustrophobia.. I bought one, but it pretty well never gets used. >>> Should sell it I suppose... >>> I find the 50 most useful, and I like the 75-90 range best (by a long >>> way) >>> FD >>> On 19 Jan, 2013, at 02:09, Richard Man <richard at richardmanphoto.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> For many people, 28mm has been the standard wide for awhile. Just a tad >>>> more than the 35mm, but more useful on the street, without the >>>> "immersive" >>>> of 24 or 21. >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Leica Users Group. >>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> >> >> >> >> -- >> Mark William Rabiner >> Photography >> http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/ >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Leica Users Group. >> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information >> > > > Henning Wulff > henningw at archiphoto.com > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Leica Users Group. > See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information -- Mark William Rabiner Photography http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/lugalrabs/