Nickers Posted July 25, 2011 Share #41 Posted July 25, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I don't have any experience with a 28, having 24 and 35 (50 & 75) and the Elmar 24 definitely has my vote. The detail this captures is stunning, the viewfinder blockage minimal. Best of all is the value for money. L1007341 - Version 2 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! View full size to appreciate, hand held, f8 / f11 not sure exactly Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 25, 2011 Posted July 25, 2011 Hi Nickers, Take a look here M9 Landscapes.... 24 or 28. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Nickers Posted July 25, 2011 Share #42 Posted July 25, 2011 I don't have any experience with a 28, having 24 and 35 (50 & 75) and the Elmar 24 definitely has my vote. The detail this captures is stunning, the viewfinder blockage minimal. Best of all is the value for money. L1007341 - Version 2 | Flickr - Photo Sharing! View full size to appreciate, hand held, f8 / f11 not sure exactly Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Studio58 Posted July 25, 2011 Author Share #43 Posted July 25, 2011 And which of those lenses gives you the most satisfying landscape pictures? Did you read the original post ? I did not ask which lens "I" should use. The post was originally out of interest generally. Does that help ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted July 25, 2011 Share #44 Posted July 25, 2011 Did you read the original post ? I did not ask which lens "I" should use. The post was originally out of interest generally. Does that help ? But the answer would give a pointer towards a complementary alternative lens! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Studio58 Posted July 25, 2011 Author Share #45 Posted July 25, 2011 But the answer would give a pointer towards a complementary alternative lens! There are a number of very informative answers which have been put forward in the thread which are mos insightful and useful. My studio has been associated with portraiture. My experience in shooting landscapes is virtually nil, though I would like to venture down that path. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeicaPassion Posted July 26, 2011 Share #46 Posted July 26, 2011 Another thumbs up for the 24 Elmar. It's stunning. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Studio58 Posted July 26, 2011 Author Share #47 Posted July 26, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) The Elmar seems to receive glowing reports. The question then is, has the Elmar seen any improvements over the 24 2.8, or is it equally good and just a cheaper alternative due to its reduced aperture capability ? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick_S Posted July 27, 2011 Share #48 Posted July 27, 2011 If one is adding a super wide-angle lens to something like a 35, 50, 90 set of lenses, why not go for the classic 21mm lens rather than 24mm? Nick Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sblitz Posted July 27, 2011 Share #49 Posted July 27, 2011 +1 own the biogon and with the new software, perfect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Studio58 Posted July 27, 2011 Author Share #50 Posted July 27, 2011 If one is adding a super wide-angle lens to something like a 35, 50, 90 set of lenses, why not go for the classic 21mm lens rather than 24mm? Nick Good call. And I did consider that option. Just did not want to go that further 3mm. Anyhow, bought a brand new 24 2.8. Did not want to go for the 3.8 as I like the extra stop. Also, while the 3.8 sounds excellent, I have read that the new series from Leica are not as nicely built (optics still great) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.