pop Posted March 5, 2017 Share #41 Posted March 5, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Sorry, a 28mm has the "rendering" of a 28mm, no matter how much you crop it. Possibly so, depending on what you think a "rendering" might be. The perspective, however, is entirely independent of the lenses in use. Perspective can be observed with the naked eye. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 5, 2017 Posted March 5, 2017 Hi pop, Take a look here 40mm version please. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
biglouis Posted March 12, 2017 Share #42 Posted March 12, 2017 24-70 Q, imho. I don't even care if the lens is slow given the high iso performance of the sensor. LouisB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
likealot Posted March 13, 2017 Share #43 Posted March 13, 2017 It's been 2 years since Q was releassed and it is still selling strong. Demand has not relented. I doubt very much that Leica will all of a sudden stop making the 28mm and releasse a new focal length or even releasse a new focal length alongside the 28mm. Makes absolutely no sense at all. Multi focal Q? Makes even less sense. That's what an SL is for. Q with a Vario bulky and slow lens? Utterly pointless. Look at the fate of X Vario. There must be a reason why Leica chose the 28mm. They didnt just pull a number out of the bag. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Posted March 13, 2017 Share #44 Posted March 13, 2017 Sorry, a 28mm has the "rendering" of a 28mm, no matter how much you crop it.You were right on other occasions, but let's please return to #1. I'd buy a 40mm Q right away. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robert M Poole Posted March 13, 2017 Share #45 Posted March 13, 2017 I actually don't really like the neither-fish-nor-fowl 40-45mm focal length. 35mm is great, 50mm is great. Somewhere in between, not so great, IMO. Around 43mm is considered to be the 'Perfect normal' So 50mm is slightly long and 35 is wide. I don't know why this focal length never took off. Maybe because Leica didn't put 42mm framelines in? I have an Olympus 35SP which has a 42mm 1.7 lens and is really lovely to shoot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
biglouis Posted March 13, 2017 Share #46 Posted March 13, 2017 Personally, if it has to be a fixed length lens then I would prefer something longer, like a 55/2. Step back and it is a normal lens. Step in and it would be good for portraits. Just my two cents. LouisB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted March 14, 2017 Author Share #47 Posted March 14, 2017 Advertisement (gone after registration) Possibly so, depending on what you think a "rendering" might be. The perspective, however, is entirely independent of the lenses in use. Perspective can be observed with the naked eye. Alright, what are we arguing about? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
garygraphy Posted March 22, 2017 Share #48 Posted March 22, 2017 If anything, it will come a year, a year and half after they released the M10... That will be new showrunner until the next SL, and so on It's been 2 years since Q was releassed and it is still selling strong. Demand has not relented. I doubt very much that Leica will all of a sudden stop making the 28mm and releasse a new focal length or even releasse a new focal length alongside the 28mm. Makes absolutely no sense at all. Multi focal Q? Makes even less sense. That's what an SL is for. Q with a Vario bulky and slow lens? Utterly pointless. Look at the fate of X Vario. There must be a reason why Leica chose the 28mm. They didnt just pull a number out of the bag. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.