Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Guest guy_mancuso

Lens advice/ i want something fast in wide

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

24 'lux -- that has a nice ring to it.

 

I keep noticing that as we move from 135 to 50 we get from 2.8 to 1.0.

 

Why can't that trend continue -- 24 'nocti! Long Live the Lens!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guy

 

Biggest advantage for the 24 on the M8 is that you don't need an external viewfinder.

I really hate those things on any M.

maurice

 

 

How difficult is it to use a 21mm lens with no external viewfinder and estimate the frame with any degree accuracy?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How difficult is it to use a 21mm lens with no external viewfinder and estimate the frame with any degree accuracy?

 

In one of the posts on the previous page, someone said they do it all the time.

 

I do the same thing with my CV15 (W-h-e-r-e-s the Fast Wide Prime, Leica?!!!). Although I mount the 15mm finder on the M8, I use it to aim and intuit the framing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

I'm really starting to lean to a 24mm elmarit. i really miss that lens. Actually thinking of selling my Oly 24mm R mount shift lens . i fell over the deep end on this M stuff

 

hard part is finding a 24mm lens. man you guys bought everything out there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
How difficult is it to use a 21mm lens with no external viewfinder and estimate the frame with any degree accuracy?

 

Impossible...with any kind of accuracy. The M8's finder really shows about a 24 mm EFOV when one centers his or her eye in it.

 

Cheers,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

How difficult is it to use a 21mm lens with no external viewfinder and estimate the frame with any degree accuracy?

 

 

I do it all the time

. Just press my eye up tight against the finder and use the whole frame. No doubt the 24 is a bit more precise with its clearly defined lines, but the whole frame works well for me and the 21...

 

PS: And obviously I disagree with Sean

 

PPS: I also have a CV 28 finder which is excellent and I never bother using it if that helps...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest guy_mancuso

Need to blame someone. LOL lenses have become somewhat scarce out there.

 

 

Jack you should talk . ROTFLMAO

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There are 24's out there...I know at least one shop that has them in stock.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do it all the time . Just press my eye up tight against the finder and use the whole frame. No doubt the 24 is a bit more precise with its clearly defined lines, but the whole frame works well for me and the 21...

 

PS: And obviously I disagree with Sean

 

PPS: I also have a CV 28 finder which is excellent and I never bother using it if that helps...

 

I'm with you Jack. I crop most of my photos anyway and having a little unseen extra to work with may be beneficial in the long run.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Guy for the price of one used 25 leica you can get both the ziess 21 and 25 and have money left over. Just a thought David

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
New or used Dan. Looking for a good used one

 

New ones....used, as you probably have noticed are unobtanium.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It *Would* be simple to do arithmetic with dollars -- *except* for the unique character of the 24mm f2.8-A lens! I agree with Puts' assessment that this is the one lens an M owner must have.

 

I also agree with Sean's point that you can't see the FOV of the 21 in the M8 finder, but I do this all the time. I imagine the FOV for the lens I am using for all the lenses I use. Unless I'm using a long lens and the focusing is important, I rarely notice the framelines in the finder.

 

Since the M8 gives more than the framelines indicate most of the time, intuiting the FOV is required anyway. That is, this thing (the M8) has to become an extension of the photog's body/process. Look, shoot -- or -- look, focus, shoot.

 

I was going to say how surprised I am that I end up printing a lot of uncropped images. Of course, I'm can't see the images I didn't get because my internal-FOV wasn't correct.

 

Fortunately, we're free to describe all the fish that "get away."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I do it all the time . Just press my eye up tight against the finder and use the whole frame. No doubt the 24 is a bit more precise with its clearly defined lines, but the whole frame works well for me and the 21...

 

PS: And obviously I disagree with Sean

 

PPS: I also have a CV 28 finder which is excellent and I never bother using it if that helps...

 

Maybe I have fat eyes. <G> The key root word I noticed in the poster's question was "accurate". Assuming people's eyes are roughly the same size, centering one's eye in the finder shows a view that is slightly outside the 24 mm frame lines. And that, in fact, matches the 24/2.8's coverage, more or less, beyond a few feet focus distance.

 

I have heard some people talk about pressing their eye in and then looking left, right, up and down to see to the edges of the finder (although never the whole frame area at once) but, even then, I'll bet that view is a little tight.

 

My own way of working requires that I am always able to see the whole frame, all at once. And I need that area just outside the frame lines to compensate for the fact that the frame lines themselves are tight. Hence, the full frame, with my eye centered, about matches the 24, not the 21.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Guy,

 

Well CV doesn't have any fast lenses wider than 28 so its, of course, Zeiss or Leica. All four candidates (Leica 21 and 24, Zeiss 21 and 25) are excellent. The two Zeiss lenses show slightly higher contrast (for better or worse), and slightly better flare resistance, but I happen to love the way the current Leica 21 and 24 draw. I shared Bill's affection for the 24/2.8 and the 21/2.8 really gives a very similar look. One the other hand, you could buy the Zeiss 21 and 25, get both new bayonets from Zeiss (needed) send both new bayonets to John for milling and still have spent less money than buying either of the Elmarits. Of course, as that process above illustrates, the "plug n' play" advantage of the Elmarits is handy.

 

Maybe you want to reread the reviews of 21s and 24s (or at least look at the comparison pics again).

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What it translates to is -- if you take the letters in the name Leica, and you shake them up and move them around and make new words, you always get the word Magic.

 

Then, if you calculate how long you will use the lenses, you quickly forget how much they cost.

 

It called (with a nod to Sean) "drawing" on the bank account.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...