Thoughts on 21mm for documentary photography

[JoshuaR]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My current kit is 21mm, 28mm, 35mm, 50mm, and 90mm, all on an M10-R.

A couple of weeks ago, I decided that I'd sell my 21mm. (It's the SEM.) It's a lens that I use very rarely. I have a few pictures I've made with it that I really love, but I often find myself resisting its somewhat unreal perspective, with the background pushed very far away and the foreground looming large. I like how much information I can get into the frame, especially indoors, but I sometimes feel that—for my taste—there's too much artificiality in the end result. When I can use the lens without a lot of foreground background separation, creating almost a flat plane of representation, I like the results; it's when the images have that "zoomy" quality that I start to balk. 

In the past I used a 24mm as my widest lens. But I felt it was too close to my 28mm. Now I'm starting to think that, in fact, 28mm is as wide as I want, for my style of photography.

I'd be curious to hear where others have landed on 21mm for documentary photography. Below are some images which I think are typical of how I've been using 21mm.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[JoshuaR]

Science museum. M10 + 21 SEM. In this case, I like the drama, since it connects with the theme of the picture.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Edited 12 hours ago by JoshuaR

[JoshuaR]

Fourth of July. M10 + SEM. Perhaps I wouldn't have been able to take this with my 28mm or 24mm? I like it, the perspective of the image works well with the idea of a car driving fast. At the same time, I can't help but feel that the interior space of the car just looks strange.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Fire station open house. M10 + 21 SEM. I really like this. The space looks lively to me, not artificial. At the same time, I probably could've made this with a 28mm by stepping back.

 

Edited 11 hours ago by JoshuaR

[JoshuaR]

Gardens. I like this one. I feel the perspective is working here.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Edited 12 hours ago by JoshuaR

[JoshuaR]

Fondazione Giorgio Cini, Venice. M10 + Voigtlander 21mm. This (boring) picture has just never sat right with me, because of the way the courtyard no longer looks like it's designed at a right angle.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

In sum: I'm thinking that, even though I like these pictures, 21mm is just too wide for me. Maybe I like my photographs to be more true-to-life? Less stylized? Possibly 28mm is as wide as I want to go?

I'd appreciate any thoughts from others who have wrestled with this focal length.

Edited 12 hours ago by JoshuaR

[lct]

I would try perspective control with 21mm lenses.

[erl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

You've just posted a whole lot of images supporting good reasons to keep the lens.

[JoshuaR]

26 minutes ago, lct said:

I would try perspective control with 21mm lenses.

But isn't perspective control about squaring up the verticals? Whereas I think what I'm struggling with is the unnaturally distant background created by the wide angle.

[JoshuaR]

5 minutes ago, erl said:

You've just posted a whole lot of images supporting good reasons to keep the lens.

Thank you, that's very kind.

To me, the spatial distortion, if that's the term, is really standing out. But maybe that's just because I'm thinking about it? In the same way it's possible to look too much at the bokeh in an image, instead of the subject.

[sandro]

Joshua, you said you dislike the Venice photo, but ask yourself what you exactly wanted to capture, and then decide whether or not it was a good photo. I like it a lot because it does show the architecture and the well-organized garden in the center. And I was about to say the same as erl just said.

Lex

[FrozenInTime]

10 minutes ago, JoshuaR said:

But isn't perspective control about squaring up the verticals? Whereas I think what I'm struggling with is the unnaturally distant background created by the wide angle.

Maybe you seek a cylindrical projection, such as the widelux swing lens camera produces. A stitched 28 or 35mm can look more natural when close to the main subject, removing the corner perspective distortion of a rectilinear super wide. 

 

[JoshuaR]

2 hours ago, FrozenInTime said:

Maybe you seek a cylindrical projection, such as the widelux swing lens camera produces. A stitched 28 or 35mm can look more natural when close to the main subject, removing the corner perspective distortion of a rectilinear super wide. 

I experimented a bit with a Horizon camera recently and loved it. I had to return it—the shutter speeds weren’t fully operational—but will absolutely get another in the future. 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

The idea that I want a different kind of wide angle distortion never occurred to me. Interesting!

I’m beginning to realize something: I’ve been choosing to use my 21 based on how much I want to fit in the frame. But I should also be thinking about whether I want the particular spatial look of 21mm. Sometimes I want one, but not the other. Maybe some confusion about this issue is part of what’s made 21mm difficult for me.

When I was shooting with my Horizon, I was using it for the look. Not because I wanted to fit a lot in the frame. 

Edited 8 hours ago by JoshuaR

[adan]

2 hours ago, JoshuaR said:

A couple of weeks ago, I decided that I'd sell my 21mm....

I'd be curious to hear where others have landed on 21mm for documentary photography. Below are some images which I think are typical of how I've been using 21mm.

A 21 has been an important tool for many of the great Leica M documentary photographers........... I would not give up on it too quickly.

So important for Paul Fusco (LOOK magazine and Magnum) that he even used it for his "self-portrait at work." (click photos in the link for a slide show - much of it 21mm).

https://www.magnumphotos.com/newsroom/paul-fusco-1930-2020/

Ken Heyman was invited to work with his Leica 21 for anthropologist Margaret Meade, and US president Lyndon Johnson, for several books. He said LBJ's This America was 90% 21mm pictures.

https://www.kenheyman.com/index

https://www.kenheyman.com/p/books

Jill Freedman used a Leica with 21 and 35 for her book Firehouse  - earned her an exhibit on the walls of the International Center of Photography (84 Ludlow St, NYC). The book features fire companies Ladder 61 and Engine 66 just off Bartow Ave. in The Bronx.

https://fansinaflashbulb.wordpress.com/2018/03/23/jill-freedman-firehouse/

Earned her other "rewards" as well.....

https://chromafineartgallery.com/product/fh56/

Personally, I've used a 20 or 21 as a documentary mainstay since 1977 - the very first lens I've acquired in every system since then.

Inspired originally by that Fusco picture of the grape-harvester framed by vines (see first link), and reinforced by Freedman's firefighter pictures.

I realized that "THIS is the way to put viewers right in the middle of the action, effectively." Even a 24/28 is too "stand-offish" for me.

Occupy Denver March, 2011. M9, 21mm Elmarit.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Jeff S]

The most important factor determining photographic results is obviously the person behind the gear.  But, for a superb photographer, and for the right project, the equipment used can be vital.

Josef Koudelka exemplified this through his iconic Gypsies project/book, for which he used a 25mm lens, obtained by chance for his Exakta Varex 35mm camera.  The wide angle proved especially well suited for people within close quarters, and for Koudelka’s wonderful eye.  The results speak for themselves.  He later went on to use very different focal lengths, and formats, which better suited subsequent projects.  
 

The following book review attempts to deconstruct some of the images from the book.  But of course nobody can deconstruct Koudelka’s brain and vision.   I’m sure he would have worked similar magic using a 21mm lens, or with something else.

https://erickimphotography.com/blog/2014/01/30/street-photography-book-review-gypsies-by-josef-koudelka/

[zlatkob]

All focal lengths are good and have their own charm. Yes, 21mm is unnatural. But ... sometimes it can be exactly what you want and perfect for the picture. My suggestion: sell the 21mm only if a few years go by and you really, really don't use it.

[erl]

I frequently use a 15mm lens. Super wide lenses do require a 'brain thought' which is not hard to acquire. Two tricks work well.

1. Elevate the camera position to reduce the possible overwhelming foreground look, remembering to tilt the camera down to retain some foreground in frame. 

2.Move in very very tight to subject to create a feeling of intimacy or closeness. This works well with some street situations, where appearing to angle the camera off the target but still including it. A matter of personal taste.

Working a W/A lens is harder work than many. Just practice it.

See attached pic shot on Hasselblad using a 30mm Fisheye lens exploiting a high angle but retaining a wide coverage of subject without over emphasizing any part of it by being too close.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[Ronazle]

Joshua, There are times where only the 21mm or wider can capture the whole image in one frame, when that occurs, there is no really easy or fast substitute, particularly when traveling.  "Street photography" might allow standing back somewhat rather then using the 21mm; I am in the habit of placing a dot/circle level in my accessory clip and sometimes do a quick photo with the level rather than the viewfinder. Sounds terrible, but it, like a 21mm can be occasionally  useful. regards, ron

Edited 6 hours ago by Ronazle

[PhotoCruiser]

I grew up with 50mm lenses, then had zooms and finally switched back to prime lenses and 90% of my shots are 28mm and 14mm, rarely the 105mm.
Other focal lengths? I don't feel the need for other lenses other for a strong tele for wildlife what i almost never do.

But as the title state Documentary Photography i believe that JoshuaR is writing about lenses who are able to capture what human eye sees without distortions and that's about 50mm.
Wide angle lenses create a kind of wired or unnatural looking image, some more and some less but using the hints erl mentioned distortion are limited. Another hint as above is to hold the camera totally horizontal to distorted sides. However the distortions or unnatural look matter mostly on photos with a lot of straight lines and much less on others where it becomes rather invisible.

New technology will help with correcting this problems; lens profiles, perspective control and stitching.
Perspective control will not help in this photo for the problem he dislikes it, but does really impressive work on perspective distortion or lens distortions. However, i don't think that the photo is looking bad or wired as i don't know the place, but he does as he knows that the patio looked different.

Op may do some in-depth tests using a 50mm in a similar scenery to his Fondazione Giorgio Cini, Venice photo to see if the effect of two or 3 stitched photos pleasure his eye more.

Chris

 

 

 

 

Edited 1 hour ago by PhotoCruiser

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M