Dear Roger,
Thanks for picking up on the idea for the thread. My natural tendency is to think moderate wide to standard rather than long/tele. Maybe this has something to do with those first years with a compact Olympus Trip and its fixed 40mm lens. Conditioning if you like. The same camera has probably also conditioned me to prefer rangefinders to SLRs: handling a camera with a direct viewfinder seems more familiar ( I also like the Nikonos-V for the same reason).
So could it be that by conditioning I don't naturally reach for the longer lens - say 75mm and above - when going out to shoot whatever I happen to see? But if I do take it, perhaps just for a change from the usual diet of shorter lenses, its selectivity brings greater impact to the pictures.
At one time I shot some pictures (like you, with HP5plus at 400ASA) in Treptower Park, the enormous Soviet war memorial park in East Berlin. The colossal figure of Mother Russia and the sculpted stone panels down the sides of the park would suggest wide-angle treatment. But it was the 105/2.5 on an F3HP that got me the shots I liked. The same again at Colditz Castle, at the time a mental institution, where the size of the building and the courtyards would suggest wide-angle. The 180 you mentioned stayed in England because it was too large to hoof around with. The choice of camera - SLR - was dictated by the choice of lens. I doubt I'll have time to find and scan the negatives to show on the forum, but it's given me an idea for some shots to put on a website if I start one at some point.
So, in summary, I get a pleasant surprise when shooting with something more selective but it can feel uncomfortable to start with. I'm talking here of course of walkabout photography - for outdoor sport it would feel natural enough to reach for the long stuff.
Best wishes,
Tom
