Would you ever use a 21 or 24/25 lens as a everyday lens?

A 25mm on an M8 gives about the same FOV as a 35mm on a film M and since 80-90% of the time I have 35mm on my M6 I'm seriously looking at getting a 25mm to use as my everyday lens for my M8.
 
I don't think you mean on crop sensors, so I will not state the obvious regarding the M8. With regard to a 21-25mm full frame... It depends if I'm comfortable with my subject and people / interiors were my main subject, maybe. Basically if I'm in tight speaces or very close to my subject... I'd say yes.
 
Last edited:
On a FF or film body, no. Super wides are fun to use but if shot after shot has that forced perspective look, I find i get very bored.
 
Last edited:
i would go for the zm 21/2.8 but i really like the tiny size of the cv lens much better.

the tiny cv lenses are somewhat addictive...
 
kshapero said:
Focusing is automatically easy. You will catch everything. Metering isn't hard. So why not?:cool:
Click to expand...

Sure.
If I photographed in/on the subway a lot. Or various crowded markets. Or various crowded streets with open air markets. Malls. Claustrophobic places.
Or I had a camera that robbed me of my mm's. ;)
Or I had a Garry Winogrand Wannabe complex. :cool:

I actually use 17-35, 24-70 & 24mm lenses a lot. With the zooms cranked out wide. And a 45mm on 6x7. That's WIDE.
 
28 no problem. Anything wider would be difficult as general purpose. I also don't like external finders.
 
I have done (21/4 on Nikon F) and still so, sort of (38/4.5 Biogon on 44x66mm is all but identical to 21mm on 35mm), but yet, curiously, I almost never do on a Leica.

Cheers,

R.
 
Certainly! On my Olympus OM, the 21mm f/2.0 has become my "usual" lens - it stays on the body, and is only rarely taken off for short periods. It's tiny (smaller than most 50mm lenses), fast, sharp, and contrasty. What's not to like? I do like exaggerated perspective, but then again, I do try to keep it subtle:

Butterfly_Trust_by_philosomatographer.jpg


the_specialists_by_philosomatographer-d37vqba.jpg


(both of these were printed in the darkroom on 8x10 VC paper, and scanned)

If you "see" wide, then photographs taken with a wide-angle lens look surprisingly normal after a while of continuous use.

The same goes for my medium format work - I shoot 50mm on the Mamiya 6x7cm all the time, which equates to around 23mm. I simply love this angle of view.
​
 
Sure! I've traveled with a 20 as only lens and it's been great. I find a real wide (20-28) a lot more usable than a normal as only lens... Normal lenses are nice for people and not being too close, or for isolating landscape fragments, but wide ones let me get "the place", "the feeling" and also give a lot of space to contrast foreground and background and tell the story: most of the times foreground is near camera and background not far away... My everyday lens is 28, and I guess my limits are 20 and 35... I find huge the difference between 20 and 15: I use my 15 for very few situations... And a 50 is totally a tele...

Cheers,

Juan
 
I used and still use the CV 21 as an everyday lens on my M4-P for periods of time, the f/4 is a bit limiting for low light, but I can handhold it down to 1/15th of a second which makes it work even with 400 film.

3471080842_0552092678.jpg


3473325536_93f15e62d7.jpg


Two 21mm portraits.
 
A 28 on a Leica is about as wide as I like to go for an every-day-carry, but I own a Nikon F3 with a 24/2.0 and DA-2 sportfinder permanently mounted that I tend to use mostly for shooting street.

Living in NYC getting in close to people is not a problem, and I can get away with having very-very bad boundries. To be even more bold I recently got another motor drive so all my Nikons have motor drives.

Also have a Plaubel 69W that's a 21mm equiv. I use this for urban landscape and without the rise/fall and shift it would not be so usefull. This is a slower shooter only because its 6x9 and I only get 8 shots with 120. Generally I carry a Rolleiflex with the Plaubel.

For MF street a Mamiya 6 with a 50/4.0 (28 equivelent) is perfect using AEL mode.

The general concensus is: the bigger the camera the bolder I can get. Seems that people are less likely to confront someone with old fim cameras IMHO, especially when I carry two.

Cal
 
the two lenses i use the most on my r-d1 are a 12mm (~18mm) and a fast 35mm (~53mm). still, most of the time I will use the 12mm, as it will allow me to capture the feeling of the place, like a tighter fov couldn't.

this of course depends on the area i am at, for instance a market or crowded streets, or beautiful landscapes, and the way i feel at the day. sometimes i feel like going for details, then the 35mm is great.

on film, it's a bit weird, i have a vivitar ultra wide & slim, plastic fixed focus camera with a 22mm lens, and have a great time with it, but i end up not using the 21mm lens on my film M as much as i thought i would. i think it's more of a crop factor thing, when carrying both cameras on a trip i end up taking the 12mm only as it works great on the r-d1. when i need an ultra wide, i just use the 12mm, though it's wild wideness sometimes is not so adequate.
 
I am assuming you are using full frame camera . For me it usually about working distance. A 21mm can be a lot of fun. I have both the ZM and the CV and the CV is so small and light it's really nice. For an everyday lens I would probably choose the 25. I have a 25mm for my Nikon rangefinders and it's a great focal length to use as a everyday lens. Both the 21 and 25 are pretty close so it's hard to go wrong. Jim
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom