David, Agreed on all points, It depends on what you are seeing and shooting. I did mean a 35mm f/0.9 M lens. Such a lens for an SLR would be quite a monster. Sometimes I wonder how long it will take the live view technology to catch up so that we can look at 2048 x 1536 collimated to infinity and updated at 70Hz, in the viewfinder, and mirrors and shutters can go away. Charlie. ---- David Young <telyt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > a aa wrote: > > >Interesting you regard 90 as normal. My 'normal' is in fact a 50. On > >the R I use an 8 element Summilux. > > Everyone "sees' differently. Most folks use a 50 or a 35 as > "normal", and I admit to being the "odd man out". These days, my > "normal" lens is the 80~200/4 Vario, followed closely by the 400 > Telyt. Wides are used less than 10% of the time. With the R8 is was > the 21/4 SA, and with the Canon 30d it is the 10~22 w/a Canon zoom > (not a bad lens, though it shows some barrel distortion at the wide > end. OTOH, at 10mm (effectively 16mm) it's one heckuva wide, when > your back is to the wall!). > > >Regarding a 35/0.9 lens, if this were to be made for an SLR it would > >be HUGE, bigger than a 50 of the same aperture and performance. > > I think such lenses, be they made by Leica, Voigtlander or anyone > else, are in the domain of rangefinder cameras, alone. I'd hate to > see/pay for/carry such a lens for a reflex camera! > > >I remember seeing an article in Mod Photo on Voigtlander > >prototypes and high speed - 0.95, 60 mm lens was mentioned. > > Hmm... I really should read more! Perhaps Leica were worried about > losing their crown as producer of the world's fastest lenses, for 35mm? > > Cheers! > > > --- > > David Young, > Logan Lake, CANADA > > Wildlife Photographs: http://www.telyt.com/ > Personal Web-pages: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt > Stock Photography at: http://tinyurl.com/2amll4 ------ Unsubscribe or change to/from Digest Mode at: http://www3.telus.net/~telyt/lrflex.htm Archives are at: //www.freelists.org/archives/leicareflex/