21mm for Street Photgraphy vs 25mm

Hi, All

 

I've been using a CV25/4 for the last couple of months, mostly for

street photo and some indoor shots. I was wondering if anyone uses

a wider fl, like the cv 21 for street shooting. If anyone has used

both focal lengths, how did it play out for you? Also, would it

make sense to keep the 25 and get a 21 or even 15, or would one wide

lens keep you covered, as long as you have a 35 for tighter shots(as

I do)? I realize that ultimately only I can answer these questions

for myself given my type of shooting and taste, but I usually learn

something from others' experience in similar terrain. Thanks in

advance,

 

GB

it seems to me that the 25mm v. 21mm conundrum is a draw. Similar to the 35mm v 28mm conundrum - each only separated by 7 or 8 degrees - some say immaterial. Only you can answer the question as you stated. I don't know what it is you do, but to draw a truly different sketch consider the 15mm instead of the 21mm. Keep the 25mm, I wish I had.

GB -

 

The alternative of course is to lose the 25mm, forget the 15mm, and get the 21mm IMHO.

 

I've got the 35mm and the 28mm. Al Kaplan has suggested to consider a 21mm instead of the 28mm for the precise reason that the 28mm & 35mm are so close degreewise. It really makes sense to me. 21mm would work great in cramped quarters.

Give the 24 a thought - it kicks all other down and up from this focal length of the table.

The quality and versantility of this lens is not from planet earth.

Get the 4mm -- really wide. . .

I find my CV 15 and my Nikkor 20 to be indispensable for shooting in very tight interior spaces-absolutely indispensable, and while they both have yielded a good variety of interesting shots on the street, I tend to exploit them most for apprehending entire structures without having to tilt the camera, which is perhaps not a top priority in street photography. I would rather have my Nikkor 24 for general street photography situations-or my 35 cron on the Leica.

I just sold the CV21/4 and bought ZM 25/2.8. The 21 was just too wide for me for street. I always ended up with lots of blank space with the 21mm, but perhaps I should have just moved in closer. I also did not like using external VF. Now I just use 28mm frame lines on a 0.58 plus alpha. Works very well so far. Some first samples <a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/megaperls/tags/biogon25/">here</a>.<p>

 

But yeah, it is very personal... see how it goes.<p>

 

=======<p>

Q: Do you find that you are putting less in the frame now, with the new lens?</p>

<p>GW: I don’t really know; I just take pictures, and they look almost the same to me. I really don’t know how to answer that question. The only real difference is, with a 28, racking it out as far as it’ll go, let’s say in terms of a face, there’s a lot less space, with a 35mm, left. It’s an interesting little difference. The minute you back up a little, then it becomes a question of how far you’ve got to back up. So with a 35 you’re probably going to back up more, usually. Or you’ll do things without feet… I really don’t want to look at contact sheets that are going to look the same as a 28. Even if I could do that with a 35, by changing the distance or whatever. It’s all about not being bored.</p>

<p>Q: Again, just to keep the problems interesting…</p>

<p>GW: Yeah. And the only way you can do that is finding out how much you can get away with, you know? It’s true.</p>

<p><em>“An interview with Garry Winogrand” (By Charles Hagen, published in Afterimage, Dec. 1977)</em><p>

 

=======<p>

 

<a href=" title="Photo Sharing"><img src="http://static.flickr.com/26/100787306_1e9abb9697.jpg" width="500" height="333" alt="Ascending" /></a>

Hi, Dirk

 

Funny running into you here, I'm using film I bought from you for this kind of work, the np400. Anyway, The way I use the 25 is either for full body shots of people in environment, where the 35 would'nt cover, or up close head shots w more bckgrd showing, as well as that rounder look u get w a wa. I tend to work close either w the 35 or 25. Would post examples but lack scanner.

Another quick point, in comparing the 25 vf fov w what I see through an SLR's 28, they're almost identical. I'm guessing the 25vf is condervative, if so, how would you compensate to get the full view when shooting? Just use the outside of the frame?

Gabriel -- thanks, yes I remembered your name. I happen to be a Leica shooter myself.

 

My choices when to use a lens pretty much matches yours. I now have ZM 25, 35 cron and

ZM50 - nicely spaced I think. I had the 21 VF on the 0.58 M6 and judged the difference

between its and the 28mm frame lines, gathering the 25mm must be somewhere in the

middle. I concluded the 25mm is pretty much the full finder window on a 0.58 mag finder,

but I always use the 28mm lines as orientation and leave the rest to the 'element of surprise'.

So far it worked. Since starting on the rangefinders and street I don't really do the exact

framing I used to do with an SLR. I like that style.

25/24 is the way to go. The wider 21 is better for cramped quarters and when you need all that foreground. The wider you go, the tougher it is to full the frame in a people type scene.

I used a 21 on an M4 in the street many years ago. 35mm was my normal lens at the time. Some images came out great, but I had trouble making a decent image in many situations. Now I have 40mm and 25mm, which is a nice spread. I find myself leaving the 25 on as my standard. I like it a lot. I find the difference between a 25 and 28 to be small, but the difference between a 21 and a 25 to be quite large.

I keep the 28 ASPH on one body for people shooting, and the 21 ASPH on another for whatever comes along in need of emphasis (though not exclusively). Don't know much about C/Vs (I have the 15 Heliar and don't care for it, and just picked up a Nocton), but I never use 35 or 50. The 75 Lux is always waiting patiently in the bag, though.

 

You might find this as interesting and instructive, as I did: http://www.whitehouse.gov/ask/20030625.html

 

Cheers,

Ray Hull

Ray: What don't you like about the 15cv? I've heard only good things about it.

Dirk: How would you describe the difference in look between the CV and Zeiss lenses you've had/used? Have you used the cv25 to compare it to the ZI? I noticed you dev the np400 in rodinal, was curious what speed you're getting out of that combo, cause I can barely get 200 out of it.

Gabriel,

Bad vignetting, cheesy sharp metal edges, and the kind of build quality you'd expect on an even cheaper lens (red "dot" doesn't even line up at TDC).

 

OK for the price, I guess, since it includes a VF, but I never use it anymore.

Ray

I would not say I am an expert in judging the differences between the CV and the ZM. Perhaps more contrast on the Zeiss? I have not used the CV25. I prefer the feel of the ZMs or Leicas to the CVs and willing to pay for that preference. I rated it 200 and it was very good, but even at 400 it was OK. Mind you it was standdevelopment, not sure how different that is compared to normal Rodinal.

How do you do stand dev at 1:50?

In that case I did 1:300 for three hours, if I remember correctly. Time does not really matter,

since it just stops with exhaustion. Did some agitation in the beginning. Worked very well

and no fuss.... love the technique & results.

Once had the CV 25mm but swapped it for a horseman 5x4 camera, too good a deal to pass up.

 

Soon after came the chance to buy a reasonably priced CV21mm which I did. Although it's good for what it costs I must say that I miss the 25mm a lot. Maybe it's the screw adapter or something but I just find the 25mm much sharper than the 21 and prefer its angle of view. The 25mm was on a real leica bayonet to screw adapter, the 21 is on a CV adapter.

 

Though the difference in view angle between the 21mm and 25mm isn't great on paper, I find that the two lenses look incredibly different.

 

Stick with the 25mm imho, it's a beauty. I don't need the rangefinder coupling on the 21mm, I'm sure others agree.