Rob F. Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Nikon makes a 24mm f/2 Nikkor. It is not quite as good as their f/2.8, but when you need f/2, it's pretty good. It can't be that tough to equal or exceed it, whether by Leica, Cosina, or Zeiss. It occurred to me while shooting under low-light conditions recently. I could even have used a 21mm f/2, but in the interests of not being overly demanding, I'd settle for a 24mm. What say you? Anyone else feel this need? You know, we clamored here for a 50/1.4 ASPH, and a 75mm f/2 ASPH, and they both happened. So if we were to make noise about a 24/2, then . . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Nikon made a 24/2 for its rangefinder? Or you referring to the F mount lens? An Ultron 21 or 24mm would be nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eliot_rosen1 Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 I could live without one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patrick_jelliffe Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Yeah, that would be a great lens to have in the bag! Leica might do it for a minimum of 1,000 units ;^)... We could all live without film, and shoot with albumen coated glass plates, and, even then, a 24mm f/2 lens would be nice. Cheers Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jochen_S Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Fast RF WAs would be very nice to have. - Are goggled versions imaginable? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew_hall1 Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Just get the Fuji Natura S/Black: http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00BEC0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Good point, Andrew! Rob, Trevor might have one for sale. Enquire with him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rob F. Posted January 7, 2006 Author Share Posted January 7, 2006 Vivek: The Nikkor is in Nikon F mount, for the SLR. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
andrew robertson Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 I really enjoy my Natura Black. It is about the same size as an Olympus XA - the Natura is a bit wider but also a bit shorter, and they have approximately the same volume. It's a really nice little camera, with the important controls such as exposure compensation, infinity focus, and flash off that are typically found on higher end P&S cameras. Also, it has the fastest and widest lens in a new P&S that I have heard of (excepting the GR21). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sanford Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 My experience with the 24mm F2 AIS Nikkor is not only is it "not quite as good as the 24mm F2.8" it is a true Nikkor dog. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricM Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 24 is one of my most commonly used sizes. 20 and 21 is too much, 28 isn't enough. nice to have. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vivek iyer Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 It (24/2 AIS) is a dog at/near infinity. Does very well at close ranges. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_haller Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 no compromises please - the current 24asph is a top performer - I am glad it is not about av-light. Get�s often sold because of the need for ex. viewfinder - but I think its a real nice change sometimes to use this well made finder... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip_williams Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 I often use a 24/2.0 on my Olympus OM's. It's fabulous and my favorite wide angle focal length. I sold my 21mm SLR lenses in deference to rangefinders for ultra WA's. It's hard to beat that wide bright finder in the 24/2 coupled with an OM-1. Skip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fjords Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 Only if the digital M has a 1.5 crop factor;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
djphoto Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 I'd like to have one to use on an Epson digital rangefinder. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
joseph_wang3 Posted January 7, 2006 Share Posted January 7, 2006 I am sure if Zeiss is making a 24mm f2, it would exceed Nikon's performance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhooru Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 24 2.8 Nikkor is great, luv that lens and felt more natural to me than the CV 21 i used on the M's. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ezio_gallino Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 It will be great to have a luminous 35 for digital M, but I'm afraid will cost on the $2500-3000 range considering what is elmar 24/2.8 cost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsimmons Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 It took me a while to get the hang of my CV 25mm f/4, but now that I've learned it, I like it a lot. It's a good jump down from my 40mm. But YEAH, having anything better than f/4 would be great. Now, f/4 does give you almost all the DOF you need, but being able to open up and use faster shutter speeds would be great. I think you're talking a big chunk of glass, though, if it will be up to Leica standards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frederick_muller Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 If you really need the extra stop, you could probably adapt the Canon FD 24mm f2.0 or the Vivitar FD 24mm f2.0 to Leica M mount. I think a couple of other manufacturers made 24mm f2.0's as well. I think a 24mm Summicron is doable, but the question is image quality. I doubt the Canon FD 24mm f2.0 and Vivitar 24mm f2.0 could compare to the performance of the 28mm Summicron at f2.0. I don't know where Leica would draw the line on image quality, but it's got to be somewhere around there. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
frederick_muller Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I would second Skip's sentiments ... a 24mm f2.0 is a wonderful lens on an SLR. It would be a really interesting exercise to compare some of those SLR 24mm f2.0's to the 28mm Summicron. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billc1 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 How about a 24/4 or 24/4.5 lens something compact and lightweight. They could call it their traveling series. A 24 summicron would be pretty heavy and big to carry around. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
todd_phillips1 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 I agree with Bill. A 24 F:4 would be a perfect light and small travel lens and probably would do very well in the market place. I'd also like to see Leica bring back the 35mm F:2.8 Summaron to add to the 35 series. It would be a somewhat smaller and without aspherics, a cheaper alternative to the lux or cron. It might be marketed as "the B&W" lens. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billc1 Posted January 8, 2006 Share Posted January 8, 2006 Lets call it the 24/4 Elmar ASPH available in Black chrome to mount on my 11f weighing 210 grams and a 39mm uv filter attached to it. Then they have something going. Oh no I don't know if we can do that, lets instead make a 24 summicron weighing a ton with a $3000.00 price tag. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now