Dear Leica Fan I'm interesting in this lens.Anyone using it ? Which frame line appear for M6 0.85? What the website for further its information beside Erwin's? Is it the best in this focal lenght? Anyone who love it ,please explain how? Greetings

-- Ksg (artksg@hotmail.com), November 02, 2001

Answers

It is reckoned to be one of te sharpest of all of the Leica M range, it is the only 24 mm made for an M. I had one for around a couple of months and sold it.....why? because I did not like the images it produced that much, the angle of view is good, and it is difficult to fault in sharpness alone, but somehow the images lacked a quality that I find in my 35 summicron. This is just my opinion and others will I am sure recommend the lens.

-- Richard (richard@designblue.co.uk), November 03, 2001.

Ksg,

I have owned and used the 24 ASPH for quite a while now and can attest to its sharpness. It works for me because I'm into people photography and the difference between the 24 and the 21 (another outstanding lens) is the extra space I can give the subject while still maintaining the "environmental portrait" theme. You will also find that the bokeh of the 24 is a little more complex than the previous generation M lenses (like the 35 Cron which I also use and love)... but in exchange you can use this phenomenal lens at maximum aperture with absolutely no percievable light falloff which in itself is an engineering victory. Also, the lens exhibits no curvature at all. You will still find the bokeh more pleasing than a Nikon's though (although that's no hard feat) so Leica didn't totally ignore this aspect of lens design. About the framelines... another great thing is that if you get the 0.58 body sometime in the future you don't need to use the separate finder with the body because the overall view from the rangefinder more-or-less approximates the coverage of the 24. Something that cannot be said about the 21.

There are pros and cons to using the 24 but for me the pros definitely outweigh the cons.

-- John Chan (ouroboros_2001@yahoo.com), November 03, 2001.

Thanks for your comments

-- ksg (artksg@hotmail.com), November 04, 2001.

Art, as John said above, the 0.58 body's viewfinder may approximate the coverage of the 24. I once read that this is in any case true of the 0.72. The "advantage" here would be that you could thereby see the "difference" between a 28 and the 24. Just wanted to point this out because whatever you decide about the 24 (I myself prefer the 21) I wouldn't let this involve a dependence on the viewfinder.

-- Michael Kastner (kastner@zedat.fu-berlin.de), November 05, 2001.

Hi,

I purchased the 24mm-M ASPH because I loved the focal length when working with SLR's. After using it in a variety of situations for over a year I sold it and went to a 21 mm. For me the 24-m angle of view on a rangefinder was hard to get used to I think that's because, for me, it didn't focus close enough. Also, I found it to be larger than I'd like. No doubt the lens is a fine performer and very sharp but for me I prefer the 21 SA because of size and its ability to focus closer than either the 21 ASPH or 24 ASPH.

Regards, TG

-- Tom Gallagher (tgallagher10@yahoo.com), November 05, 2001.