Talking Gear: Walkabout Lenses

I love using film and printing in the darkroom but I also love camera gear. I know there are lots of serious photographers out there who don't like talking about equipment and I respect that. But there are lots of others who are quite happy to read about and discuss cameras and lenses. So what to do?

The first thought I had was a sneaky one: write about equipment but try to couch it in such a way that it doesn't look like a gear-related post. I suspect you would have sussed that out quite quickly so I decided just to go for it and announce it up front.

Therefore, anytime I'm talking about gear, I'll preface the post title with "Talking Gear". That way, if you don't want to read about equipment, you can bail out without wasting too much time. Of course, it would be great if you still read it anyway, possibly out of a misplaced sense of loyalty towards this website. :)

I thought I'd kick off with walkabout lenses after reading a review on a photography website that said such a lens was always a wide-ranging zoom. That was a new one on me and far too proscriptive but perhaps I just missed the memo. I'd rather thought a walkabout lens was any lens you liked to attach to your camera when going for a stroll throughout the countryside or town. It could be anything that did what you wanted it to do, prime or zoom.

Life Begins At Forty

Anyway, it got me thinking about my favourite walkabout lens and it would be great if you could chime in on the comments with your own, personal preference. As a lot of others photographers have figured out for themselves, I prefer the angle of view offered by a 40mm lens on the 35 mm format. It's roughly the same as the 80mm lens on a Rolleiflex or a 127mm lens on 5x4. When you're talking about just a few mms either way, it might seem a big dogmatic or idiosyncratic to insist on 40mm but there are good reasons why it's just about perfect for me.

I find a 50mm lens to be just a little too narrow in its field of view. Although I prefer a 35mm to a fifty, the wide angle can be just a little too wide. Sitting happily in the middle, the 40mm is spot on. It also seems easier to design a forty which has very little distortion or light fall off and it can sometimes be made smaller than either of its two close rivals. I love the FOV of a Rolleiflex as well and the 127mm Ektar I have for my Speed Graphic is great.

For me, once you have the requirements of FOV and image quality nailed down, a good walkabout camera and lens is all about portability. I have to laugh now that I used to use a Nikon D700 and 28-105mm Nikkor as a walkabout kit, an outfit that is huge and weighs a ton. The Nikon combo tips the scales at 1.55kgs or about 3.5lbs. Now, I think a Pentax MX and 40mm f2 Voigtlander Ultron would be the bee's knees - a pairing that weighs in at a svelte 1.5 lbs. I have the MX and will be selling my lovely Hexar AF to finance the Ultron. If anyone has an Ultron and fancies a swap, you know where to find me.

Here's a pic of my preferred combination on Stephen Gandy's Camera Quest page on the Voigtlander Ultron.

The Ultron is supposed to be a cracking lens although I haven't used one or even had a fondle. Ken Rockwell reckons its as good as just about any Leica optic. Ken says, "The 40mm f/2 SL-II is among the sharpest lenses I've used on a Nikon. …it's sharper than Nikon's sharpest fixed normal lenses.

"Criminy, it's worlds ahead of Leica's 1973 40mm f/2 Summicron-C, and seems as good as Leica's newest 35mm f/2 Summicron-M Asph, even though I haven't shot them on the same camera."

The Ultron is well made and compact but not so small that you can't get a proper grip of it. Pentax aficionados will know that the company made a very small pancake lens, the 40mm f2.8 M, but I haven't been convinced by it. It might be worthwhile trying one, though, as it sells for about a quarter of the Ultron. From what I've read, it doesn't seem to be too sharp wide open although it improves as you stop down. It's not a bad lens: it's just sort of middling to good. I think it would lose out a lot in edge definition when compared to the Ultron.

On the plus side, it makes for a more compact package but it might just be too small to handle easily. Still, never say never. If I were to try one out and find it was great for prints up to a maximum of 12x8 inches then it would be a good buy.

And the MX? If you haven't handled one, they're just little gems. The viewfinder is very big although not quite as bright as an Olympus OM1's. It has a nice heft to it without feeling heavy. Just enough weight to feel like a well made product. When you pick one up for the first time, it feels just a little heavier than you might have imagined.

My MX somewhat overshadowed by the bulk of another fantastic 35mm SLR,
the Minolta XE7.

My MX is a beauty and I had it serviced a couple of years ago. It's been largely sitting in a drawer since then and it deserves to see a lot more use. With the Ultron on the front, it would be the first camera I reached for when heading out the door for a walk. Coupled with a roll of Delta 100 if the weather was good or Delta 400 for those cloudy days, it would take a bit of beating.

But what about you? Do you have a favourite walkabout combination? It would be interesting to know what readers are using. I'll bet there are one or two surprises.

You might also like:

THE Walkabout Camera
A Sharp Wee Number
TLR Versatility
Zuiko 50mm F2 Results