On Fri, 07 Sep 2012 21:11:58 -0500, Rich wrote:
: I don't get this oddball hatred of focal lengths not in the "norm" of
: camera focal lengths. Scroll down 2/3 and see the comment by sour old
: Wizniewski. He claimes 55-58mm focal lengths all "failed." Was it too
: difficult getting 10-15% further away from a subject so you end up with
: your precious 50mm focal length, if it's that important??
:
: http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/09...Distagon-55mm-
: F1-4-for-Canon-Nikon-lenses-for-mirrorless-system-cameras

The picture of "sour old" Wisniewski (note spelling) makes him look a good bit
younger than me, and probably you. But we'll let that pass. Wisniewski's point
may be pedantic and irrelevant (and it was pounced on by at least one other
commenter), but it's based on historical fact. When SLRs first started to
compete with 35mm rangefinder cameras, most came with "normal" lenses of 55mm
or 58mm, rather than the common rangefinder "standard" of 50mm. The
presumption at the time was that it was easier to keep the slightly longer
lens away from the mirror. But the 50mm standard was pretty well ingrained in
the mentality of 35mm photographers, and soon enough the SLR manufacturers
replaced the longer lenses with 50mm designs compatible with their cameras. So
in that sense the longer lenses did "fail".

But surely you knew all that?

Bob