Paulus Posted October 31, 2011 Share #1 Posted October 31, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) A lot is written on the forum about the Elmarit -M 24 asph and also a lot is written about the " recent" Elmar-M 24. What I could not find was a "verdict" from users who have used both lenses for a few years on the M9. ( Excuse me if there is a thread and please point me to this thread if there is one . ) I understand that the Elmarit-M is a fantastic lens with high secondhand prices due to its performance, but what about the Elmar -M 24. Are there people who have second thoughts about this lens after a few years of use, thinking it would be better they had kept to the Elmarit-M ? In short: what's the best buy on the long run? Thank you for answering. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 31, 2011 Posted October 31, 2011 Hi Paulus, Take a look here New Elmar-M 3,8/24 or old Elmarit -M2,8 24 asph? Verdict after a few years?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
photolandscape Posted October 31, 2011 Share #2 Posted October 31, 2011 Hi, I have had both lenses and used them on an M9. I also had and used the Biogon 25mm as well. Unless you operate in low-light situations frequently, I think you might find the 24mm Elmar to be a great solution. I have the Elmar, 35mm Summarit, and the 90mm Elmarit, so the 24 is fairly close to the 35mm--traditionally the lens I keep mounted on my camera the majority of the time. On those occasions when a faster lens would be helpful, I just step up my ISO setting to 400 and I am in good shape. Almost from the beginning, I have gone from using the 24mm probably 35-40 percent of the time. The Elmar renders color beautifully. The angle of view if great for tight situations or whenever I'd like to introduce more depth, and it easily the sharpest (edge-to-edge) of my three excellent lenses. With the FW fix Leica put out (FW 1.162) last spring, which compensates for red edging issues, the 24mm now does a sensational job. I can't recommend it enough, it's relatively affordable, and it's reasonably available. Maybe people think that just assume because it isn't the fastest lens, it isn't so worthy, but trust me, I think it is one of the truly overlooked, under-appreciated, most reasonably-priced Leica lenses made today--imho. 7 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alnitak Posted November 1, 2011 Share #3 Posted November 1, 2011 Hi, I have had both lenses and used them on an M9. I also had and used the Biogon 25mm as well. Unless you operate in low-light situations frequently, I think you might find the 24mm Elmar to be a great solution. I have the Elmar, 35mm Summarit, and the 90mm Elmarit, so the 24 is fairly close to the 35mm--traditionally the lens I keep mounted on my camera the majority of the time. On those occasions when a faster lens would be helpful, I just step up my ISO setting to 400 and I am in good shape. Almost from the beginning, I have gone from using the 24mm probably 35-40 percent of the time. The Elmar renders color beautifully. The angle of view if great for tight situations or whenever I'd like to introduce more depth, and it easily the sharpest (edge-to-edge) of my three excellent lenses. With the FW fix Leica put out (FW 1.162) last spring, which compensates for red edging issues, the 24mm now does a sensational job. I can't recommend it enough, it's relatively affordable, and it's reasonably available. Maybe people think that just assume because it isn't the fastest lens, it isn't so worthy, but trust me, I think it is one of the truly overlooked, under-appreciated, most reasonably-priced Leica lenses made today--imho. I agree with your assessment of the 24mm Elmar--a superb lens that is overlooked and shouldn't be. Jeff 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darylgo Posted November 1, 2011 Share #4 Posted November 1, 2011 The Elmar is sensational. The MTF on the lens is rarely seen on any lens let alone a wide-angle. It is sharp into the corners unlike most wide angles that have difficulty outside the center. Some quick tests I did today comparing this lens to a Zeiss 35mm Biogon (an excellent lens) made me wonder if I could crop the Elmar and achieve results very close to the Biogon in sharpness. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cbretteville Posted November 1, 2011 Share #5 Posted November 1, 2011 The Elmarit ranks very, very high on the list of my favorite lenses on both film and digital Ms. I see absolutely no reason to exchange it for an Elmar. I'm sure it is a great lens, but it is one I don't crave. Carl 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
spylaw4 Posted November 1, 2011 Share #6 Posted November 1, 2011 (edited) I've had two Elmar-Ms and I really wish I had never sold the first, but having done so, I now wish I had kept the second! daryglo is right - "sensational" and much overlooked. Having said that - and although I have no experience of the Elmarit, going by reports my guess would be that if you already have an Elmarit there is no reason to change. But I would buy another Elmar-M. Edited November 1, 2011 by spylaw4 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
parsod Posted November 1, 2011 Share #7 Posted November 1, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have the Elmar 24 and it is the best wide angel lens I have used. After a year of use I am still amazed when a look at the files on the computer. For me it was an easy decision. Almost half the price, less distortion (almost no distortion) and better edge to edge sharpness compared to the Elmarit. These things were more important to me than one stop less speed. /Paer 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
4X5B&W Posted November 1, 2011 Share #8 Posted November 1, 2011 I have the Elmarit and while having no experience with the Elmar, I can say that the Elmarit does everything I could ever hope for in a lens. When traveling I will often shoot indoor scenes with the lens wide open, at extremely slow shutter speeds, and it just amazes me at it's edge to edge resolution, and the great depth of field. From what I read, both the Summilux and the Elmar are also excellent, however my Elmarit will be with me for a very long while. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted November 1, 2011 Share #9 Posted November 1, 2011 Hi, I have had both lenses and used them on an M9. I also had and used the Biogon 25mm as well. Unless you operate in low-light situations frequently, I think you might find the 24mm Elmar to be a great solution. I have the Elmar, 35mm Summarit, and the 90mm Elmarit, so the 24 is fairly close to the 35mm--traditionally the lens I keep mounted on my camera the majority of the time. On those occasions when a faster lens would be helpful, I just step up my ISO setting to 400 and I am in good shape. Almost from the beginning, I have gone from using the 24mm probably 35-40 percent of the time. The Elmar renders color beautifully. The angle of view if great for tight situations or whenever I'd like to introduce more depth, and it easily the sharpest (edge-to-edge) of my three excellent lenses. With the FW fix Leica put out (FW 1.162) last spring, which compensates for red edging issues, the 24mm now does a sensational job. I can't recommend it enough, it's relatively affordable, and it's reasonably available. Maybe people think that just assume because it isn't the fastest lens, it isn't so worthy, but trust me, I think it is one of the truly overlooked, under-appreciated, most reasonably-priced Leica lenses made today--imho. Enjoyed your website photos. Do you crank up the colors often since your India group looks so vibrant. Also which lens did you use for the India series. In the Antelope slot canyon did you use a 24 or wider? You state you went from using the 24 around 35-40% of the time to what percentage now? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted November 2, 2011 Share #10 Posted November 2, 2011 Leicas slower offering are not second class lenses. They will image as well if not better than the faster glass at similar apertures. A nice small kit is of great value to me and fast glass stays home. 50 2.8 90 4.0 35 2.0 V4 is what is in my bag ready to go. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted November 2, 2011 Share #11 Posted November 2, 2011 Another issue worth noting is that the elmarit is 24mm, the elmar is closer to 25mm Useful if using without viewfinder but not quite as wide Very marginal though Rgds 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted November 2, 2011 Share #12 Posted November 2, 2011 Another issue worth noting is that the elmarit is 24mm, the elmar is closer to 25mmUseful if using without viewfinder but not quite as wide Very marginal though Rgds Does that mean that the Zeiss 25/28 finder is better to use if a VF is wanted ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
akiralx Posted November 3, 2011 Share #13 Posted November 3, 2011 I shot with both for a short while then sold the Elmarit. The Elmar is better in every respect except speed. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted November 3, 2011 Share #14 Posted November 3, 2011 I shot with both for a short while then sold the Elmarit. The Elmar is better in every respect except speed. Its interesting, for those that like high contrast, Leica's latest "cheaper" lenses are hard to beat and, despite their price, have Leica's most up-to-date glass technology I think the 24mm Elmar, 28mm Elmarit and summarit series are awesome ! 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shadow Blaster Posted November 3, 2011 Share #15 Posted November 3, 2011 Another vote for the Elmar. I don't have the Elmarit but the Elmar is a truly fantastic lens with sharpness that is stunning. John S. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paulus Posted March 22, 2015 Author Share #16 Posted March 22, 2015 Time to revive this thread, because I'm still thinking of buying a 24mm. The Elmarit-M always seemed like a magical lens to me, but I could not afford one at the time. In the mean time the Elmar 24 proved to be a stunning lens, but so did the SEM 21mm Now having a 21/3,4 SEM and a Elmarit -M 28mm I really see the difference between those two. The 21/3,4 SEM is much better. I still like the 28 on film, but on the M240 it's lacks some sparkling. For those of you who have experience with the Elmarit-M 24 and Elmar 24/3,8, could you please enlighten me? Is the 2,8 24mm really worth while on the digital M ? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Photoskeptic Posted March 22, 2015 Share #17 Posted March 22, 2015 I have the Elmar-M. I think it is a fabulous lens, sharp at any aperture, good dof, very little distortion and also makes those wonderful 16-point stars when shot into the light. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
graphlex Posted March 22, 2015 Share #18 Posted March 22, 2015 I'm delighted with the performance of the 24mm Elmarit on the M240. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thompsonkirk Posted March 23, 2015 Share #19 Posted March 23, 2015 (edited) This is a new version of an old question: do you prefer the rendering of older or newer Leica lenses? If you like newer designs like the 28mm Elmarit Asph, you'd probably prefer the 24 Elmar. If you like older and less contrasty lenses, you'd probably prefer the Elmarit. The Elmarit is a late '90s aspherical design, so it's not really an old lens. It arrived rather late to fill the gap between classic 21s and 28s. Its resolution is higher than the older lenses, but its contrast remains gentle. I like the Elmarit because it renders not too differently from my Mandler lenses. And for landscapes it makes a sort of matching bridge between WATE and MATE. The Elmarit seems to show more diffraction at f11 and 16 than the 25mm Zeiss that I'd used previously. The Zeiss was an outstanding lens, and I would've kept it except that its remarkable sharpness and contrast didn't match the other lenses I use. You might consider the Zeiss as a strong contender against the 24 Elmar. Kirk PS, the CV 25mm finder is a useful bargain. Edited March 23, 2015 by thompsonkirk 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tappan Posted September 17, 2023 Share #20 Posted September 17, 2023 Ok, time to resurrect this post, if all would be so kind to indulge me.... 🙂 Good morning from the year 2023. Anyone using one of these with the new(er) cameras? Specifically M10 or M10 Monochrome? How are your results? Happy with one or the other? Thx Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.