Elmar 24 mm f3.8 lens

[Carduelis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think the Elmar 24 mm f3.8 is a fabulous lens that always seems to be eclipsed by the much vaunted Super Elmar 21 mm f3.4 lens. I appreciate that the 21 mm focal length seems to be more popular than the 24 mm focal length, but from examining MTF curves and distortion, the Elmar 24 mm lens seems to outperform the Super Elmar 21 mm lens. Have users of these lenses any views on this issue?

[Messsucherkamera]

I can't comment as an owner/User as I have neither of these lenses () but I have always eyed the 21/3.4 since it was released. Since I do have a 28/2, I think the 21 might be a better choice (for me) than the 24.

 

The only drawback to the Elmar lenses is the somewhat slow maximum aperture of f/3.4 - not so much of an issue for those who use digital M cameras with variable ISO. Being a film shooter means that thee faster lenses are always appreciated.

 

I'm going to take a look at those curves, though. Gotta be prepared to buy at the drop of a hat. You never when it might start raining gold nuggets!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[tomasis7]

i try purchase this so soon as I can.

 

I think 24mm fl is perfect for 50mm user as me. Still relevant for 35mm user too.

 

What I could see that 24mm renders images like 28mm, no perspective exaggerations

 

My eyes would bleed if I tried 50 iso film with this

[Carduelis]

I think 24mm fl is perfect for 50mm user as me. Still relevant for 35mm user too.

 

I feel that 24 mm is wide enough to complement both 35 and 50 mm focal length lenses. I think the 24 mm lens is much easier to handle in dealing with perspective than a 21 mm lens from previous use of a Canon16-35 mm mk2 lens.

Edited October 24, 2012 by Carduelis

[xalo]

The 24mm Elmarit is a lens I miss somewhat (sold a while ago), but would now rather replace by the Elmar. I once tried the latter in a shop on an M8, handled great, much less finder intrusion than the Elmarit. Impressive results in the trial pics. Speed might be bothersome at times, especially with film, when quick ISO change is rarely an option. But then, it's 2/3 stop less and this wide you can handhold it well - if the subject holds still

I also prefer 24mm to 28mm in most circumstances, nicely complementing the 35mm or 50mm while keeping a more natural perspective than the 21mm.

24mm would be my favourite for landscape (natural and urban) and it seems this Elmar shines in the detail and contrast department.

One day...

Alexander

[CheshireCat]

I think the Elmar 24 mm f3.8 is a fabulous lens that always seems to be eclipsed by the much vaunted Super Elmar 21 mm f3.4 lens. I appreciate that the 21 mm focal length seems to be more popular than the 24 mm focal length, but from examining MTF curves and distortion, the Elmar 24 mm lens seems to outperform the Super Elmar 21 mm lens. Have users of these lenses any views on this issue?

 

I own both lenses and I can say the 24 is the sharpest wide I have ever used.

The 21 is wider, so technically more challenging, therefore the comparison is not totally fair. Distortion is easily corrected on the 21 in post; and although not as sharp as the 24, it stays in my bag more than the 24 due to the wider angle.

[gvaliquette]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I LOVE the 24mm f3.8 Elmar-M. It is significantly wider than a 35mm to be a real asset. Currently, my next wider lens is the 12mm f5.6 Voigtlander Ultra-Wide Heliar. The only other focal length that I would like to acquire is 18mm, but that "need" (don't tell my wife) is not urgent.

 

Guy

[Manolo Laguillo]

I like very much the 24mm focal length. Therefore I owned first the Zeiss 25/2.8, then the Leica 24/2.8, and now the 24/3.8, which is IMO the best of all three in terms of detail rendering and microcontrast. We are speaking of course of the highest level: the other two are excellent as well.

[chalkdust]

I do not have and have not used the 21mm. But I like the 24mm Elmar very much. I use it on an M8.2, so it is my "slightly wide normal lens." I especially like it's colors and contrast. On indoor shots, I need to use higher ISO, perhaps, or flash sometimes.

[Leicakillen]

I LOVE the 24mm f3.8 Elmar-M..

 

Guy

 

Cant agree more, and my image says it better than my words....

 

/Anders

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

[insomnia]

Oh yes, workend like a charm in Istanbul for me too

 

Time Flies by insomnia09, on Flickr

[mirekti]

At the moment, I own 35, 75 and 135mm lenses, using them on a FF M, and have been trying to decide which lens to pick to expand my wide angle.

 

After reading all the reviews of 21 SEM, I fell in love with it without even trying it out. Than I went through my Canon shots from the past, and I only found few shots within the range 18-21.

 

I started to think whether I should get the 24 Elmar, and even 15CV for the price of 21mm SEM. I think the 21mm is a great lens which perspective is not too hard to controll, but it would be much easier with a 24mm, and especially when shooting people. I could also add mentioned CV 15 if I really need something wide.

 

I am a bit affraid that 24 and 35 might exclude one another.

Any users with 24, and 35 and some encouragement experiance in regards to it?

 

I also noticed there are not many 24mm Elmar reviews, and Reid's review was done on M8.

[01af]

I am a bit afraid that 24 and 35 might exclude one another.

They definitely do not exclude one another. To the contrary—they make a nice combo in the wide-angle range. Sure, the 21+35 combo is very popular ... but if you feel more at home with a 24 mm lens then you shouldn't bother about what others prefer. It's your equipment, not theirs. The Super-Elmar-M 21 Asph is an excellent lens but so is the Elmar-M 24 Asph. There's absolutely no reason to prefer one over the other due to performance or rendition. Just pick the angle-of-view you prefer.

 

Some even like 28+35. Others use 18+28 but no 35. Still others use still other combinations. To add a 24 mm lens to a 35+75+135 combo does make perfect sense ... especially if you plan to add an 18 mm or 15 mm lens in the future.

[mirekti]

Does anyone know the number of diaphragm blades for 24mm Elmar? I couldn't find this information anywhere.

[Erik Gunst Lund]

Does anyone know the number of diaphragm blades for 24mm Elmar? I couldn't find this information anywhere.

 

It has 9 blades

[gpwhite]

It has 9 blades

 

I love this lens. Incredible bite and saturation.

 

The 24 Elmar, IMHO, is best when all nine blades are recessed away from the throat of the lens.... f/3.8 is just WA at its best, and no need for the extra VF.

[mirekti]

Thanks for all the inputs.

Perhaps the last question, is it prone to the italian flag?

[Bill W]

Could not agree more on the 24 Elmar f3.8. I have an older version of the 24 and sold it a couple of years ago. I found my "new" 24 used mint and at a great price.

[Bill W]

Thanks for all the inputs.

Perhaps the last question, is it prone to the italian flag?

This is more of a camera sensor software issue than a lens issue I think but I could be wrong. I have not seen it with my copy.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[mirekti]

This is more of a camera sensor software issue than a lens issue I think but I could be wrong. I have not seen it with my copy.

 

Sure, my bad for not being precise. I ment when used on M240.

Thanks.