Jump to content

Leica 24mm 3.8 vs Zeiss 25mm 2.8


Ib M

Recommended Posts

Both are very very good. The bokeh of the Leica lens is a bit smoother and the Elmar also has the (native) 6-bit-coding. The only advantage of the Zeiss (besides the lower price) is in my opinion the f/2.8 which is sometimes really helpfull.

I had both lenses, sold the Zeiss and kept the Leica.

 

Boris

Link to post
Share on other sites

Both are very very good. The bokeh of the Leica lens is a bit smoother and the Elmar also has the (native) 6-bit-coding. The only advantage of the Zeiss (besides the lower price) is in my opinion the f/2.8 which is sometimes really helpfull.

I had both lenses, sold the Zeiss and kept the Leica.

 

Boris

 

Does the Zeiss have more contrast?

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have the Leica 24mm f 3.8 and really love it.

Sean Reids review at Reid Reviews is also a good resource. You need a subscription to read his reviews but it is well worth the fee. Although I haven't used the Zeiss 25/2.8 Biogon, potential advantages of the elmar are: Smaller size so it blocks less of the viewfinder, the elmar is 6-Bit coded which allows optimal color & vignetting correction, and I like the fact that it takes the same filter size as the 50mm summilux.

 

Here's a link to two pictures taken with the elmar of the hoar frost we enjoyed here last week-end: Hoar Frost 1 Hoar Frost 2.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the Zeiss 25, then I changed to the Leica 2.8/24, and finally I have the Elmar 3.8/24.

All are beautiful lenses, although I love the 3.8/24 the most because it's the smallest one and it's coded. Wide open, at 3.8, the Elmar´s quality is amazing. I'm very satisfied with it. And although the Zeiss is cheaper, the Elmar is not that expensive measured by Leica standards...;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I had the Zeiss 25, then I changed to the Leica 2.8/24, and finally I have the Elmar 3.8/24.

All are beautiful lenses, although I love the 3.8/24 the most because it's the smallest one and it's coded. Wide open, at 3.8, the Elmar´s quality is amazing. I'm very satisfied with it. And although the Zeiss is cheaper, the Elmar is not that expensive measured by Leica standards...;)

 

I too had both Leica 24mm lenses (not the Zeiss) and sold the Elmarit after shooting with both for a short while. The Elmar is truly excellent, small, not too expensive - and coded as you say.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The 25 blocking less of the finder? The Leica M9 does not have a 24mm frame, so you will use an accessory finder in any case, with both lenses. That is, if you belong to the dwindling minority of people who want to know what sort of picture they are taking.

 

Apart from the speed edge and the price, which you discount, the Elmar has the advantage that the coding works better for it. My Biogon is coded as a 24mm Elmarit, and it does show some residual rededge. I have not tried coding it as an Elmar, as this would mean redoing the existing coding.

 

The old man on the red edge

Link to post
Share on other sites

so you will use an accessory finder in any case, with both lenses. That is, if you belong to the dwindling minority of people who want to know what sort of picture they are taking.

 

The old man on the red edge

 

You bring a smile to my face!

 

I think I am shortly going to be joining the joining the ranks of the great 24mm unwashed in this respect

Link to post
Share on other sites

My main reason for keeping the Elmar was the 6-bit-coding (and the 46mm filter size).

 

With newer versions of the Zeiss, there are recesses in the bayonet, as to allow permanent and easy (with a pencil) 6 bit coding.

 

Then again, the Zeiss has got 46mm filter size too.;)

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 25 blocking less of the finder? The Leica M9 does not have a 24mm frame, so you will use an accessory finder in any case, with both lenses. That is, if you belong to the dwindling minority of people who want to know what sort of picture they are taking.

 

Apart from the speed edge and the price, which you discount, the Elmar has the advantage that the coding works better for it. My Biogon is coded as a 24mm Elmarit, and it does show some residual rededge. I have not tried coding it as an Elmar, as this would mean redoing the existing coding.

 

The old man on the red edge

 

Lars, Thank-you for pointing out that oversimplification in my post. With the Elmar 24mm I do use an accessory finder for composing the images most of the time, but after using it enough, I can estimate the 24mm FOV by using the 28mm framelines realizing there is extra 4.5° FOV on each side. It is a wonderfully sharp small lens.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Anyway, I'd suggest the Zeiss 25.

In my experience:

-Handling is the same.

-The 1/3stop (aperture settings ring) of the Zeiss is an improvement vs. the Leica (1/2 stop)

-The Zeiss is as light as the Leica

-T* coating of the Zeiss is way better than Elmar's, in this way you can regularly use the ZM without hood (if you don't mind the absence of protection of the front element).

-The Zeiss is almost half the price of the Leica (you can buy the 25 and 21 2.8 ZM lens for the price of the only Elmar 24), but the OP said price is not discriminant.

-OOF area of the Zeiss is different, but it's just a subjective matter

-Some may say that sample variation is a problem with Zeiss, while Leica works with 0,000000000000....1% tolerances. It may be true, But I had "lemons" both with Zeiss and Leica, so nevermind.

-The Biogon scheme (ZM) is more predictable with contrast when stopping down the lens.

 

In few words, if you're not a red-dot addicted, I see no reason in everyday photography to buy the Elmar 24 (nor the Elmarit 21) until Zeiss(Cosina) is producing two absolute stellar lenses as their 21 and 25 ZM biogon.

 

Different story, when it's up to 21 and 24 Summiluxes. ;)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Well, the Biogon is sharp. I would doubt your other claims for it. I do own it, retired it and bought myself the Super-Elmar, and I do not regret it. And through the latest firmware update reduced the rededge of the Biogon, it did not remove it. Cornerfix? Why bother with it when you are not forced to do it?

 

By the way, more reliable framing is not the only advantage of a proper accessory finder. It does also make it a good deal easier to level the camera, which is quite important with very wide optics.

 

The old man on the edge

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

With newer versions of the Zeiss, there are recesses in the bayonet, as to allow permanent and easy (with a pencil) 6 bit coding.

 

Then again, the Zeiss has got 46mm filter size too.;)

 

Ok, then forget about the 46mm filter size, but I tried the manual coding with a pencil and it never really worked for me. Either the camera detected nothing or even the wrong lens.

 

Boris

Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...