Einst_Stein Posted February 22, 2014 Share #1 Posted February 22, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) ZM 15mm is a faster prime. WATE is a zoom, 16-18-21mm, F4, and it is said that most people use it mostly at 16mm. It should be no brainer which one is better. But I still have a little question, there is no lens correction profile for ZM. Does that factor revert the comparison? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 22, 2014 Posted February 22, 2014 Hi Einst_Stein, Take a look here Zeiss Zm 15mm vs. leica tri-elmar WATE. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
algrove Posted February 22, 2014 Share #2 Posted February 22, 2014 I use the R 15/2.8 and without correction it works just fine. Check out my R on M images under the thread Jaap started R lenses on M240 or something like that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted February 22, 2014 Share #3 Posted February 22, 2014 Why do you need 2.8 with a w/a lens ?? You can hand-hold easily at 1/8 sec at 16-21mm The advantage of 16-21 of the WATE far outweighs the extra stop. Correction on the 240 is almost perfect and image quality excellent. The main consideration is PRICE 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted February 22, 2014 Author Share #4 Posted February 22, 2014 Why do you need 2.8 with a w/a lens ?? You can hand-hold easily at 1/8 sec at 16-21mm The advantage of 16-21 of the WATE far outweighs the extra stop. Correction on the 240 is almost perfect and image quality excellent. The main consideration is PRICE -- That one stop between 2.8 and 4 helps a lot for low light. 1/8 second? maybe maybe not. It's a matter of milage and personal taste. -- I am sure I can find some usage of the 18~21mm in WATE, but not likely as much as the f2.8. -- I don't have M240, I have M9. -- Yes, the lens correction still bugs me, just not sure how much difference. I am particularly concerned the color shift. -- I'm not convinced by the other reply yet, and I'm not interested in the R lens. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Marc G. Posted February 22, 2014 Share #5 Posted February 22, 2014 the zeiss is not rangefinder coupled which could be a real disadvantage compared to the wate, although both are ultra wide angles Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Einst_Stein Posted February 22, 2014 Author Share #6 Posted February 22, 2014 the zeiss is not rangefinder coupled which could be a real disadvantage compared to the wate, although both are ultra wide angles Not sure this is a critical issue, but I am leaning towards WATE. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted February 22, 2014 Share #7 Posted February 22, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Not sure this is a critical issue, but I am leaning towards WATE. A wise choice. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted February 23, 2014 Share #8 Posted February 23, 2014 (edited) OP Just go rent one or both the lenses that interest you and then you might get a better feel for each lens. That said I like coded lenses and Zeiss lenses can be hard coded for a price or hand coded, but I found that often wears off in short order. Edited February 23, 2014 by algrove Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted February 23, 2014 Share #9 Posted February 23, 2014 The main consideration is PRICE I had a similar doubt, but in my case it was 21 SEM vs WATE. I ended up buying SEM, and it was due to the price difference, not the IQ (not that I'm was thrilled with the SEM's performance once I got the lens). Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted February 24, 2014 Share #10 Posted February 24, 2014 mirekti Do I read your post to mean you are not that happy with the SEM21 image quality? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mirekti Posted February 26, 2014 Share #11 Posted February 26, 2014 Just for the sake of answering your question, no. I wouldn't like to hijack this thread as I opened one where the problem was described. I received two copies and each was far away from corner to corner sharpness everyone talks about. One corner was good, the other not. On the second copy the same, but the opposite corners. I decided to keep the second one, and will send it for a repair. I truly hope Leica would fix this. Other than that, no regards, the lens should be a masterpiece from what I have seen in center, and in the "working" corner. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berlinman Posted June 1, 2014 Share #12 Posted June 1, 2014 My 21SEM was stolen. So for me ist the question: 21SEM again or WATE. I was happy with the quality of the SEM but think about the extra possibilities with 16 and 18mm. Has anyone experience with the WATE especially with the M240 and EVF2 ? Usage mainly landscape and architecture. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rirakuma Posted June 1, 2014 Share #13 Posted June 1, 2014 If you do a lot of pure landscape work then a WATE will be an excellent investment. It's literally 3 primes in one lens, the performance is just incredible. I own the SEM now but have used the WATE before and although the SEM has a slight edge in performance I believe the extra focal lengths on the WATE far outweighs the advantages of the SEM. Here are some samples with the WATE: 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rirakuma Posted June 1, 2014 Share #14 Posted June 1, 2014 By the way sorry to hear about your SEM .. My 21SEM was stolen. So for me ist the question: 21SEM again or WATE. I was happy with the quality of the SEM but think about the extra possibilities with 16 and 18mm. Has anyone experience with the WATE especially with the M240 and EVF2 ? Usage mainly landscape and architecture. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gpwhite Posted June 1, 2014 Share #15 Posted June 1, 2014 Not sure this is a critical issue, but I am leaning towards WATE. I have shot the 15mm ZM more (just one big job with the WATE), but I do not view these lenses as being either-or... they do well what each of them was designed for. The WATE, in my limited experience, is best at 16mm and set to f/4 at all focus lengths. Good 3D, but not what I expected in comparison to my own set of Leica WA's. It is very portable!! The Zeiss is excellent at f/2.8, has quite a bite and great 3D. The edges and corner performance of the Zeiss, by about f/6.3, is far superior (IMHO) to the WATE. The Zeiss is a brick... more so that the Summilux 21mm. The difference in FOV between ZM 15mm and WATE is not small, if you shoot up close as both lenses can do. Just to throw my own opinion as a WA addict into your mix, there is no super-wide that compares on any image measure to the quality of the SEM 18mm.... unless you want a bit of isolation and go for the nearly as spectacular Elmarit-R 19mm. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berlinman Posted June 1, 2014 Share #16 Posted June 1, 2014 Very impressive examples. Looks like a good solution for me. Thanks ! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted June 11, 2014 Share #17 Posted June 11, 2014 I am particularly concerned the color shift. The Distagon ZM 15/2.8 is a beast of a lens, but it is incredibly well made and works very well with the Monochrom and the T (limited testing so fat with the latter). On the M9, colour shift is an issue - not huge, but an issue. The lack of coupling does mean that you are either estimating distances (not that hard, actually) or using live view for focusing (limiting you to the M(240) or the T). Cheers John 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flu Posted December 5, 2015 Share #18 Posted December 5, 2015 OP Just go rent one or both the lenses that interest you and then you might get a better feel for each lens. That said I like coded lenses and Zeiss lenses can be hard coded for a price or hand coded, but I found that often wears off in short order. Can someone point me in the right direction as to where I might be able to get the 15 distagon hard coded? TYVM! Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hiepphotog Posted December 6, 2015 Share #19 Posted December 6, 2015 Can someone point me in the right direction as to where I might be able to get the 15 distagon hard coded? TYVM! Send it to Don Goldberg at DAG 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted December 6, 2015 Share #20 Posted December 6, 2015 Can someone point me in the right direction as to where I might be able to get the 15 distagon hard coded? TYVM! What are you coding it as, if you don't mind my asking? 1 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.