21 Lux vs 21 Ultron

[CheshireCat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

My 21 SEM is an amazing lens, but many times I miss more subject separation and being able to use it in low-light.

 

The obvious choices are the 21 Lux and 21 Ultron.

If you have tried both lenses, plese let me know if there is a solid reason why I should spend that outrageous amount of money for the Lux. Thanks !

Edited July 4, 2015 by CheshireCat

[uhoh7]

very good question

[Advertisement]

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

[jdlaing]

You should spend that money on the Lux because it is your destiny.

[NB23]

The only subject separation you can hope for, when shooting 21mm, is in your composition.  No wide-openness.

[Winedemonium]

You might find this useful - 

http://www.ronscheffler.com/techtalk/?page_id=130

[CheshireCat]

You might find this useful - 

http://www.ronscheffler.com/techtalk/?page_id=130

 

Thanks, I had read Ron's comparison. Still wanted some opinions from you guys.

[CheshireCat]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The only subject separation you can hope for, when shooting 21mm, is in your composition.  No wide-openness.

 

I wouldn't say so. There are very nice examples of people photos in the link Winedemonium posted above.

[Winedemonium]

Thanks, I had read Ron's comparison. Still wanted some opinions from you guys.

 I used to own the 21SEM. I regret selling it - it is one of Leica's best lenses, and most of the time for this FOV I would shoot stopped down a bit. At mid-apertures it is superior in most ways to the 21SX - a bit sharper, less distortion, and more likely to go in the bag given the size and weight. It also takes 46mm filters, which I have plenty of already for other lenses.

 

But I do now have the 21SX. For the kinds of photographs that warrant wide open or fairly open shooting, the effect can be magical - provided you get the framing right. If your subject is moving of course then this is really tricky, and get the angle a bit off and you are lumped with often curious perspective distortion. There is also the fairly obvious falloff/vignetting, but in the same photographic situations this can be a bonus for the overall effect.

 

That's not to say the 21SX is any slouch stopped down. It's just that you have paid a lot more for it, its bigger, heavier, takes serie VIII filters, and the 21SEM might give you closer to what you want in that situation anyway. 

 

In other words, it is a big premium to pay. BUT... its rendering is special, in those situations where you can use it artistically. I have seen some photographs on this forum and elsewhere taken with it that have been really inspiring. And the lens is a design/engineering marvel.

 

If cost is a consideration, then the Ultron might prove the right compromise. I don't know, I haven't tried it.

[batmobile]

IMHO, if you want 'wide' and 'separation' in the same sentence, you are probably better off with a 24mm or 28 summilux. Were I personally buying I would almost certainly go for the CV f1.8 if I needed sheer speed, but I would not be expecting much by way of separation unless forcing it. I have the 24 lux and that is easier to work separation into the shot that the 21mm and its still a bit forced IMHO. I got it for speed and low light bombed out basement documentary shooting.

 

If you want speed, I'd suggest the 21mm CV... with the 35mm f1.2 II on top. The latter is astonishing IMHO and this pair is still half the price of the Leica 21mm f1.4.

[jto555]

I have two questions?

 

Is the lens for a one-off project or for a lifetime?

Do you have the funds to get the Leica lens now or before you need it? I am not looking for you to ansewer this one on the forum!!!

 

Personally, I went for the Elmarit-M ASPH as it f/2.8 instead of the SEM's f/3.4. The Lux was out of my reach.

 

Here are two reviews of the Lux:

http://findingrange.com/2015/05/01/leica-21mm-summilux-m-f1-4-asph-review/

http://www.taphousephotography.com/reviews/leica-summilux-21mm-f1-4

 

One of the reviews found a strong wave type focus 'feature', with the other issue been that the lens is heavy.

 

Guess which lens I'd suggest? 

[indergaard]

I tried out both. I was surprised by the small difference between them. I bought the Ultron, but later sold it since I didn't get a long with the 21mm focal length, and the size and heft of the lens.

 

The Ultron has a flatter plane of focus. The Summilux has more field curvature. The Ultron images looked a bit duller and less crisp out of the camera. But adding a small amount of saturation and contrast made the images from the Ultron look very similar to the Summilux. The bokeh of the Summilux was a very little bit smoother when you are making images up close, but honestly, buying a 21mm for it's OOF rendering mainly does not make sense. The Ultron has less distortion, by the way. 

 

The Ultron was about as sharp as the Summilux at the same apertures.

I was amazed how little difference there was between them. The Summilux just had a bit more sparkle out of the camera, but that was very easy to replicate in post with a few adjustments in Lightroom on the Ultron images.

 

So is the Summilux worth the insane extra cost over the Ultron? Not at all. Not by a long shot. I also sold the Ultron for 10% less than what I paid for it. I know people who has been trying to sell a 21mm summilux for over 6 months with more than 20% loss, and it's still not selling... So not a wise "investment".

Edited July 7, 2015 by indergaard

[CheshireCat]

Is the lens for a one-off project or for a lifetime?

 

For a lifetime.

 

Do you have the funds to get the Leica lens now or before you need it? I am not looking for you to ansewer this one on the forum!!!

 

I would buy it used. As indergaard points out, the lens can be found for -20% in good overall conditions, and hopefully even less than that but still in good optical conditions.

[CheshireCat]

The Ultron images looked a bit duller and less crisp out of the camera.

 

If you are talking about colors, this is the impression I got after examining a lot of shots taken with both lenses.

This is the part that scares me most. For example, I can't stand the Elmarit 90/2.8 (newest version) because I found no way to get good colors in postprocessing on my wide-gamut display.

The Ultron seems to have the "dreaded yellowish cast" (my own syndrome perhaps). If the lens has worst colors than the SEM 21, that may be a showstopper.

Did you compare colors on a wide-gamut display ?

[indergaard]

If you are talking about colors, this is the impression I got after examining a lot of shots taken with both lenses.

This is the part that scares me most. For example, I can't stand the Elmarit 90/2.8 (newest version) because I found no way to get good colors in postprocessing on my wide-gamut display.

The Ultron seems to have the "dreaded yellowish cast" (my own syndrome perhaps). If the lens has worst colors than the SEM 21, that may be a showstopper.

Did you compare colors on a wide-gamut display ?

 

Yes, the colors from the Ultron are more muted. The images had less sparkle.

I did not compare on a proper wide-gamut display.