carstenw Posted October 15, 2009 Share #21 Posted October 15, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) "Adorable"? That means cute, and I don't see that it fits. I guess you mean something like "attractive"? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 15, 2009 Posted October 15, 2009 Hi carstenw, Take a look here Summilux 21 1.4 mm or 24 1.4 mm ?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jjjjuin Posted October 15, 2009 Author Share #22 Posted October 15, 2009 "Adorable"? That means cute, and I don't see that it fits. I guess you mean something like "attractive"? ah, excuse my limited english. anyhow, I mean they're lovely Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Bernd Banken Posted October 15, 2009 Share #23 Posted October 15, 2009 wow,, what a adorable album . like it so much. thank you Just to get the "feeling" for let's say 21mm my way was.....buying a cheap V/Cosina 21mm f4. Approx. 300 € including the M adapter it's a good training partner to see how familiar you might be after some weeks. Compare to the price of a Lux 21/24mm it's nothing......but not so bad in the results: My first shots on film 36x24: JU52 on Flickr - Photo Sharing! Cheers Bernd Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leicaiste Posted October 15, 2009 Share #24 Posted October 15, 2009 Hello from central Africa - just a short one - this is a wobbly dial-up.First you compose in the accessory viewfinder, noting the centre, then you use the camera viewfinder for focussing and aiming. 21/24 @ 1.4 is usually not a value for action photography. That's why I never really understood why Leica announced both the 21 & 24 Summiluxes. They knew that the M9 was coming, the 24mm frames in the M8 were not covering the actual field of view of the lens, and the lens was blocking at least 1/4 of the view. And the lenses announced a year ago were only really available just before the release of the M9, with which you need a separate finder for both. A f1,4 lens usable only with a separate finder seems to be there only for the sake of it... The 24/3,8 makes much more sense for me. BTW, both lenses are attracting dust in the window of the local dealer since he finally received them. A Summilux 28 had also made more sense IMO. Now, what I am really waiting for is a redesigned Summilux 35 /1,4 Asph. Lucien Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mym6is12 Posted October 15, 2009 Share #25 Posted October 15, 2009 That's why I never really understood why Leica announced both the 21 & 24 Summiluxes.BTW, both lenses are attracting dust in the window of the local dealer since he finally received them. Perhaps that explains how I managed to get my 21mm up North for 12% below UK list ( i.e. almost VAT free ) - which is also significantly less than the €-zone prices I saw. UK list prices :leica-storemayfair.co.uk pdf. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
lars_bergquist Posted October 15, 2009 Share #26 Posted October 15, 2009 Are we talking about the same photos? I mean 8/2008, the photos from the Goodwood Revival event. There are shots there which could not be made with another lens, like page 42 and 44. Given, that was on an M8. I would like to see someone do the same for the M9. We are talking of the same photos, among several. You would not have known what lens they were taken with, but for the captions. Take the two pictures on the same spread, pp. 46-47. Nobody who does not know the actual distance from the two girls to the course (left page) can know from a purely visual inspection if the pictures do really show more background than a 50mm. Right page: Was the picture taken from a distance of less than one meter (24mm) or two meters (50mm)? There are no obvious clues in the picture itself. Oh well. A 50mm Summicron or Summilux ASPH would have had smoother bokeh ... case closed? The old man from the Euclidean Age Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
glenerrolrd Posted October 16, 2009 Share #27 Posted October 16, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) The key questions (1) m8 or M9 and (2) type of photography you plan to do. For example, with street photography I find a 28mm FOV to be optimum. It is wide enough to provide some context to the image (show enough in the background to place the subject in a situation) and yet....the distortion of a subject near the edges can be managed . So I start with the desired field of view. Next is speed and with either the m8 or M9 ...the IQ is just visably better at lower ISOs . So you can argue about high ISO and marvel at the few images taken a 2500 with acceptable DR and noise ..but really 640(M8) and 1000(M9) are about it . This makes lens speed important....and having a 1.4 verse a 2.8 is a big deal. The 21 and 24 asph are both great on the M8 with 28 and 32 mm FOV ..you can use the 24 without the finder but 32mm isn t very wide so thats the tradeoff. On the M9 ...its the 28summicron first....perfect FOV,small form,a lot less expensive ,no finder..one of Leica s all time best lenses. The 24/1.4 is next because its now a real 24....ever try using an 18 on an M8 same FOV..this is wide for street work . I am adjusting to this combination as wide and fast opens up new opportunities. The 21/1.4 was perfect on the M8 but I think the 24/1.4 maybe better on the M9. And both may get less use than the 28 summicron. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_n Posted October 16, 2009 Share #28 Posted October 16, 2009 Ask yourself: Have I not been oversold on the awesome separation effects of the Summilux at full aperture? They are not that great. I have yet to see a published picture that actually sings out loud: This could have been done only by a superwide Summilux!I completely agree with you. I really wanted to buy the 24/1.4 and I've seen all the great pictures by Brett and also Riccis, who's taken some outstanding shots with the 24. I have yet to see one from either lens that is visually so unique that it could only be achieved at f1.4 on a full-frame body, film or digital I don't care. This is a completely different issue from needing the f1.4 because the body tops out at 1000ISO, I can understand that need. What I haven't seen is the delineation of figure/background, DOF effect, call it what you will, that as Lars says "sings out loud" (a good description! ) you can only do this with a super-wide at f1.4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henning Posted October 16, 2009 Share #29 Posted October 16, 2009 Most of the posts in this thread sound to me like rationalizations for not getting the 21 or 24/1.4 lenses. Similar arguments could be made for not getting a 50/1.4 but keeping the 50/2.8 Elmar if only those two were available. Sometimes the separation of focus is important, sometimes just the speed. In the case of the wide Summilux lenses, you don't really give up anything in performance at those apertures where they overlap with the available apertures of f/2.8 lenses, and the two wider apertures don't perform much differently than the smaller apertures except for some quite manageable vignetting. Price, and for most people probably size to a lesser extent, are the only downsides. Out of focus rendering is smooth; someone mentioned that it was harsher than that of the Summilux ASPH 50. I strongly dispute that. I've had the 50 for a number of years, and the 21 'lux since February, and if anything the 21 is smoother. Mostly I've shot with the 21 on M8's, but I've had a day with an M9 and the 21 is the main reason I want that camera. It's outstanding on an M9. I should mention that I use and have used many wideangles and at present about 1/3 of my lenses for all formats cover more than 90 degrees including 7 for Leica. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riccis Posted October 16, 2009 Share #30 Posted October 16, 2009 I completely agree with you. I really wanted to buy the 24/1.4 and I've seen all the great pictures by Brett and also Riccis, who's taken some outstanding shots with the 24. I have yet to see one from either lens that is visually so unique that it could only be achieved at f1.4 on a full-frame body, film or digital I don't care. This is a completely different issue from needing the f1.4 because the body tops out at 1000ISO, I can understand that need. What I haven't seen is the delineation of figure/background, DOF effect, call it what you will, that as Lars says "sings out loud" (a good description! ) you can only do this with a super-wide at f1.4. Thanks for the comments about my work. While I can't speak for Brett the reason why you will not see in any of my 21/24 lux images that separation is because I don't care about all the bokeh (sp?) gimicks a lot of folks seems to get into when they shoot fast lenses. Think about this, if you want to get the nice separation while shooting wide open with the new 21/24 lux you need to be shooting at the closest focusing distance and we know from experience that in a wide angle lens this will be pretty close (or almost on top) of your subject... This is not my style or the type of images I want to make... Also if you need to recompose shooting this way there is a good chance you are going to have a few out of focus images. The reason why you get the 21/24 lux is to be able to use the extra speed over the Elmarit counterparts while keeping your ISO as low as possible, specially for those of us who are always working in conditions where you need the fastest lenses available. Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riccis Posted October 16, 2009 Share #31 Posted October 16, 2009 ...and here you can see some of my samples... If you are shooting the M8/M8.2 I honestly believe the 21/24 lux are the way to go due to the crop factor and the extra speed. M8.2, ISO 160, 21 Summilux @ 1.4 M8.2, ISO 640, 24 Summilux @ 1.4 - You may see some of the separation here as this was shot pretty close. M8.2, ISO 1250, 24 Summilux @ 1.4 - This is all about shooting in very low light conditions. M3, Neopan 400, 21 Summilux @ 1.4 - This was in very low conditions in Mexico (no street lights) Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mym6is12 Posted October 16, 2009 Share #32 Posted October 16, 2009 This is the first shot I took with a 21 summilux in the Mayfair showroom a couple of weeks ago. It's no great shot, but it shows the out of focus blur achievable on full frame at the minimum focus distance and f/1.4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.