Fotomiguel Posted January 5, 2007 Share #1 Â Posted January 5, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I've dicided to buy the 24 elmarit ashp, so I can shot without external viewer. But I doubt if it's a right decision because many people said that the 21mm elmarit 2.8 has more quality. It's worthwhile the trouble of the external viewer to get more quality because the difference of focal range it's not too important to me? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 5, 2007 Posted January 5, 2007 Hi Fotomiguel, Take a look here Elmarit 21mm Asph or 24 Elmarit Ash?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
j. borger Posted January 5, 2007 Share #2 Â Posted January 5, 2007 I've dicided to buy the 24 elmarit ashp, so I can shot without external viewer. But I doubt if it's a right decision because many people said that the 21mm elmarit 2.8 has more quality. It's worthwhile the trouble of the external viewer to get more quality because the difference of focal range it's not too important to me? Would all depend how you define quality. The 24 asph is sharper and contrastier. I find the slightly lower contrast of the 21mm asph a pre ........ but most people will consider the 24mm asph the "better" lens. In fact both lenses are outstanding ... so i would not choose on difference in "quality" ...... because these differences are highly academic. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eoin Posted January 5, 2007 Share #3 Â Posted January 5, 2007 Miguel, you don't say what camera your using, I choose the 21Asph over the 24Asph due to the extra width it gives. You can frame the 21 very easily with the viewfinder in the M8 and don't need an external 28mm view finder. the frame to use is what you normally can see within the viewfinder and then a little more around that. It is not the whole viewfinder, what I mean by that is if you move your eye to the left or right and look deep into the corners of the camera this area is not inside the field of view of the 21mm. Â The 21mm field of view on the M8 is essentialy the whole visible view when looking through the view finder normally. I hope this helps. Â As for which is better, the 24asph is supposed to be better than the 21asph but will you really notice it in prints?. Either way the 24 will never be a 21 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drjon Posted January 5, 2007 Share #4  Posted January 5, 2007 The 24mm is a great lens on the M8.  Reading Al Fresco 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!  Where's My Purse Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!  Where's My Purse ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/12805-elmarit-21mm-asph-or-24-elmarit-ash/?do=findComment&comment=134357'>More sharing options...
macusque Posted January 5, 2007 Share #5  Posted January 5, 2007 Hi Miguel,  I have both lenses, the 24mm is slightly sharper and a bit more contrasty but I'm selling it and keep the 21, because I prefer to use the 28 Summicron as my main lens and the 24mm is too close.  The 28 framelines are also visible with the 1.25x magnifier, so I could always keep it on.  I will probably sell also the 21 asph, because I usually directly jump to the 15 CV when I need wider than 28, although there are times where the 21mm focal lenght just fit the subject better.   Btw, if you are interested in my 24 asph (practically new but no 6bit), let me know by email: macusque at tuttopmi dot it  Ciao Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted January 5, 2007 Share #6 Â Posted January 5, 2007 I've dicided to buy the 24 elmarit ashp, so I can shot without external viewer. But I doubt if it's a right decision because many people said that the 21mm elmarit 2.8 has more quality. It's worthwhile the trouble of the external viewer to get more quality because the difference of focal range it's not too important to me? According to Erwin Puts the 24 is one of those rare lenses where everything comes together. I would hesitate to claim the 21 is "better". If forced at gunpoint I would say just the other way around. But I would say, in this league, quality comparisons are utterly uninteresting and unproductive, one should buy the lens that is most suitable for the purpose one wants it for. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
macusque Posted January 5, 2007 Share #7 Â Posted January 5, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) But I would say, in this league, quality comparisons are utterly uninteresting and unproductive, one should buy the lens that is most suitable for the purpose one wants it for. Â Couldn't agree more. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fotomiguel Posted January 5, 2007 Author Share #8 Â Posted January 5, 2007 Thank you for all those replies!! you are great!!!!! I'm going to use it with my new M8 that has arrived today! I'm going right now to the shop to get the M8!!!!!!!!!! Later I will reply all of you. Thank you very Much:D :D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted January 5, 2007 Share #9 Â Posted January 5, 2007 Miguel, I was faced with the same dilelmma when looking for a new, wide lens for my M8. Â I settled on the 24 for 2 reasons. One was Puts description that it is the single most important lens for an M-owner to have. Â Second, and more important, I saw images from the 21, 24, and 28 in Sean Reid's reviews of wide lenses and I thought the images from the 24 were more organic and artistic than those from the 21 and 28. Â However, what I really want is an f1.4 lens at these widths. Â I really like this lens. I'm glad you're enjoying it. Â Regards, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.