sean_reid Posted February 3, 2007 Share #1 Â Posted February 3, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I'm in the midst of testing the new Zeiss ZM C 21/4.5 for the 21 mm lens article and I must say that I'm quite impressed so far. So far, it seems to perform as well as the Zeiss 21/2.8, and CA is actually lower. If one can live with F/4.5, I think the smaller size and lower cost (than the 21/2.8) make it pretty compelling. Naturally, both of the Zeiss lenses have two fundamental disadvantages on the M8 (for color photographers). The first is, of course, that they aren't coded. The second is that they trigger the wrong frame lines in a Leica M which means that, even hand coded, one needs to manually hold the frame selector in the 28-90 position to activate the M8's lens detection. One could, however, have Zeiss swap the bayonet on a 21 with one meant for the 28. Â That aside, both of the Zeiss 21s are as impressive (albeit different in character) as the 21 Elmarit. Â Cheers, Â Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
grober Posted February 3, 2007 Share #2 Â Posted February 3, 2007 Thanks for this report. Some of us are also eager to see the new ZM 18/4.0 lens. Can you press your source to test one of these too? Â -g Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted February 3, 2007 Share #3 Â Posted February 3, 2007 Sean, what is your opinion of the CV15 vs. Zeiss 15/4.5? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted February 3, 2007 Author Share #4 Â Posted February 3, 2007 Hi Carsten, Â Do you mean the Zeiss 15/2.8? If yes, they're both here right now but haven't even had a chance to try the Zeiss. I expect to start testing ultrawides on the week of Feb. 11 when the WA TE test lens should be here. So that set would be: CV 12/5.6, CV 15/4.5, Zeiss 15/2.8 and then the WA TE as well. There' still some remaining work on the 21s review and then the 50s are up next week. Â Hi grober, Â I'm working on that. Â Cheers, Â Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 3, 2007 Share #5 Â Posted February 3, 2007 Sean, which 50s will you include? regards,tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted February 3, 2007 Author Share #6 Â Posted February 3, 2007 Hi Tom, Â 50 Summicron 50 Lux Asph. Zeiss 50/2.0 Zeiss 50/1.5 CV 50/1.5 Â Cheers, Â Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted February 3, 2007 Share #7 Â Posted February 3, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I am looking forward to your review. regards, tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chrism Posted February 3, 2007 Share #8 Â Posted February 3, 2007 Damn, Sean, you're working hard - but someone's got to do it! Â Chris Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geoffreyg Posted February 3, 2007 Share #9 Â Posted February 3, 2007 Sean, what's great about this is that you anticipate what questions need answers, and then move in that direction just before we need the answers! Keep going! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted February 3, 2007 Author Share #10 Â Posted February 3, 2007 Thanks guys! I'm working my tail off, actually. Now time to forget work for awhile and go out to dinner with my wife. Have a good evening all. Â Cheers, Â Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted February 4, 2007 Share #11  Posted February 4, 2007 Hi Carsten, Do you mean the Zeiss 15/2.8? If yes, they're both here right now but haven't even had a chance to try the Zeiss.  I meant the CV15 vs. the Zeiss ZM C 21/4.5 that you refer to in the first post, but I was mixing things up, thinking 15=21 Never mind me, I am babbling. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gogopix Posted February 5, 2007 Share #12  Posted February 5, 2007 Dear Sean  Excellet review on the 21mm. It is important to me right now, and you really cover the water front . Worth the renewal right there! in that one article! [can I say that?]  . I am currently considering 21mm distagon(YES! I have TWO adapters for CZ to"M") 21mm Biogon 21mm ASPH tri elmar 16-21  I want the crispest look I can find. I was surprised at the low contrast of theLeica! If the distagon/biogon have reasonable distortion (I do a lot of panos at 28mm eq.) then it seems hard to see the IQ of the 21mm Leica  and BTW I am quite a Leica glass bigot with about 20 "R" lenses For "M" I already have 50 1.0, 75 1.4, and 28 2.8  have 15mm and12mm CV  so the critical lens now is the 21mm  am I missing something? The 'icicle' image with leica was particularly disapointing comnpared to 21mm VC!  regards Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted February 5, 2007 Author Share #13 Â Posted February 5, 2007 Hi Victor, Â Thanks very much. As you know, I'm still working on various sections of that article. The Elmarit 21 isn't really a low contrast lens, the contrast is just a bit lower than the Zeiss. That's an advantage for the Leica, of course, when it comes to dynamic range. Take a look at the 28s article to see how that contrast/dynamic range relationship plays out. Â Is distortion an important aspect for you? If so, the best RF 21s show less than the Distagon. Among them, I'd say *your* lens will likely be either the Elmarit or one of the Zeiss 21s. Â Cheers, Â Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scho Posted February 15, 2007 Share #14 Â Posted February 15, 2007 Sean, Â What does the "C" designation imply for the new 21mm f/4.5? Just classic design as for the 50 C Sonnar? Â Carl Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cnguyen Posted February 15, 2007 Share #15 Â Posted February 15, 2007 Sean, How about comparison between the Zeiss 21 f4.5 vs the WATE with M8 at 21mm ? Thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted February 15, 2007 Author Share #16  Posted February 15, 2007 Sean, What does the "C" designation imply for the new 21mm f/4.5? Just classic design as for the 50 C Sonnar?  Carl  Hi Carl,  For the 21/4.5, the C stands for "compact". It's very much much a modern lens in character.  Cheers,  Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted February 15, 2007 Author Share #17  Posted February 15, 2007 Sean,How about comparison between the Zeiss 21 f4.5 vs the WATE with M8 at 21mm ? Thanks  Charles,  It is going to come down to logistics, largely. The test copy of the WA TE is still not here yet and needs to be back to Leica for PMA. So I don't know yet if there will even be enough time to test it properly. The Zeiss lens set also has to go back to Zeiss for PMA. So, basically, as time allows, I'm testing whatever full sets of lenses I have here. The 28s are done, the 24/25s are done, the 21s are done (except for OOF comparisons, macro-contrast and some more illustrations) and the 50s are done (except for OOF comparisons and some more illustrations). The 21 and 50 articles should be complete by the end of this month (I hope).  The ultra-wides test requires that I have the WA TE for a good chunk of time. That may not be until mid-March unless it arrives very soon.What I may do, in the interim, is to post an initial article that looks at the CV 12, CV 15 and Zeiss 15.  That leaves the 35s, 75s and 90s for this spring. I have a long shoot in Florida coming up soon but I'll be testing lenses there as well.  Cheers,  Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.