Leica Super Elmar 21mm f3.4 versus 21mm f2.8 Biogon T*ZM

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have exactly the same lack of affinity with the focal length, Paulus. It is completely incomprehensible to me, because I use my 18 and 24 happily all the time .

[Paulus]

I have exactly the same lack of affinity with the focal length, Paulus. It is completely incomprehensible to me, because I use my 18 and 24 happily all the time .

 

Yet, 2,8/24mm was a favorite of mine.

 

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/people/219556-poisoning-pigeons-park.html

 

I regret I've sold it. It focused just a little bit " denser " than the 28mm, but maybe I'll buy it back once and take a sentimental journey .

[250swb]

Its not my favourite focal length either Paulus, and I wouldn't swap my 28mm Summicron for a Super Elmar or a 50mm Summilux. But the point is that as it isn't so far away from SE quality, and it is well made, and it is less than half the price, it ticks all the boxes.

 

Steve

[bpalme]

Buy them both.. you can take your time comparing and make a little money if you sell the Leica and probably lose very little selling the Zeiss.

[LotharZhou]

Among all the lenses I use to have, the biogon 21mm and 25mm are without doult the sharpest lens, from edge to edge, ergonomic wise not bad either.

My 28mm summicron also renders nearly perfect, one lens I will never sell, but not as sharp as the 25mm biogon.

 

The summicron handles highlight better, less over exposual.

After playing with all these leica, CV and zeiss lens, I would buy biogons anytime for it's quality and price.

[MarkP]

I have Zeiss (4.5/21) and Leica (1.4/21 & and now a 3.4/21 as of 2 days ago) 21mm lenses. I'm deciding which to keep between the Biogon and SEM. However, the 4.5/21 Biogon's performance should by no means be underestimated:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/landscape-travel/219426-victorian-coastline-1-australia.html

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/landscape-travel/219427-wilsons-promontory-1-australia.html

 

I also agree with the comment about the 28 Summicron which will never go.

[kokoshawnuff]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

the 4.5/21 Biogon's performance should by no means be underestimated

 

I am a believer when it comes to the C-Biogon (at least on film Ms), not only because of the negligible difference in terms of optics when it comes to Leica 21mm lenses, but because of the wonderfully compact size. I wouldn't reject the new Super-Elmar, but for now I'm very happy with the Zeiss.

 

To answer OPs question, worth and value is subjective because it's always more than just about the monetary considerations. But when it comes to the lenses you are speaking about, you will get your money back on either, so it might be worth-while to get both, compare and decide from there...

[Double Negative]

You definitely can't go wrong with either Zeiss (or the Leica for that matter). They're all optically outstanding. The only thing to watch for is when used on the M9... The C Biogon (and Color Skopar) can be a little troublesome as far as red edge. Version 1.162 firmware went a loooong way for me in making the Color Skopar (and other lenses) usable "out of the box" without *needing* to use CornerFix. The C Biogon I'm not sure of on that front... On the M8 and obviously film bodies - no problem whatsoever.

[hydeca]

... the point is that as it isn't so far away from SE quality, and it is well made, and it is less than half the price, it ticks all the boxes

 

Your comments have prompted me to use the Biogon for a couple of days. I still have all my fingers, image quality is really nice, calibration spot on, you're right its quite a good lens. =)

 

I still hate the lens cap and those three sharp-edged pieces of alloy that protrude at the front. I ordered the lens hood today; that should ameliorate those two issues.

[Peter H]

Until this thread, each time I used my Biogon I thought how beautifully made it was; everything is precise, the aperture ring moves more smoothly and positively than any Leica lens I've ever owned or used, and nothing feels sharp to me.

 

So I've compared it carefully and deliberately with my Leica lenses and with a new 21mmSE.

 

This is my conclusion about the Biogon's build quality:

 

It is beautifully made. Everything is precise, the aperture ring moves more smoothly and positively than any Leica lens I've ever owned or used, and nothing feels sharp to me. And since I always use a finder, the small increase in size is irrelevant to me.

 

Until I see some photos that demonstrate why the SE would be a better tool for taking photos, I can't think of a single reason for buying one.

 

Many Leica lenses are worth every penny of the higher price for their incomparable qualities, but in the slower 21mm class I do believe Zeiss just offer better value.

[lars_bergquist]

I have no experience of the 21mm Biogon 2.8, but I since I purchased my Super-Elmar, one 25mm Biogon and one 18mm Distagon are in semi-retirement, even though both are extremely good lenses. I am simply in love with the Super-Elmar. And that includes the finder!

 

The old man from the Age of the Contax Biogon 4.5/21mm

[Muizen]

I am simply in love with the Super-Elmar. And that includes the finder!

The old man from the Age of the Contax Biogon 4.5/21mm

Exactly what finder do you use with the Super Elmar?