Michael Geschlecht Posted February 19, 2012 Share #21 Posted February 19, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello Everybody, Does anyone know why the depth of field scale on the M version of the black 21mm Super Angulon 3.4 is somewhat tighter (less depth of field @ any aperture) than the same scale on the bright chrome version of the same lens? As far as I know they are optically the same lens. You can see this in the wiki @ the top of this page if you look @ "M Lenses". If I knew enough about computers I would Post a copy here of the wiki photo of the 2 lenses side by side. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted February 19, 2012 Posted February 19, 2012 Hi Michael Geschlecht, Take a look here 21mm f/3.4 Super-Angulon information wanted. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
farnz Posted February 20, 2012 Share #22 Posted February 20, 2012 Page 396 of Erwin Puts's 'Leica Compendium' describes it as a 9 element construction, each of which is made from a different type of glass. Unfortunately Herr Puts has included a schematic of the lens at the bottom of the page that shows 8 elements in 4 groups. So, alas, it appears to be another typo in this otherwise excellent tome. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 20, 2012 Share #23 Posted February 20, 2012 Unfortunately Herr Puts has included a schematic of the lens at the bottom of the page that shows 8 elements in 4 groups. So, alas, it appears to be another typo in this otherwise excellent tome. Pete. Pete, this is a characteristic of our time ...always making things in hurry to save time/money. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 20, 2012 Share #24 Posted February 20, 2012 Hello Everybody, Does anyone know why the depth of field scale on the M version of the black 21mm Super Angulon 3.4 is somewhat tighter (less depth of field @ any aperture) than the same scale on the bright chrome version of the same lens? As far as I know they are optically the same lens. Best Regards, Michael ? 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/172974-21mm-f34-super-angulon-information-wanted/?do=findComment&comment=1931953'>More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 20, 2012 Share #25 Posted February 20, 2012 Hello Everybody, Does anyone know why the depth of field scale on the M version of the black 21mm Super Angulon 3.4 is somewhat tighter (less depth of field @ any aperture) than the same scale on the bright chrome version of the same lens? As far as I know they are optically the same lens. You can see this in the wiki @ the top of this page if you look @ "M Lenses". If I knew enough about computers I would Post a copy here of the wiki photo of the 2 lenses side by side. Best Regards, Michael Yes... I remember that this topic was discussed time ago in the forum... I'd say 2 years ago or so... differences in the DOF scale were indeed noticed : I don't remember if it was on the same lens (21 3,4) or in different lenses (21 f3,4 vs. 21 f4 or even 21 f2,8... surely the old thread can be found). I remember that someone (can be myself) thought that maybe one DOF scale derived from a Schneider computation based on some standards (CoC etc...) and the other from Leitz traditional standards... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 20, 2012 Share #26 Posted February 20, 2012 The old thread I remembered is easy to find...(linked in the wiki page on SA 21 3,4) http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-collectors-historica/117814-lens-numbering.html - see post #12 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted February 20, 2012 Author Share #27 Posted February 20, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I remember that thread now. In the photo above both chrome and black lenses appear to have an identical dof scale so I wonder if the early chrome ones had the scale suggesting greater dof which was amended for some reason for later lenses? I have come up with Werner Wagner as the name on Schneider's patent application of 14-08-63. I've just taken delivery of a copy of the new 21mm f/3.4 SE and intend trying to compare the two (simply because I'm interested to see how much improvement has been made in 50 years and I still think that the SA is a lovely little lens) but am struggling to produce a really viable Cornerfix profile. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 20, 2012 Share #28 Posted February 20, 2012 . In the photo above both chrome and black lenses appear to have an identical dof scale . Looks well they are not . Silver 0.60 /8, Black 0.60 /11 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 20, 2012 Share #29 Posted February 20, 2012 I remember that thread now. In the photo above both chrome and black lenses appear to have an identical dof scale so I wonder if the early chrome ones had the scale suggesting greater dof which was amended for some reason for later lenses? I have come up with Werner Wagner as the name on Schneider's patent application of 14-08-63. I've just taken delivery of a copy of the new 21mm f/3.4 SE and intend trying to compare the two (simply because I'm interested to see how much improvement has been made in 50 years and I still think that the SA is a lovely little lens) but am struggling to produce a really viable Cornerfix profile. Not sure that it looks like this, even if the picture is not 100% decisive (it would be useful to have for instance, the two lenses focused at 1 meter exactly , taken with the "1" right in foreground) : but is worth noting that the two lenses of JC post have not, indeed, IDENTICAL barrels... the diameter of the black one, in the area with distances' scales, looks a bit smaller, and the tapered surface with DOF scale, consequently, with a different angle... so, the distances' values, by logic, are a bit less spaced in the black item... the DOF indexes too (I'd say)... but in the "old thread" the posted examples did show a CLEAR difference between DOF scales, so really it seems they cahnged it at acertain moment, durong the "chrome era" of the 21 f 3,4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
telewatt Posted February 20, 2012 Share #30 Posted February 20, 2012 :D:D one step ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 20, 2012 Share #31 Posted February 20, 2012 one step ... ... people out of the Leica world would think we are crazy to discuss this way details of items from 40-50 years ago... (btw... I have the 3,4 only in chrome... obviously, now I start to be tempted to find a black... ) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
telewatt Posted February 20, 2012 Share #32 Posted February 20, 2012 Luigi, they are much more shocked when I use it to make my job. :D Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pgk Posted February 20, 2012 Author Share #33 Posted February 20, 2012 ... people out of the Leica world would think we are crazy to discuss this way details of items from 40-50 years ago... (btw... I have the 3,4 only in chrome... obviously, now I start to be tempted to find a black... ) But we're still discussing dof field scales today with digital cameras and the topic still provokes intense debate. I do wonder if Schneider originated the early dof scale (I'no idea how many - if any - 35mm lenses they would have been building at that time) based on a CoC that Leica later realised was not the same as the one they were using - this would be quite a simple and perfectly possible explanation I would think. I find the SA to be an intriguing lens - small, compact, extremely high performance in the centre, and with a strange and simple diaphragm - quite unlike that used in other Leica lenses. IMHO the hood is too bulky though, and I wonder why a smaller hood was never produced. The black version is lovely - mine came from Newoldcamera who obviously considered it to be in somewhat 'used' condition, but in reality it only shows some marks from use on the lower knurled mounting ring and of course it still performs perfectly well as the optics are fine - in fact (against my better judgement) having bought the 21SE I am in the process of buying a film M specifically to use with the 21SA:eek:! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 20, 2012 Share #34 Posted February 20, 2012 ... people out of the Leica world would think we are crazy to discuss this way details of items from 40-50 years ago... ) Archaeologist are speaking things about 4000 ..5000 year ago :D (btw... I have the 3,4 only in chrome... obviously, now I start to be tempted to find a black... ) the worm is already in the fruit... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jc_braconi Posted February 20, 2012 Share #35 Posted February 20, 2012 Luigi, they are much more shocked when I use it to make my job. :D I used a lot for making pictures inside buildings with a DOOLU level. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted February 20, 2012 Share #36 Posted February 20, 2012 Hello Everybody, To further stir the pot: The Super Angulon F4 which preceded these 2 - 3.4's (All are Schneider lenses) had a scale which was even further broadened from the bright chrome 3.4's. On top of which: It showed a depth of field @ F4 that the black 3.4 said existed @ 5.6. Once again: Sorry I don't know how to bring down the photo from the M lens wiki above. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 20, 2012 Share #37 Posted February 20, 2012 From the Wiki pics the 21 f4 and the chrome f3,4 seem to have the same DOF values (and, on my items, too)... definitely different the black f3,4 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/172974-21mm-f34-super-angulon-information-wanted/?do=findComment&comment=1932577'>More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted February 20, 2012 Share #38 Posted February 20, 2012 Hello Luigi, If you notice in your photo above: The F4 shows sufficient depth of field @ F8 begining 1/2 of the way from the 1.2 meter inscription to the 1.5 meter inscription while the F3.4 bright chrome shows sufficient depth of field begining from closer to the 1.5 meter inscription in relation to the 1.2 meter inscription @ the same F8. Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
luigi bertolotti Posted February 21, 2012 Share #39 Posted February 21, 2012 Yes... I noticed that you can't define them strictly IDENTICAL... but , considering a certain tolerancing, my opinion is that the f 4 and the chrome f 3,4 were, to say, "declared" for practically the same DOF : what imho is really surprising is that sometime after (black f 3,4) they decided to alter it substantially... the DOF scale of the black f 3,4 is in the same range (just not to say identical) the the one of the later Elmarit M 21 f 2,8 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! Which, not surprisingly, was kept also in the 21 asph... My conclusion is that in the "first 21s" they indeed kept a (probably) Schneider-originated methodology of DOF evaluation. Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Which, not surprisingly, was kept also in the 21 asph... My conclusion is that in the "first 21s" they indeed kept a (probably) Schneider-originated methodology of DOF evaluation. ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/172974-21mm-f34-super-angulon-information-wanted/?do=findComment&comment=1932936'>More sharing options...
jaapv Posted February 21, 2012 Share #40 Posted February 21, 2012 Unfortunately Herr Puts has included a schematic of the lens at the bottom of the page that shows 8 elements in 4 groups. So, alas, it appears to be another typo in this otherwise excellent tome. Pete. Erwin has been naturalized as a German?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.