ski542002 Posted April 20, 2013 Share #1 Posted April 20, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hello: At times I need a very wide lens for architectural and industrial applications; in the 15mm range. When shooting Canon I rent the 14, but now I prefer to purchase and stay in the Leica M family because of the superior wide angle optics. Anyone have any experience with any of the super wide Leica lenses or even the Zeiss Ikon 15mm f/2.8 T*? At $4,500 the Zeiss is not cheap, but barely twice the price of the Canon 14 with better quality IMO. Replies always appreciated! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted April 20, 2013 Posted April 20, 2013 Hi ski542002, Take a look here Rectilinear ultra-wide. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
01af Posted April 20, 2013 Share #2 Posted April 20, 2013 My Leica M ultra-wide of choice is the Leica Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21 mm Asph. It does suffer from some wave-form distortion—in fact, it has the strongest distortion of all current Leica M lenses—but still this hardly is a problem in architectural use. And if it is then it perfectly can be taken care of in post-processing (when you have Photoshop). The Zeiss Distagon T* 15 mm 1:2.8 ZM sure is a good lens but it's expensive, big, heavy, and not coupled with the camera's range finder. Sorry I cannot say more about it, as I never used this beast. Personally, I like the Voigtländer Ultra-Wide Heliar 12 mm 1:5.6. I think on the M9 it's even better than the Super-Wide Heliar 15 mm 1:4.5 which also is no slouch (but not quite up to the Distagon or the Tri-Elmar). You may also want to consider the 18 mm focal length—there we have the Leica Super-Elmar-M 18 mm Asph and the Zeiss Distagon T* 18 mm ZM. Rumour says Leica was developing a new 14 mm 1:3.8 M lens ... but that rumour is haunting us for two years now, with no actual substance emerging whatsoever. 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
LucisPictor Posted April 20, 2013 Share #3 Posted April 20, 2013 For ultrawides I use 15mm on my 5D. The mirror finder suits me better when shooting at such an angle. But I love the Voigtländer Heliar 4.5/15 (plus 20mm viewfinder) on my M8, which equals a 20mm lens on an M9. 20/21mm are great for a viewfinder IMHO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted April 21, 2013 Share #4 Posted April 21, 2013 I dont do a lot of ultrawide work but when I do it's either the 19mm f/2.8 v2 Elmarit-R on a 5D MkII or CV 15/4.5 (LTM) on M9-P. The CV 15 is a sterling performer for so tiny a lens and at such a modest cost. Pete. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MikeEvangelist Posted April 21, 2013 Share #5 Posted April 21, 2013 I can recommend the Voigtlander 12mm and 15mm lenses as well. Both are very sharp. I prefer the 12mm it has less color/vignetting on the edges, and what is there seems (at least to me) to be easier to correct. I coded the 12mm as a 21/2.8 pre-asph, which gives great results. The only drawback with the 12mm is it's 5.6 aperture. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tashley Posted April 21, 2013 Share #6 Posted April 21, 2013 Hello: At times I need a very wide lens for architectural and industrial applications; in the 15mm range. When shooting Canon I rent the 14, but now I prefer to purchase and stay in the Leica M family because of the superior wide angle optics. Anyone have any experience with any of the super wide Leica lenses or even the Zeiss Ikon 15mm f/2.8 T*? At $4,500 the Zeiss is not cheap, but barely twice the price of the Canon 14 with better quality IMO. Replies always appreciated! On which camera? The Voigtlander 15 is very out of its league on the M240 whereas the Leica 18mm F3.8 can, with some effort at both the shooting and post ends of the process, give well corrected and sharp results. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Etruscello Posted April 22, 2013 Share #7 Posted April 22, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Mike Evangelist has said it all -- exactly my experience. The CV 12mm is sharp, rectilinear with minimal distortion, and shows no red-edge on my M-E. Its limitation is its f5.6 aperture, and I use it for best results at f8. I use the CV 15mm, which is a little faster, on the M8.2 only. It is as good as the 12mm, but does show red-edge on the M9/M-E and is the focal length equivalent on the M8 of only 21mm. Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sebastel Posted April 25, 2013 Share #8 Posted April 25, 2013 (edited) don't forget the hologon. i have seen very convincing examples (lookup members 'menos|M6' and 'awslee', or on flickr under the names 'teknopunk.com' and 'Higgs Singlet'). i am a bit cheaper, happy with the quality provided by the 15mm super wide heliar; but i prefer the 21mm in the ultra wide sector anyway. if you want colour, the heliar requires using cornerfix with the M9. i have no idea about the hologon in this regard. cheers, sebastian Edited April 25, 2013 by sebastel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tobey bilek Posted April 26, 2013 Share #9 Posted April 26, 2013 They are like automobiles, spend as much as you like. CV are a bit cheesy build, and just ok optically. I put Ebay adapters ,screw tp bayonet, and coded the 21 2.8. Sometimes I see a red edge, sometimes not. Corner Fix rescues. I use them, 12 & 15, seldom. For serious application, I use my 28 R lens shift on the Nikon FF. Use a micro focusing rail sideways. Make three photos, shift left, right, center, keeping the lens centered with the rail. Close and far objects line up when you do the stitch. Straight lines are straight which does not happen if you do rotational panos. For architecture and other things that do not move, this the way to go. You get a nice large file also. Sweep is about the same as 15 mm, 90 degrees. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted April 26, 2013 Share #10 Posted April 26, 2013 I use the Voigtlander 15mm on the M9 when in truly informal, non-demanding circumstances. It dearly needs a center filter, or something better because for some reason it tends to darken on the left (print view) side of the image. Someone else mentioned the same thing. I could have a bad example. Dunno. (For serious wide work I use a 35mm Grandagon on 6x12cm @F/22 with lots of front rise.) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gvaliquette Posted April 27, 2013 Share #11 Posted April 27, 2013 Here is an image from my Voigtlander 12mm f5.6, uncoded, taken in Chicago last week. First as is from the M9; the vignetting is obvious: And this one is after processing with CornerFix: I really like this little and relatively inexpensive lens for what it does. Needless to say, I cannot afford a Hologon! I hope this helps. Guy 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/203032-rectilinear-ultra-wide/?do=findComment&comment=2308817'>More sharing options...
plewislambert Posted May 11, 2013 Share #12 Posted May 11, 2013 "Personally, I like the Voigtländer Ultra-Wide Heliar 12 mm 1:5.6. I think on the M9 it's even better than the Super-Wide Heliar 15 mm 1:4.5 which also is no slouch" I used the 15mm Voigtlander successfully on my film Leica but on the M9 it needs Cornerfix to make the edges of the frame respectable and even then I did not like the images so sold the lens. I am experimenting with 17mm lenses by Tokina and Tamron (can't see anything between them!) using an Olympus to M9 adapter. They don't have the bite of a Leica lens but I have had some good results of the interior of Southwark Cathedral. Didn't have the nerve to set up a tripod in the cathedral so everything hand-held and a few shaken. Maybe I should have asked about tripods when I bought the photo permit in the cathedral. Philip Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
semi-ambivalent Posted May 12, 2013 Share #13 Posted May 12, 2013 Straight lines are straight which does not happen if you do rotational panos. As an aside I remember, decades ago, an article in Modern Photography saying the reason this happens is that people rotate the camera "around" the film plane (circumstantially) because that's where the tripod socket happens to be. The author's take was to rotate the camera around the lens's nodal point (don't recall which one) and that image mis-alignment goes away. The author put a macro-photography focusing platform between the camera and the rotating pano head and moved the camera back/forth until this nodal point was on the axis of rotation of the pano head. Of course, plumb and level are crucial here. The article included before and after images and darned if the problem wasn't solved. Of course, these days some sort of software will fix all one's mistakes so this mechanical solution is academic, but I though I'd mention it in honor of those mechanical times, and because I've just finished a three shot latte and needed to type...something. s-a Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henning Posted May 13, 2013 Share #14 Posted May 13, 2013 I do architectural photography and have used many wide angles. Currently I have a Super Angulon 3.4, Summilux 21, Wide Angle Tri-Elmar, 21 Elmarit ASPH, CV 21, Leica-M 15 Hologon, CV 12, CV15 as well as Canon TS-E's in 17 and 24 and the Sigma 12-24 on FF Canon cameras. For architecture I like the CV 12 a lot, as it has little distortion and corner issues on digital M cameras can be corrected quite well with Cornerfix. The CV 15 doesn't work as well as the rear exit pupil is closer to the sensor than on the 12, and thus the corner effects are worse. The distortion of the WATE is worst at 16mm, and is not easy to fix properly, and thus isn't my favourite lens for demanding shots. At 21mm it's not as bad, and no worse than that of the 21 Elmarit. The new slower Leica lenses are better, but all of them are retrofocus and have the wave form distortion. The current Zeiss 21/4.5 is not retrofocus, but then has the problem of the exit pupil being too close to the sensor so the edge effects are unmanageable. Similarly the Super Angulon f/4 and f/3.4 as well as the Hologon. The latter can actually be mounted on the M9 (haven't tried it on the M240 yet), but it only produces a small circular image in the centre with extreme falloff. The Canon 17TS-E is excellent and works on the M240 quite well, as long as you get a very good adapter. This isn't as easy as it sounds, as almost all are a bit too short and/or don't have strong enough springs. Aperture setting is of course a pain. The Leica (Schneider) 28 PC is unfortunately not as good, in particular it has quite a bit of distortion and the image circle is a lot smaller. The Nikkor 28 is better re: distortion, as are almost all other shift lenses except for the 28 Pentax. For 'semi-ambivalent': For extreme wide-angle, you have three basic choices - rectilinear, where the whole image has to be coverable by the image circle of the lens (for shift lenses with the left-right shift and stitching you're just using the whole image circle of the lens), so the Canon 17 is about the widest you can get for digital. For film I still have some wider solutions. Next comes rotational panoramas, either stitched or single shot. In digital Roundshot makes some excellent if expensive single shot equipment, and for film they made my 28-220 camera and many others, and cameras such as Horizon, Widelux and Noblex made cameras that take about 130° wide shots. For this type of shots nodal rotation is important, and software can't fully repair images that weren't taken correctly. Here vertical lines are kept straight, but horizontal lines above and below the horizon are curved. Vertical angle of view is limited to about 120°, but horizontal angle of view can be multiple 360's, as on my 28-220 camera. Finally, fisheye representation - here neither vertical nor horizontal angles are kept straight, but vertical and horizontal angles of view can be greater than 180° in a single shot, or in stitched shots. In summary, for extreme wide-angle shots on M cameras with lenses shorter than 21mm, you're probably best off with the CV12 for architectural work. For 21mm my pick at this time would be the 21/3.4, with the WATE at 21mm close behind. Henning 5 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henning Posted May 13, 2013 Share #15 Posted May 13, 2013 (For serious wide work I use a 35mm Grandagon on 6x12cm @F/22 with lots of front rise.) This is what I use as well. I have the 35/4.5 Grandagon, 47 SA-XL and 65 Grandagon on Cambo Wide with 4x5 or 6x12 holders. Center filters on all. Henning Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted May 13, 2013 Share #16 Posted May 13, 2013 The distortion of the WATE is worst at 16 mm, and is not easy to fix properly ... Fixing the WATE's (and many others') distortion perfectly is just a mouseclick or two with the ALPA Switzerland Lens Correction Tool which is a free plug-in for Photoshop. The new slower Leica lenses are better, but all of them are retrofocus ... As a matter of fact, none of them is retrofocus. The only retrofocus wide-angle lens in the current Leica M lens line-up is the Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21 mm Asph—that's why it has the lowest vignetting of all Leica M super-wides. ... so the Canon TS-E 17 mm is about the widest you can get for digital. It is virtually the same as (just a tad wider than) the Voigtländer Ultra-Wide Heliar 12 mm 1:5.6. The TS-E 17 mm uses a wider image circle than 35-mm format so it can make use of the full angle-of-view only through stitching multiple shots (which will work for static subjects only); the Ultra-Wide Heliar 12 mm uses a smaller format than the 17 mm but can utilise its full angle-of-view in a single shot, hence will work also for moving subjects or hand-held shooting. For 21 mm, my pick at this time would be the Super-Elmar-M 21/3.4 Asph, with the WATE at 21 mm close behind. Agreed. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henning Posted May 17, 2013 Share #17 Posted May 17, 2013 Fixing the WATE's (and many others') distortion perfectly is just a mouseclick or two with the ALPA Switzerland Lens Correction Tool which is a free plug-in for Photoshop. Thanks; I will look for that. As a matter of fact, none of them is retrofocus. The only retrofocus wide-angle lens in the current Leica M lens line-up is the Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21 mm Asph—that's why it has the lowest vignetting of all Leica M super-wides. I'm sorry, but you should check the optical formulas again. Yes, vignetting is usually better controlled by retrofocus lenses, but they also tend to have more complex distortion. The current Leica lenses of 28mm and wider are all retrofocus; this allows the exit pupil to be far enough in front of the sensor so that the light rays do not strike it at too low an angle of incidence. It also allows the TTL metering to work by keeping the rear cell of the lens far enough away from the shutter so that it doesn't shade the meter. The last Leica lens that was not retrofocus was the Super Angulon f/3.4. Leica M lenses are less extreme retrofocus designs than those for SLR's, but they are still retrofocus. It is virtually the same as (just a tad wider than) the Voigtländer Ultra-Wide Heliar 12 mm 1:5.6. The TS-E 17 mm uses a wider image circle than 35-mm format so it can make use of the full angle-of-view only through stitching multiple shots (which will work for static subjects only); the Ultra-Wide Heliar 12 mm uses a smaller format than the 17 mm but can utilise its full angle-of-view in a single shot, hence will work. also for moving subjects or hand-held shooting. I know that, but the 17mm lens still has the widest effective angle of view when shifted of any lens for 35mm. That was my point. Henning Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted May 17, 2013 Share #18 Posted May 17, 2013 As a matter of fact, none of them is retrofocus. I'm sorry, but you should check the optical formulas again. [...] The last Leica lens that was not retrofocus was the Super Angulon 21 mm 1:3.4. Don't worry, I did check the optical formulas carefully. And I can reassure you—the only retrofocus Leica M lenses are the two Tri-Elmars, i. e. the 28-35-50 mm and the 16-18-21 mm. Leica M lenses are less extreme retrofocus designs than those for SLRs, but they are still retrofocus. With the exception of said Tri-Elmars, no single Leica M lens is retrofocus. The modern wide-angles have slightly longer backfocus distances than symmetric designs would have, but still not long enough to make them actually retrofocus. ... but the 17 mm lens still has the widest effective angle of view when shifted of any lens for 35-mm format. That was my point. And my point was—technically it's the widest indeed, still it's only insignificantly wider than the Voigtländer 12 mm. Equally wide, basically, for any practical intents and purposes (123° vs 121°, if I'm not mistaken). And while the Canon TS-E 17 mm can yield a higher image quality due to higher pixel count after stitching, the Voigtländer 12 mm is easier and quicker to use because it will give you (almost) the same angle-of-view in one single shot. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gvaliquette Posted May 17, 2013 Share #19 Posted May 17, 2013 ... With the exception of said Tri-Elmars, no single Leica M lens is retrofocus. The modern wide-angles have slightly longer backfocus distances than symmetric designs would have, but still not long enough to make them actually retrofocus. ... See what Leica itself says about the Elmar-M 24mm f3.8 in the "Technical Data" sheet: "The retrofocus-like construction ..." http://us.leica-camera.com/assets/file/download.php?filename=file_3882.pdf Guy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
01af Posted May 17, 2013 Share #20 Posted May 17, 2013 See what Leica itself says about the Elmar-M 24 mm 1:3.8 Asph in the "Technical Data" sheet: "The retrofocus-like construction ..." Exactly "Retrofocus-like" (as opposed to "retrofocus") means, "increased backfocus distance, yet not quite retrofocus." As I've already explained. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now