21mm f3.4 Super Elmar

[Stealth3kpl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Being the proud owner of a new-to-me 21mm Super Elmar, and nestling in for the evening with a glass of cider, I am interested to hear everyone wax lyrical about my new acquisition especially with regard to film. I've used it on a Ricoh GXR M module and I'm very impressed with its sharpness. It's replacing a 24mm F2.8 Elmarit which was no slouch. I've purchased the 21mm as we're off to the Canadian Rockies later in the year, and it will complement my 35mm a little better than my 24mm. There'll be a lot of lake and mountain shots but there's a real danger of having too much in the way of foreground with such a wide angle so any tips are welcome. Please post some examples to demonstrate your thoughts (so long as the mods don't mind). Try to steer clear of referring to the cheaper and very capable Zeiss offering because the money's already spent.

Pete

[01af]

Both 24 mm and 21 mm—or more precisely spoken: not both but either—are good complement to a 35 mm lens. in the recent years, I wrote several posts about the difference between 21 mm and 24 mm on 35-mm full-frame format.

[kokoshawnuff]

I use my SEM almost exclusively with an M7 and M3 (but one day it will be used on an M), and it really is the perfect 21 (imo) when optics, ergonomics and mechanics are considered. As for your intentions, it will be a great...for sweeping landscapes, just get as close as possible to those things you want at the bottom of your frame and it should be fine. I don't typically shoot the expansive landscapes with such a wide lens because of the issues with unwanted foreground scenery, the photo below is probably as close as I have to what you're asking about ( I was maybe 8 inches from the pine sapling)

 

M7 and Tri-X

[Gary Clennan]

I love mine!

 

L1000050 by Gary Clennan, on Flickr

 

L9996185 by Gary Clennan, on Flickr

 

L9995658 by Gary Clennan, on Flickr

 

L1000039 by Gary Clennan, on Flickr

[brusby]

enjoying mine!