Leica 21mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M

[tony740607]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I just bought the Leica 21mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M (1991 60mm filter version from Canada) through ebay and awaiting shipping. I was into buying this lens as new (Super Elmar f/3.4) but I got a very good deal on this one including the Leica view finder so I did not hesitate to buy.

 

But I have problems to find any reviews of this lens. There are many reviews of the same ASPH but not w/o the ASPH. Does anyone own one like this or have tested one? What is your experience and is there something special to think about?

[iedei]

I just bought the Leica 21mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M (1991 60mm filter version from Canada) through ebay and awaiting shipping. I was into buying this lens as new (Super Elmar f/3.4) but I got a very good deal on this one including the Leica view finder so I did not hesitate to buy.

 

But I have problems to find any reviews of this lens. There are many reviews of the same ASPH but not w/o the ASPH. Does anyone own one like this or have tested one? What is your experience and is there something special to think about?

 

i have a late-model 21mm Elmarit pre-ASPH and i absolutely love it. It has spent more time on my M8 than any other lens i've owned. The mechanics of the lens are simply excellent....smooth focusing, a nice heft which makes it very stable while using, and a very characterful rendering, IMO. I actually cross shopped this vs. the 18 Super Elmar and the 21 Super Elmar. I thought the Super Elmars were really great lenses, but a bit more expensive and perhaps a little too clinical/sharp with less character....I think the Elmarit pre-ASPH renders very organic and beautiful images. One of the great 'underrated' lenses, IMO. Enjoy yours!

 

M8.1 w/ Elmarit 21mm pre-ASPH

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!

[tony740607]

i have a late-model 21mm Elmarit pre-ASPH and i absolutely love it. It has spent more time on my M8 than any other lens i've owned. The mechanics of the lens are simply excellent....smooth focusing, a nice heft which makes it very stable while using, and a very characterful rendering, IMO. I actually cross shopped this vs. the 18 Super Elmar and the 21 Super Elmar. I thought the Super Elmars were really great lenses, but a bit more expensive and perhaps a little too clinical/sharp with less character....I think the Elmarit pre-ASPH renders very organic and beautiful images. One of the great 'underrated' lenses, IMO. Enjoy yours!

 

M8.1 w/ Elmarit 21mm pre-ASPH

 

Thanks for your answers. I like the Lincoln picture on 500px taken with the 21mm.

Since I am new to Leica I just have additional questions. Pre-ASPH? Does this term mean all the lenses that were released before ASPH came?

On my M9 I will go a bit wider but that be good for landscape. Maybe I should consider it for some street photography as well.

[jankap]

This lens was built from 1980 to 1997.

The Leica Taschenbuch writes, that the optimal performance is at f/4.

The MTF at f/5.6 is very good.

Jan

 

PS

On the Leica Homepage you can find technical data of many lenses, that are not in production any more.

[adan]

I did a mini-review of the 21 pre-ASPH here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/customer-forum/45854-praise-mandler-lenses.html

 

It was the lens that lured me into the Leica M system - and I've been mildly disappointed that I've found few other Leica lenses that match it perfectly for color and contrast range and resolution all in one (the 75 Summilux comes closest, followed by the 90 Summicron/28 Elmarit of the same era). Lots that match (or surpass) it in one particular or another, but not in every particular.

 

Virtually everything "wide" in my magazines is shot with this lens: ColoradoSeen - Home

 

Mine was sloshed with white-wash during a news event 4 years ago - and has worked fine ever since with just a wipe-down. See the credits at the end of the "Freshman Hill Climb" video here to see the "damage": ColoradoSeen - RMI Archives

[iedei]

Thanks for your answers. I like the Lincoln picture on 500px taken with the 21mm.

Since I am new to Leica I just have additional questions. Pre-ASPH? Does this term mean all the lenses that were released before ASPH came?

On my M9 I will go a bit wider but that be good for landscape. Maybe I should consider it for some street photography as well.

 

correct....pre-ASPH is a generic term applied to lenses made prior to ASPH ones. I primarily shoot street and abstract...so I can't really tell you how it does for landscape....but It is a very capable lens, so I'm going to guess it will be great!

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

...

On the Leica Homepage you can find technical data of many lenses, that are not in production any more.

 

? where ?

(= always greatful for enlightment)

[jankap]

Try: Leica-camera.com/service/downloads

For instance R-lenses.

Jan

[Alberti]

I just bought some yellow and Y-Orange filters -  but when they arrived the filters did not fit.

I had done a quick google and this gave 55mm for the Elmarit-M from several sources - but this beautiful version I have is the E60. It seems it is Canadian.

it is a marvelous and gorgeous lens. 

I once owned a S-Angulon and that did not survive the bodies with a light meter, but this certainly can stand up. Nice old-fashioned way of handling strong lights - no cheapish start structures.

And yes the corners are a bit vague but less so than what O remember of the SA.

Great colors too.

 

Mine is uncoded and it behave well when not set on the M240   (I am one of those who forget to change manual selection . . .)

[IWC Doppel]

A great lens I have the ASPH as well and whilst the ASPH is sharper particularly wide open the colouring and rendering of the earlier lens I prefer. Especially with a subject close in the foreground, where it has the ability to show fantastic image depth.

[uhoh7]

Puts:

"The general performance of the Elmarit-M lens is better than that of the Super-Angulon at f/3.4. This is partly due to the reduction of astigmatism, which results in improved rendition of fine details. At f/4.0 extremely fine details are vis- ible with good contrast in the center and within a 12 mm diameter circle around the center. From there to the corners the image details become progressively softer, but fine details remain within a detectable range. Optimum performance is reached at f/ 5.6 with extremely fine details now vis- ible over the entire image area into the outermost corners. Subject outlines, especially in the outer zones, have soft edges, giving an overall impression of a smooth, somewhat subdued image. Stopping down to f/11 and smaller apertures diminishes image quality. Decentering was not measurable. Generally speaking, this lens is a commendable performer and an improve- ment over the Super-Angulon lens. In the field at the wider apertures, image quality is a bit modest."

 

regarding the asph:

 

"At full aperture, contrast is high and extremely fine details are rendered very crisply from the center to an image height of 11 mm. That is the coverage of an image circle of 22mm. From there to the edges, the contrast decreases a little but it is still vastly superior to that of all its predecessors. Astigmatism and curvature of field are almost fully corrected. Subject outlines and fine details have very high edge contrast and are rendered clearly, almost lucidly. In the outer zones and in the corners this superior performance decreases slightly. The overall image quality is a quantum leap forward in relation to all previous 21mm lenses in the Leica stable. To place it in perspective: the performance at f/2.8 is better in all respects than that of the f/3.4 Super-Angulon at f/ 5.6. At f/4 contrast and the clear rendition of very fine details improve, with the corners still lagging a bit behind. Overall contrast is now at its optimum, with exceptional performance over a large part of the image field. At f/5.6 overall contrast drops a little, but very fine details are still crisp into the far outer zones. From f/8 the performance drops ever so slightly and at f/16 it is noticeably below optimum. Decentering is not measurable. Overall assessment: this lens produces out- standing image quality at full aperture, which continues to improve as it is stopped down as far as f/8. It is by far the best 21mm lens in Leica history and the only recommended choice for the person who needs superior performance from a 21 mm lens starting at f/2.8."

 

and as to the SEM21? That's one of his three favorite lenses today.

[bocaburger]

I own a late version of the pre-ASPH (with a push-button shade, vs pins and a twist-on hood).  I bought it and then shortly thereafter bought an ASPH largely based on Mr. Puts' opinion that it is "vastly superior" and "quantum leap forward".  Much as I respect him and do not doubt that MTF graphs bear out his opinion, I just didn't see anything nearly that compelling in my own practical comparison, in fact honestly I could hardly tell the images apart.  So I sold the ASPH and put the money to better use.  I have not regretted keeping the much less cost pre-. 

 

The only drawback (and it applies almost as much to the ASPH) is the size/weight of the lens.  A CV 21/4 has become my usual travel lens, as it is tiny by comparison, and takes the same 39mm filter as my other travel-kit lenses. 

[uhoh7]

another take from:

 

http://leica.nemeng.com/029ba.shtml

 

(24a refers to the 24/2.8 asph)

 

"I have read and re-read Erwin's reviews of the 21's and the 24, but had difficulty integrating his results. In my mind, his review makes any 21 prior the to Asph version seem like it is not worth having - they "didn't bear the Leica badge with full honor". He boasts on the performance of the 24A, but makes no comparison between it and the 21A. The problem for me was that my 21 Pre-asph seemed like a pretty decent performer. Not as sharp as my 24, but certainly not horrible, and notably better than any of my Nikon 20mm counterparts. In actual use however, I found myself continually choosing the 24 over the 21 to go into my bag because of its superior performance, yet I found myself more than once wishing I had brought the 21 for that little bit extra spread. So, curiosity got the better of me. Could the 21 Asph be as good as the 24? It was difficult to imagine it could, as the 24 is such a stellar performer, but I wanted to know the answer for myself.....

 

ƒ2.8 -- Here I got a surprise. When comparing the centers for the 21A and 21P, I found the 21P to be sharper(!) Not by much, but definitely a visible difference. I double-checked my notes to insure that I had not inadvertently swapped the slides. Indeed, I hadn't. At the corner I received another surprise. The 21P is notably better than the 21A (!!). The 24 is the overall winner at ƒ2.8, being sharper in the center, yet it essentially only equaling the 21P at the corner. It is worth noting that the 21P is performing significantly better at the corner than at its center. Perhaps an issue with under-corrected spherical aberrations or even a curvature-plus-focus issue? Yes, I was beginning to regret my 21A purchase as it looked like the 21P wasn't all that bad as I had originally thought.

 

ƒ4 -- An interesting phenomenon here. The 21A takes a quantum leap in image quality at the center, now almost equaling the 24, which also takes a fairly significant jump in quality. Both are clearly better than the 21P in the center whose performance here is actually a bit lower than it was at ƒ2.8. At the corner, the 21A improves a lot, but the 21P also improves a little, and in fact just edges out the 21A here; and even very slightly edges out the 24(!) So, the 21P loses the center, but hangs on to the corner by a tiny margin.

 

ƒ5.6 -- Here the lenses all come into their own and behave much as we might expect. The 21A is very sharp in the center, but not quite up to the 24. The 21P lags behind notably. In the corners, the 21A is now notably better than the 21P, and for all intents and purposes the 24 and the 21A are equal here. The 21P is still performing better in the corner than the center, but not by much, and is showing essentially even results across the image.

 

ƒ8 -- The results are essentially the same as above, with the 21A losing a little bit more ground to the 24 in the center and the corners.

 

ƒ11 and ƒ16 -- The 21A and 24 fall off here, but interestingly the 21P actually improves to the point where it is almost as good as the other lenses. So, for all intents and purposes in general picture taking situations, one can consider all three lenses to be equal performers at these stops.

 

For the field test, I shot the same image with each lens, keeping the exposure and focus-point identical for each lens. All shots were hand- held. For some of the shots I also altered my shooting position with the 24 relative to the 21 in an effort keep the main subject of uniform size for comparisons in the final image."

 

Jack Flesher 2002

 

So accorded to this the 21 asph "turns on" at F/4. The SEM 21 is already off the hook at 3.4 and one stops down only for reasons of DOF.

 

What I learned is just how good the 24/2.8 is, and in fact Puts basically has the SEM and the Elmarit equal at 24mm, except the SEM is not a 24 but more like a 24.8 LOL, while at 21 he prefers the SEM to all other options. Puts is certainly not the last word, but he makes for excellent context.

[russell]

That's interesting.  How do you feel it compares to the 28mm v3?  I have both the 21mm (the pre-asph from the 1980s) and the 28mm.  The 28mm is a cracker.  The 28mm, for example, is better than the 35mm pre-asph cron at f2.8.  The only downside is the relative size is large.

 

I suspect I prefer the 28mm as it's easier to compose than the 21mm, but how about the color, contrast and resolution you mention below?

 

It was the lens that lured me into the Leica M system - and I've been mildly disappointed that I've found few other Leica lenses that match it perfectly for color and contrast range and resolution all in one (the 75 Summilux comes closest, followed by the 90 Summicron/28 Elmarit of the same era). Lots that match (or surpass) it in one particular or another, but not in every particular.

[tobey bilek]

Corners need F5.6 or 8 on M9.   I have had mine since introduction.   

 

28 V4 has similar performance.    Lenses made for digital perform better.

[MarkP]

Puts:

 

 

and as to the SEM21? That's one of his three favorite lenses today.

 

...and just for interest what are the other two lenses. 

[uhoh7]

...and just for interest what are the other two lenses.

If I'm not mistaken: 35 FLE and 75/2. Karbe takes credit for them both I think, but I don't know who did the 21 SEM, or any of the SEMs.

 

My 28 v3 is a dog on the M9. Could be the copy. I believe it's great on the M8, because you don't see the edges. I've seen many great shots with that setup. The v4 is meant to be much better, but I can't speak to it. I use the 28/2, and love that one.

[tobey bilek]

I just bought some yellow and Y-Orange filters -  but when they arrived the filters did not fit.

I had done a quick google and this gave 55mm for the Elmarit-M from several sources - but this beautiful version I have is the E60. It seems it is Canadian.

it is a marvelous and gorgeous lens.

I once owned a S-Angulon and that did not survive the bodies with a light meter, but this certainly can stand up. Nice old-fashioned way of handling strong lights - no cheapish start structures.

And yes the corners are a bit vague but less so than what O remember of the SA.

Great colors too.

 

Mine is uncoded and it behave well when not set on the M240   (I am one of those who forget to change manual selection . . .)

 

When the rep brought the first one to the largest Leica dealer in USA when first introduced,  I ordered one.  55 mm.   In a week or so it arrived, 60 mm.  I seriously doubt many were made at 55 mm.  

[semi-ambivalent]

...and just for interest what are the other two lenses. 

As above, I think the 75 was one of them. He does say this about the current 50 'lux ASPH:

 I often get questions like this: if you only had to use one lens, which one would you choose. The answer was not that easy. But now it is: the Summilux-M 1:1.4/50mm ASPH.

 "Desert Island" questions like this can be framed in any manner of ways. I like the current 21 but I also paid a lot of money to have the 75mm frame lines removed from my MP. Find your own path.

s-a

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[b18221964]

Hello Everyone,

 

I just got this lens and started playing with it. Its simply awesome. I did like to know if you guys use the hood at all times? Are there no filter able to be use with the hood as well? Also in some photos I see some black shade around the corners, what seems to be the problem?

 

Thanks you!