Ultra Wide Angles 15-21mm ?

[mmradman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

When comparing sensor to film, sensor surface is shiny while film surface has matt appearance.

 

Film surface is covered by narrow layer of film emulsion which is populated with photo sensitive silver compound crystals. Any light ray hitting film surface regardless of the angle will get absorbed by the layer of silver crystals.

 

Sensor surface is covered with tiny micro lenses, close to edges these micro lenses are angled to help capture oblique light rays hitting sensor surface. Linked article may help explain better than me.

 

The Leica M Max Sensor Explained | THEME

 

Angled micro lens, to best of my knowledge, are Leica M magic ingradient that help cope with extreme wide angle lens, lens coding/firmware helps also . There may be other micro lens implementations but not necessarily compatible with M lenses.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[plewislambert]

Whilst reading through these earlier posts it occurred to me to mention that I found the AF 20mm Nikkor f2.8 on N/LM adapter to give sharper results at f4 than the 21mm CV f4 and no coloured or vignetted edges.

If I want wider I use the 17mm Tokina on OM/LM adapter. It's soft at f3.5 and the aperture scale starts at f5.6! At f5.6 or f8 it's good, (no red edges with slr lenses). I do find the dimness a limitation in interiors given the maximum sensible ISO of 640.

A Leica ultrawide lens would be sharper, maybe brighter, but the price is a deterrent.

Handheld indoor exposures tempt me to put the ISO up but noise gets worse. Even if I were to carry a light tripod I am not sure I would be permitted to use it inside public buildings (apart from the need to pull the M9 out of its half-case and mount it on the B&S.) I do object to looking noticeable when out with the Leica.

For extreme wideangle I use the CV 12mm f5.6 which is also a bit dim indoors but fine outside. The stretched way it draws familiar objects like cars at the extreme edge of field needs care but if it stretches buildings it seems to matter less.

I have been photographing narrow Chelsea streets and am surprised how many dwellings fitted into one exposure. Too much tarmac and sky appears and cropping produces a panoramic look, not what I always want.

 

Getting closer to the buildings to reduce sky and tarmac involves standing in the middle of the road, possibly unwise in London traffic.

 

Realistically, none of these lenses in my experience is as sharp as my 28mm 1980's Elmarit f2.8.

Philip:)

[arthury]

I'd seriously consider the Zeiss 21mm/2.8 Biogon ZM: it is capable lens. Even Erwin agreed that it is a capable lens when he tested it.

I have been using it since my M8 and now still use it on my M9 and M240.

If architecture is an area you are interested in photographing, then the Biogon design is perfect for it.

 

 

 

 

[arthury]

I have also considered the Zeiss 15mm/2.8 Distagon ZM but the price tag is pretty steep with some complaints about corner discoloring issue. If I pay $4500 for a lens, it should be close to perfect. So, I decided against it.

But, my understanding is that it is a high contrast lens with pretty exotic glass materials included in there and it is Made in Germany, unlike the rest of the Zeiss ZM lenses.

If color images is your main application, this is the lens designed for this purpose.

 

Here's someone who has successfully used it on his M9:

[Nick_S]

David,

 

Set your Zeiss 21 to "Leica 21 pre-asph" in lens menu on your M240. You should not have ANY color cast! If it does, something is off...

For the Biogon 21mm f/2.8 lens Zeiss recommend setting the cameras to 28 f/2.8 11809

as the optimum setting is not always that of a corresponding Leica lens of the same focal length. A table of Zeiss findings on the performance of different camera settings for their lenses is given here:

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-lenses/248700-zeiss-zm-21mm-2-8-m9.html

 

Nick

[dgc]

Yes, I found, accidentally, by leaving the manual detection at the 35mm f2 setting for my ZM 35mm that when I used my ZM 21mm there was no appreciable red edge. It usually pays to take things slowly and experiment, as I found out yesterday.

 

I was a little concerned that my 21mm with the Lee seven5 big stopper was causing light leak, especially after a search on this forum. Fortunately, I went to Cambrian Cameras where I bought the lens and went through every combination of filter/ adapter/ holder/ no adapter/ no ring/ no holder to find it was probably some fault with the 46mm Lee adapter ring not having a snug fit with the holder. The holder works fine with my 39mm adapter and 50mm Summicron. Very surprising there is a problem with the Lee system, so I am still testing.

 

However, my annoyance at getting up early and having wasted a morning would have probably resulted in a rash decision to return the lens had I bought it off the internet. It is also another good reason for buying locally.

 

David

[algrove]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am looking at some ultra wide angle lenses between 15mm and 21mm and I am considering, in addition to the Leica Super Elmar series, Zeiss and Voigtlander for my M and M7. I already have the Leica 28mm f2.8.

 

I have no experience with Zeiss and Voigtlander and I would like to hear if anybody can summarise the differences in the quality of the glass between Leica and Zeiss & Voigtlander and the limitations of a particular lens for, say, landscape and architecture.

 

Is the best lens simply the most expensive or do the Zeiss / Voigtlander lenses have any 'special' qualities ?

 

I am particularly interested in the Zeiss 18mm f4 and 21mm f4.5. Any comments are welcome.

 

Thanks, David

 

So what camera do you use and how do you plan on using the WA lens?

[dgc]

As stated the M and M7, however, yesterday I bought the Sony A7. I was in two minds whether to go for this or the XT1 but the full frame of the A7 and being able to use my M mount lenses at the same focal length was the deciding factor. I work in some unsavoury places and wanted a camera that may be considered less desirable, however, Sony/ Fuji are probably as desirable in many countries; although I have suitable insurances I just do not want to put my M at unnecessary risk.

 

The WA lenses will be used for landscape, architecture and travel. I am waiting for the Novoflex adapter so I have yet to try my ZM 21mm. By all accounts any non-Sony lens wider than 35mm is less than ideal with the A7, so the ultra WA may be moot.

 

David