Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
michaelbrenner

Leica T 23mm/f2 vs Leica M 24mm/f3.8

Recommended Posts

Hi Michael,

 

The M Elmar 3.8/24mm is a razor sharp lens on the M9. I like it very much for landscape. On the Leica T it becomes a 36mm lens. This focal lens is the standard for street fotography. And therefor f3.8 is a little bit to slow in my opinion. If you own only the Leica T and no M I would buy the new T 2.0/23mm. Nearly 4times faster and you can use autofocus.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I'll second the opinion by macrobernd above. The 24mm Elmar is my current favorite wide-angle for the M, so I was very interested to see how it performed on the T in my review.

 

Considering the 23mm is roughly 2 stops faster, it did very well vs. the legendary Elmar. For use on the T, I would go with the 23mm. For me, the added convenience of AF and the additional speed afforded by an f/2 aperture have more value than marginally better optical performance under ideal conditions (tripod, self-timer).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Elmar will be easier for zone focusing (and manual focusing as well) than the T lens. Previously someone mentioned that the Elmar maybe too slow for street photography. I don't think that assessment is entirely accurate. I can be slow or lacking in very low light conditions but generally speaking street scenes require deeper depth of field than f/2. And the T should have decent high(ish) ISO performance. Very often we forget photography (photographs?) is/are about what is in focus not about what's out.

 

I'm assuming you have a T on order? If so, I would suggest getting a T system lens. Both the initial offerings seems fantastic and have AF available (which seems to me a part of the T experience).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Elmar should be good but i dont know how it affects the handling as the whole.

 

I use primarly Elmar for M body and it is nice to attach a few lenses on T. Im interested only of the body as the lenses seem quite expensive.

 

Slower speed is not issue for me as 6400 iso is more than enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think if you are a street shooter it would be possible to zone focus with the Elmar + possibly a 35mm optical viewfinder accessory (which exist from M3 days, etc). You are then just using the camera as a sort of high grade point-and-shoot, but with APS-C quality and a (potentially) high level of performance on M lenses, as this is the only non-M to have M lenses considered during design. (Open to debate I suppose).

 

Same May hold for owners of the excellent 3.4/21 SEM, which comes out at 31.5mm - quite good for street, and a compact lens.

 

BUT, I think the "native" 2/23mm Summicron will likely offer higher performance, as well as more versatility. But it does double the price almost. So I think this is a very good point (OP's question) to consider.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, for photography I do street shooting. I've been using zone focusing on camera a while (Epson Rd1, Super Angulon 21/3.4 and Voigltander 25mm viefwinder)

 

I wonder if the old SA 3.4 could fit on T? I hope so.

 

Using M lenses on different bodies would save hassle and more money if you have M bodies as well. T body seems good as a complement for wide angle lens (zone focusing).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Any thoughts on how these two lenses might compare (both using the T body)? Anyone out there able to post some real world pics for comparison?

 

Why not pick the T 23/2.0 and the M 35/2.0 which are more FL matched. The M 24 would be more comparable to a T 16mm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The OP question specifies "both using the T body", so the comparison is for nearly equal focal lengths for nearly equal angles of view. I know it's very early days still for the T, but I'd like to see more detailed comparison of the optical performance, setting all other issues aside.

 

Doug

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...