21mm lens for the M240 - any thoughts?

[Herr Barnack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm thinking of adding a 21mm optic to my M240 kit; the principal contenders are Leica's 21mm Super-Elmar-M f/ 3.4 ASPH and the Zeiss Super Wide Angle 21mm f/2.8 Biogon T*.

 

When we look at the specs of each lens, we see that the Zeiss lens has a bit of an edge in terms of minimum focus distance (1.8 ft. vs. 2.3 ft. for the Leica) and the Leica optic has a bit of an edge in terms of angle of view (91 degrees vs. 90 degrees for the Zeiss). If I recall correctly, the Zeiss lens has ten aperture blades while the Leica has eight (?); this will give the Zeiss lens a bit of an advantage in terms of bokeh. The Zeiss lens is 1/2 stop faster than the Leica lens (f/2.8 vs. f/3.4) which is a plus, but is not really critical, given the excellent high ISO performance of the M240. The Leica lens has two ASPH elemments while the Zeiss has none (according to all information that I have read so far). Both lenses take 46mm filters, which is a common size for the M system.

 

There is a significant price difference, with the Leica lens selling for twice the price of the Zeiss lens. This leaves me wondering what advantages the Leica Super Elmar 21 gives you over the Zeiss Biogon 21.

 

This brings me to my main questions:

1 - Does the Super Elmar out perform the Biogon in terms of print image quality?

2 - Is the Super Elmar head and shoulders above the Biogon in terms of build quality and durability?

3 - Is there a significant difference of any kind between these two lenses or are they neck and neck?

4 - What about sharpness and color rendition of the two lenses?

 

If anyone can address these questions, please speak up. If you own or have shot with both lenses, I would greatly appreciate hearing your thoughts on these optics; I do not have a Leica dealer anywhere nearby that stocks both lenses, so I will not be able to handle or test shoot either before purchasing.

 

Thanks in advance to all who respond.

[pos]

I can't really comment for the Zeiss lens, nor can i directly answer many of your questions. But i use the 21mm f/3.4 Super-Elmar, and in use, the way it renders, has that magic Leica feel reminiscent of the 50mm/1.4 summilux FLE around f5.6-f/8.

 

Having used many Zeiss lenses, i could very roughly (and perhaps incorrectly) describe the Zeiss look as being somehwhat more 'true to life' whereas i find the best Leica lenses (this being one of them imho) add a certain warmth and emotion. This is all subjective and depends on what kind of photography the lens is used for.

 

With such a wide lens, the bokeh isn't a big feature in most of your images: but wide open, i love the elegant way Super-Elmar goes from super sharp to 'soft' in distance.

 

Feel-wise, the relative short focus range, small size and low weight, make this a real winner, especially with the m240 where the smaller light-gathering ability isn't as big a deal as compared to the m9.

 

Couldn't recommend this lens enough, if you're after a 21mm for your Leica.

 

If possible, try and rent each lens for a weekend before committing; both are very fine lenses you'll want to keep for a long time, and specs and numbers don't ever tell the whole story.

 

Also, look at how other people are using these lenses:

 

Leica:

https://www.flickr.com/groups/super-elmar21mm/

 

Zeiss

https://www.flickr.com/groups/zeissikon21mm/

[epand56]

Unless it is too big, I would suggest you to also consider the CV Ultron 21/1.8.

It is a sharp, beautiful lens.

 

https://www.flickr.com/groups/2070873@N24/

[thighslapper]

I have everything from 35 an down (excluding the luxes) that Leica produce plus a smattering of Voigts/Zeiss ...... and the 21/3.4 is in a league of its own in terms of sharpness, contrast and saturation.

 

If you have the money there is no real choice....... if strapped for cash you will not be disappointed with the Zeiss and have the satisfaction of knowing you have got much better value for money .....

 

...... but that's not really what Leica ownership is about .....

[adan]

21mm lens performance - especially color fidelity along the edges - is going to be very dependent on how well that lens matches Leica's canned in-camera corrections. Which are very lens-specific in the wide-angle range - one size does not fit all.

 

A Zeiss (or C/V) lens may - or may not - match the available Leica corrections. If it does, all is good. If it doesn't, you'll have an ugly mess. Testing (or getting feedback from other users on which settings to apply and how well they work) will be critical.

 

No matter how "good" a lens is on paper, it will be a "bad" choice if it is not a close fit to one of Leica's settings (presumably, 21 f/1.4, 21 f/3.4, 21 f/2.8 APS, 21 f/2.8 pre-ASPH).

 

I'm still waiting to get my hands on an (newest firmware) M240, to try it with my Leica-coded 21 Elmarit pre-ASPH. The results with an early (firmware) version of the M240 were not nice.

[bephoto]

I have 21mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M ASPH and compared it with the new Super-Elmarit, and 2.8 seemed superior but downside is that its way more expensive than f/3.4 even in used condition. either are great lenses. I don't recommend Zeiss though I used to have it for a short time, more contrasty and has aberration if you wanna do serious architecture (in colour).

downside of super-elmarit is that its more prone to flare than Zeiss which i think this is the case for all leica vs zeiss. I had Zeiss21 with a T* filter it had less flare than Naked super-elmarit!! with a good professional hood you can solve this problem.

 

And YES Zeiss lenses are always cooler, about ±100 Kelvin (compared to C500 reading) which is not a big deal if you are shooting digital. while Leica lenses are always warmer around ±150K depending on lens.

with Zeiss lenses if you want precise vignette removal you must profile it in CaptureOne LCC while leica's Super-Elmarit Adobe profile works perfect though still I profiled them my self in C1.

 

for critical Architecture I would go for Leica always, if this is not your case save money and get Zeiss.

For close ups Leica is the winner, the OOF areas are creamy and transition from focus to oof is smooth.

[bab]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have been so happy using the 21mm f/3.4 Super-Elmar focus is very easy, contrast is WOW and the scenes render quite good with lots of picture area even in the street. In fact it might just be my favorite lens for distant street scenes that include people. The 35 I have is tough sometimes shooting into the light and contrast is hit or miss usually hits either one or the other 10% of the time both.

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!

[rirakuma]

I've never owned the biogon but I do own the SEM and here's my thoughts:

 

1. In print quality it could depending on the size of the print, I'm guessing we're talking about perceptive sharpness here.

2. Its not neck and shoulders above but its definitely better built. That doesn't mean the Zeiss is bad or anything.

3. There's a lot of difference some you have mentioned above and others are easily recognized for those who are familiar with the lens. They have different rendering, the SEM has "superior" colours and is extremely sharp. Images taken with the SEM tend to have that bite or pop that my other lenses don't have.

4. As above

 

If I were you I'd ask myself whether I need the closer focus and slightly faster aperture or sharpness and colour rendition. I also believe the biogon has better field curvature control and is the superior lens for taking portraiture. If you do a lot of landscape and PJ work I would think the SEM will be the better performer but if you shoot a lot of portraiture the biogon will be better suited for your needs.

 

I'm thinking of adding a 21mm optic to my M240 kit; the principal contenders are Leica's 21mm Super-Elmar-M f/ 3.4 ASPH and the Zeiss Super Wide Angle 21mm f/2.8 Biogon T*.

 

When we look at the specs of each lens, we see that the Zeiss lens has a bit of an edge in terms of minimum focus distance (1.8 ft. vs. 2.3 ft. for the Leica) and the Leica optic has a bit of an edge in terms of angle of view (91 degrees vs. 90 degrees for the Zeiss). If I recall correctly, the Zeiss lens has ten aperture blades while the Leica has eight (?); this will give the Zeiss lens a bit of an advantage in terms of bokeh. The Zeiss lens is 1/2 stop faster than the Leica lens (f/2.8 vs. f/3.4) which is a plus, but is not really critical, given the excellent high ISO performance of the M240. The Leica lens has two ASPH elemments while the Zeiss has none (according to all information that I have read so far). Both lenses take 46mm filters, which is a common size for the M system.

 

There is a significant price difference, with the Leica lens selling for twice the price of the Zeiss lens. This leaves me wondering what advantages the Leica Super Elmar 21 gives you over the Zeiss Biogon 21.

 

This brings me to my main questions:

1 - Does the Super Elmar out perform the Biogon in terms of print image quality?

2 - Is the Super Elmar head and shoulders above the Biogon in terms of build quality and durability?

3 - Is there a significant difference of any kind between these two lenses or are they neck and neck?

4 - What about sharpness and color rendition of the two lenses?

 

If anyone can address these questions, please speak up. If you own or have shot with both lenses, I would greatly appreciate hearing your thoughts on these optics; I do not have a Leica dealer anywhere nearby that stocks both lenses, so I will not be able to handle or test shoot either before purchasing.

 

Thanks in advance to all who respond.

[Peter H]

My experience: my Zeiss Biogon 21mm 2.8 is a delightful lens which certainly works superbly with my M (and M9, equally.)

 

I'd say that at its price it is a storming lens and tremendously good value and quite honestly, if it were the same price as a Leica equivalent it would still be good value, it's that good. It's the only non-Leica lens I use regularly with my M, but it is never out of place.

[a911s]

I have 21mm f/2.8 Elmarit-M ASPH and compared it with the new Super-Elmarit, and 2.8 seemed superior but downside is that its way more expensive than f/3.4 even in used condition. either are great lenses.

 

Agreed. Also, unlike the SEM, the 21 Elmarit Asph has the same distance scale as most M lenses (focusing tab at 6 o'clock equals 4"). Hardly ever use the RF with a 21 myself. Sometimes go without the finder on M9/M240 too.

 

Never really cared for the Zeiss lenses on Leica M - the handling is unfamiliar to me and the distance scale is even more different.

[pgk]

I have the 21mm SE. In my utterly biased opinion it is the 21mm lens by which others should be judged.

[pgk]

Don't know what happened there - duplicated post!

[rramesh]

I think the 21SEM is definitely better than than the 21ZM having tried both. However if the poster is looking for bokeh neither will give much. For this consider the CV21 f/1.8.

[Peter H]

I think the 21SEM is definitely better than than the 21ZM having tried both. However if the poster is looking for bokeh neither will give much. For this consider the CV21 f/1.8.

 

I'm not asking this in the spirit of a challenge but rather to learn about the differences: in what ways would you say the SEM is better than the Zeiss?

 

Thanks.

[Pobble]

I have used both the Zeiss 21 and the Super Elmar 21. The Super Elmar is by far the better lens. It's micro-contrast and color rendition approaches that of the Apo 50 Summicron. The Zeiss build quality, moreover, is inferior.

[rramesh]

I'm not asking this in the spirit of a challenge but rather to learn about the differences: in what ways would you say the SEM is better than the Zeiss?

 

Thanks.

Sharpness, less distortion. But the deal breaker for me was light leaks in my version of the 21ZM using an ND filter.

[JuanLeon]

Get the Leica SEM. I was not sure of its low light performance because of the F/3.4 minimun aperture, but I'm delighted with it. One of the best constructed Leica lenses IMO, only the lens shade worth the price.

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!

[Herr Barnack]

@JuanLeon,

That is an outstanding image! I love the deep blues and the sharpness and contrast. If that is what the Super Elmar is capable of, how could a person go wrong with that lens?

 

If I were you I'd ask myself whether I need the closer focus and slightly faster aperture or sharpness and colour rendition. I also believe the biogon has better field curvature control and is the superior lens for taking portraiture. If you do a lot of landscape and PJ work I would think the SEM will be the better performer but if you shoot a lot of portraiture the biogon will be better suited for your needs.

@rirakuma,

While thinking about this yesterday as I went about my daily routine, these thoughts did come to me. I do a lot of documentary and travel work and I would choose either my 28/2 or 50/1.4 for portraits.

 

I came to the conclusion that the Super Elmar is the only choice. I am not too concerned about its low light performance but at f/3.4, I will have to get right on top of my subject to have any kind of shallow DOF; the 21/1.4 is just too big and bulky for my purposes (as is the price tag). After ruling out other alternatives for one reason or another, the Super Elmar is the "last lens standing," so to speak.

 

The lens hood comes with the lens, which is an added bonus; that will help soften the blow of the cost of the EVF or the shoe mount viewfinder to go with it.

[chris_tribble]

I've just fallen in love with the SEM 21 f3.4.  It's so compact and light and renders BEAUTIFULLY.  I'm still re-engaging with 21mm - for a long time I've shot 28mm at the widest, but with this lens I can see myself using this FL a great deal more.

COLOUR renders here:

https://flic.kr/s/aHskHKTBmy

B&W renders here:

https://flic.kr/s/aHskHKTJub

 

I'd recommend!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jrp]

You can get text and sample images here http://www.ronscheffler.com/techtalk/?page_id=130