21 Summilux

[IWC Doppel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am using my 21 Elmarit and 18 Super Elmar quite a lot at the moment and wishing I had another stop or more to play with. I at the start of a complete house refurbishment and spending time recording progress.

 

I still have one camera, the M9-P (Actually thinking of getting an M6 TTL at some point too, and ofcourse am MM)

 

I've read quite a bit on the 21, seems better than the 24, which is the reverse of the elmarit pair which I have. I will keep my Elmarit as I really like the lens size and rendering, especially at f5.6 for landscapes

 

Anyone have both and give any user advice in comparison ?

[John McMaster]

I have 21mm Summilux and SEM, I sold my Elmarit asph after comparing to SEM. Even at f5.6 I think the Summilux has a bit more sparkle but it is much bigger and more expensive, have you looked at the CV 21mm f1.8?

 

john

[IWC Doppel]

Tks, In some ways the CV is very interesting but I tend to buy Leica if available. I do have 15mm and 12mm CV lenses but the 15mm has dreadful Magenta issues that have stopped me picking it up, I'm also aware the QC means you do run the risk of getting a bad one. The challenge then is how to resolve.

 

I'm tempted by the CV but 1.8 is closer to f2.0 than f1.4 and a full two stops feels like a notable step forward

 

They seem to fetch £3.5k secondhand in the UK

[indergaard]

The CV 21/1.8 is about 90-95% of the Summilux 21/1.4, at a bargain price.

I have one myself, and I am utterly satisfied with it. It has far less distortion than any Leica 21mm lens. And the WATE profile works wonders on it. It also focuses down to 0.5m, which works perfectly with the M240+EVF combination. Highly recommended.

[Paul J]

I think the Ultron is quite sharp but it's colour is relatively dull compared to the Leica's. The Summilux is an incredible lens in terms of design but the Super Elmar smashes it silly for performance. The word for that lens is Brilliance. The colour, tonality, sharpness...it just has a sparkling brilliance to it not many lenses share. Personally I find, with the Summilux, that pronounced bokeh in such a wide angle lens a bit off putting, a bit distracting and not for me. Same for it's distortion.

[LuxM9]

Before you make any decission try the 21 lux on your M9-P, it is an amazing piece of glass and NOT comparable with any other on the market there, you will be happy for the files you get

[indergaard]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think the Ultron is quite sharp but it's colour is relatively dull compared to the Leica's.

 

That's true. Compared to my Leica lenses the Ultron's colors are muted. But that's the great thing about digital, it takes me 2 seconds to bump up the saturation so that the results in regards to colors look identical to my Leica lenses.

[philipus]

I tried the 21 at the Stockholm Photo Fair yesterday. I did shoot a few frames with it but since I use film I can't say anything about image quality. I did make a few observations in terms of handling so fwiw here they are.

 

I had never used one before and was under the impression from online discussions and descriptions that in terms of size and weight it would be a Noctilux-like beast. I was pleasantly surprised that it is not. It is quite long but just 1cm longer than my 75 APO and that extra length is effectively the hood if I am not mistaken. The lens is certainly a lot wider in the front but not disturbingly so I found. And the fact that the hood is rectangular with the horizontal sides sloping in towards the lens slims the form factor quite a bit. In addition, the fact that it is quite a bit slimmer towards the mount means that it rests nicely in the hand.

 

A second surprised was that the weight is quite clearly concentrated to the inner half (towards the lens mount) of the lens. I tried it on my TTL and it does not feel unbalanced in the slightest. In fact, a film M with this lens is a very nimble combination.

 

I also liked that the aperture ring is raised (of slightly greater diameter than the rest of the barrel) so it is very easy to feel. The lens I used had clear stops. The focus action was, in one word, silky with just the right amount of resistance.

 

All in all I had a very positive impression of the 21 Summilux. I am not seriously considering it at the moment, but I was very happy to have my preconceived opinion pleasantly shattered.

 

Philip

 

Ps. I guess you've seen this article?

[Ivar B]

I think the Ultron is quite sharp but it's colour is relatively dull compared to the Leica's. The Summilux is an incredible lens in terms of design but the Super Elmar smashes it silly for performance. The word for that lens is Brilliance. The colour, tonality, sharpness...it just has a sparkling brilliance to it not many lenses share. Personally I find, with the Summilux, that pronounced bokeh in such a wide angle lens a bit off putting, a bit distracting and not for me. Same for it's distortion.

 

I agree fully. I did something I should not have done, namely comparing directly the 3.4/21 SEM and the 1.4/21 Summilux. No doubt the Summilux is a superb lens, but the SEM is clearly superior and this is not difficult to see. I sold my Summilux thereafter.