thighslapper Posted December 10, 2014 Share #21 Â Posted December 10, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) There is not much difference in the actual sharpness over the image field...... but ..... Â There IS a difference in colour saturation and contrast though which is quite noticeable. Â With minor adjustments in LR you really cannot spot the difference otherwise. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 10, 2014 Posted December 10, 2014 Hi thighslapper, Take a look here Super-Elmar 18mm. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Coach Rosie Posted December 11, 2014 Author Share #22 Â Posted December 11, 2014 Thanks, Thighslapper. But, which is better with the saturation and contrast? Is it the 18mm due to its fixed length? Â In addition to my M240, I have an M6, and I am wondering if there would be noticeable differences. In some ways, it seems worthwhile to get the WATE, even with the increased expense, because it has multiple focal lengths. In other ways, I have always been partial to fixed length lenses. Â Thanks again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted December 13, 2014 Share #23 Â Posted December 13, 2014 Leica 18 and 21 SE are great lenses and do have a bit less edge distortion witch would be completely unnoticeable unless you were doing very critical architectural work. If, that is your job, then the SE is your lens. Otherwise, the WATE gives virtually identical results but gives you a range of 16-21. The WATE also is a tele centric design and has better properties in the corners and edges; like less smearing (sharper on digital) and less need for color correction. In this way the WATE is a better designed lens than the other retrofocus designs. Â That extra range down to 16mm is a huge difference at these focal lengths. For example, jaapv's photo of the circular shells inside the ship would have included the entire right side of the circle of shells. It may have made a more interesting shot to see the entire arc. Also, if the shot was taken very close to one of the shells, the perspective of that shot might have been more interesting. That is what the 16mm perspective gives more of than either 18 or the more normal 21. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
uhoh7 Posted December 14, 2014 Share #24 Â Posted December 14, 2014 I use both ZM 18 and SEM 21, and frankly cannot decide which I like more. Â What does the SEM 18 have over the ZM 18? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.