Jump to content

Leica - more wide Elamarit's please


IWC Doppel

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I really like my 21mm and 24mm Elmatit ASPH's. I have the 18mm which I do use quite frequently and the VC 15mm and 12mm.

 

The 12mm is very good but very slow (f5.6), the 15mm is okay but too much magenta to be an easy lend for colour use.

 

I'd really like an F2.8 18m, f3.8 is a pain indoors, I'd love something similar in the 14-16mm range at f2.8. Am I alone ?

 

I'd also like an F2 21mm if it was smaller, lighter and cheaper than the Summilux

 

I know the SEM's are good but too slow to be really interesting IMO

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'd really like an F2.8 18m, f3.8 is a pain indoors, I'd love something similar in the 14-16mm range at f2.8. Am I alone ?

 

Probably. The 'completists' would probably buy one but I can't imagine there will be huge demand for a 14/F2.8. It will inevitably be big, heavy and expensive – the very antithesis of what a Leica camera was once all about. What's wrong with an F3.8 or F4 lens and a tripod?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Leica fast superwides are too big for my tastes. Give me a Summicron 21 the same size as my Zuiko 21/2 (left) and i could reconsider the question.

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Probably. The 'completists' would probably buy one but I can't imagine there will be huge demand for a 14/F2.8. It will inevitably be big, heavy and expensive – the very antithesis of what a Leica camera was once all about. What's wrong with an F3.8 or F4 lens and a tripod?

 

My M9-P goes with me everywhere my tripod goes out once a year or set up for lens testing, every now and then

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ lct - to be fair, you have to consider the total optical path depth of the Olympus lens, including the body thickness (mirror box).

 

The Olympus lens itself may be smaller than the Elmarit - but it is not usable unless it has another cm or so added on the back, either through a thicker OM body, or an OM-LM adapter on an M body.

 

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_vI0kN05trmM/S_izJhFrzkI/AAAAAAAAANk/DrecZDEt7Yo/s1600/Leica+M3+vs+Olympus+OM2n.JPG

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sure but it is a SRL lens open at f/2 and all things equal it is more compact than its Leica R competitor open at f/4. Now i just wanted to say that i'm not interested in bigger lenses than the Zuiko on small bodies like Ms anymore. Too bad for the Elmarit-M 21/2.8 asph but each time i take it i find it too bulky for my taste and i end up using the SE 21/3.4 asph or even the little CV 21/4 instead. YMMV.

Link to post
Share on other sites

@ lct - to be fair, you have to consider the total optical path depth of the Olympus lens, including the body thickness (mirror box).

 

The Olympus lens itself may be smaller than the Elmarit - but it is not usable unless it has another cm or so added on the back, either through a thicker OM body, or an OM-LM adapter on an M body.

 

http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_vI0kN05trmM/S_izJhFrzkI/AAAAAAAAANk/DrecZDEt7Yo/s1600/Leica+M3+vs+Olympus+OM2n.JPG

 

And the fact that the back cap is notably thicker on the Leica Elmarit ASPH in the image shown. I use this lens a lot along with the 24mm, I find the size to be no problems at all. 35mm summilux and 50 summilux both bigger and heavier. I'd call it average not large or bulky

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...