your experiences with 18mm lenses (zeiss vs Leica)?

[Dikaiosune01]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I haven't been able to find much information about user's experiences on these lenses.  And flicker groups of the zeiss hasn't had too many uploads recently --> some of which are even taken with a different lens based on the field of view in the image.  

 

Or are these lenses really uncommon because they seem like 'half-measures' compared to the Tri-elmar 16-18-21? or the voigtlander 15mm?  

[jaapv]

There is nothing wrong with the Zeiss lens. On an M8 you will be hard put to see a quality difference. On full frame the Leica lens is a bit better in the corners. The Zeiss seems to be slightly harsher to my eyes.  Whether this justifies the price difference is a personal call. After trying them side by side I preferred the Leica lens.

[nic]

Sold mine 3 month ago and use on the wide side: VM15 (2015) and VM21 (Ultron). Was not happy with the corners of my SE18 on M(240). VM lenses are not Leica-lenses, but much lens for little buck.

[nic]

here is a shot with the SE18 on my old M9-P

no corrections, out of the box

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!

[nic]

This is a shot where you can see why I'm not so happy with the corners of my sold lens:

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!

with f8 there should be more clarity and sharpness (especially on the right side).

 

If you want a completely sharp image - you must crop with SE18

[Mijo]

I had the SEM 18mm for a over a year and used it to shoot graffitti, which it excelled at.  I had no issues with the corners, but then again I wasn't using it for landscape and my subjects were much closer to the camera.  I didn't require much DOF so I rarely shot this lens stopped down more than a stop or two, so that could be another reason why I didn't see any issues with the corners.

 

The SEM 18mm excelled at what I was using it for and I do plan to replace the copy that was stolen from me

[Peter Branch]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm using an 18mm SEM a great deal at the moment on a project to record sites that are or have been associated with the printing industry in Watford, Herts. UK.

 

In my experience it is a very fine lens.  However I've come to realise that it does not have infinite depth of field even at f/8, which seems to be the optimum for detail recording across the whole frame.  Correct focus turns out to be surprisingly critical to achieve images of the highest quality.  I'm working to an International Standard for images to be displayed in museums which in summary is A2 size at 100 ppcm.  The 16 bit Tiff files are ~ 115MB each.  

 

The pictures I'm taking, which are essentially record photographs often with little or no artistic merit, are littered with signs and notices of every conceivable sort.  The problem is that those viewing the pictures always attempt to read the text on these signs and are surprisingly critical if they can't.  I've discovered by accident however that although the images show no sign of "chromatic defects", even when viewed at >400%, using the "Remove Chromatic Aberration" option in ACR 8 often improves the legibility - not a total transformation but often a very worthwhile improvement.

[uhoh7]

the new CV 15 v3 is meant to be superb and probably the cheapest UWA option.

 

I have ZM18, and it is great. I also have sem 21 and it's a close contest between these lenses. You code as pre-asph 21 on the M9

 

as mentioned focus is critical for corners at various distances.

 

L1021261 by unoh7, on Flickr

[derleicaman]

I would agree that there are very few reviews of this lens around. I reviewed the 18 SEM for the LHSA Viewfinder in issue 47-1, which is from the first quarter of 2014. If you are a member, you can read about it in the archive section of LHSA.org. I concluded that the 18 SEM is a great lens with very low distortion. I used it exclusively on a day shoot in the city of Boston. It is a more difficult lens to use than say a 21 or 24. I own the ZM 18, and on side by side comparison, there is very little difference between them. I did my shooting with the two on my M9. I have not tried either one on an M240. I would say it is a better lens than the pre-ASPH 21, slightly better than the 21 Elmarit ASPH, on a par with the 21 SEM, not quite as good as the 24 Elmarit ASPH and better than the CV 15 which I also own.

[nic]

... better than the CV 15 ...

which version?

[derleicaman]

which version?

v1. Don't have any experience with v3 which is supposed to be better

[nic]

Thanks for your answer. Yes v3 is referring to the colors on digital bodies much better. I use my new VM 15 (v3) without any code. The new lens is excellent for the low price. Now I have for less then half the price of SE18 two lenses: Ultron 1.8/21 (coded as 1.4/21 Summilux) and an excellent super wide (the new 4.5/15).

 

With respect to the imaging quality when you compare the shot from uhoh 7 from above my pics shot with SE18 are not better. 

[jrp]

Here's a comparison of the 15mm v3 and the 18mm.  http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/242555-voigtlander-15mm-f45-vm-iii/?p=2789424

 

 

And here is a review of the 18mm http://tashley1.zenfolio.com/blog/2013/4/leica-m240-with-18mm-f3-8-super-elmar---some-observations