Jump to content

21mm question


colonel

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I might finally be actually on the verge of purchasing a 21mm lens (shock / horror)

 

I am looking at :

1. 21mm Leica f2.8 ASPH (balance of weight, contrast, sharpness and light)

2. 21mm Leica f3.4 ASPH (super sharp, contrast and flat field)

3. 21mm Zeiss f2.8 (balance of weight and cost)

4. 21mm Voigtlander f1.8 (balance of value, not bad sharpness at all and light)

 

Anyone had 2 or more of these and can compare/ contrast ?

 

Slightly more drawn to Leica f2.8, in terms of good compromise, or Voigtlander in terms of sacrificing some weight and contrast advantage to get the extra light

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 60
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I have owned the Elmarit Asph. since film days and had it 6-bit coded for digital use. I never saw the need to buy an alternative and simply love the clean rendering it gives on film, M8, M9 and M-P. Although the Elmar is tempting, my overall limited use of the 21mm focal length simply does not justify the change. It is a challenging focal length, but always rewarding.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have both 21/3.4s (SE and SA). The SE is a phenomenally good lens and is probably the best 20/21mm lens that I've ever owned (and I've owned quite a few over the years). If its affordable then I would strongly recommend that you get one and forget all the others. FWIW I still own and use the 21SA too because it has such a unique signature; still very sharp centrally but with poorer corners and substantial vignetting - very much a lens of its time (as is the SE today).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi 

I just onwed a new Super-Elmar. After having used for a long time the Elmarit pré-ASPH. It is a huge difference!  This new lens is realy well done, small and the image quality is outstanding. If cost is on top of your questions: take a look on the f4.5/21 from ZEISS also. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

It does not play with color M sensors. Extreme color shift in the corners.

 

(Would work nicely with the Monochrome, though)

 

The 4.5/21 ZM C-Biogon is a fabulous lens but on digital it is indeed a problem with colour. For film, B&W conversions or on the Monochrome it is great.

Having said that it is not as good as the 3.4/21 SEM. I sold the Zeiss for these two reasons.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I am not sure if shooting landscapes is your thing. For me it was. So the deal breaker for Elmarit-M 21mm ASPH is the fact it has only 8 aperture blades. I just can't stand those 8 point sunstars. So for this reason alone I much prefer Super-Elmars with 9 apertude blades (for once I agree with mr. Ken Rockwell :D:p ). Biogon has 10 straight blades, a slight improvement. If you are fine with even number of blades, then I am sure you are happy with the performance of both Biogon and Elmarit-M. Good luck in your decision :)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I bought a Zeiss 2,8 first. It was nice but needed Adobe Flat Field correction (or Cornerfix if you don't use Adobe products). I found that inconvenient, so I bought a SEM. The SEM is smaller and better to handle because of the focus tab . It is also more expensive. My suggestion: buy the Zeiss if you don't plan do take many pictures with a 21mm.

 

Here are some crop-comparisons taken from center right edge, at 2,8/3,4:

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

I bought a Zeiss 2,8 first. It was nice but needed Adobe Flat Field correction (or Cornerfix if you don't use Adobe products). I found that inconvenient, so I bought a SEM.

Did you code it? I find it a little baffling you needed Cornerfix with a properly coded f/2.8 Biogon as I've found it works perfectly on an M9 and M240. I agree that if aren't going to use a 21mm a lot then don't knock yourself out finding perfection because they are all pretty good anyway. If I want something more lightweight on a day shooting I prefer to take my f/4 CV Skopar and don't worry myself it isn't quite as perfect as any other lens.

 

Steve

Link to post
Share on other sites

How much do you think you are going to use the lens? A lot? Then the SEM is wonderful. I had the Zeiss and it was great and relatively cheap and more than filled my needs at the time -- I used it around 5% of the time. I eventually swapped into a 18mm SEM which was fantastic but since sold because I rarely used it and was able to use the cash to finance a different Leica purchase. Moral of the story -- these are all great lenses and whether they deliver what you want depends on what you want other than owning that focal length. Unless, of course, the budget is unlimited.

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...