neXt lens ?

[jackal]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

everyone keeps talking about teh 24mm elmarit ASPH and how amazing its fingerprint is

 

can anyone elaborate any further ?

 

i love the wides for street shooting and am thinking about the 24

i have sort of discounted the 21 as it will be too wide imo and the 24 is handy in that i have framelines built-in on the m8

 

i have a 28 ultron and that is amazing so i dont have a need to get a 28, or a 35 as well for that matter cos i have a summilux. i have x2 50mm's to choose from as well and also a 15mm heliar in the post for some fun wide stuff. So 24 is one length that i dont have and im attracted by ths fine rendition that it is supposed to have. Can anyone describe that more ? Thanks.

[Shootist]

everyone keeps talking about teh 24mm elmarit ASPH and how amazing its fingerprint is

 

can anyone elaborate any further ?

 

i love the wides for street shooting and am thinking about the 24

i have sort of discounted the 21 as it will be too wide imo and the 24 is handy in that i have framelines built-in on the m8

 

i have a 28 ultron and that is amazing so i dont have a need to get a 28, or a 35 as well for that matter cos i have a summilux. i have x2 50mm's to choose from as well and also a 15mm heliar in the post for some fun wide stuff. So 24 is one length that i dont have and im attracted by ths fine rendition that it is supposed to have. Can anyone describe that more ? Thanks.

 

Did you just post about the 28/2.8 ASPH Elmarit and that you bought one?

 

There are a few threads on the 24 and in those threads are some images taken with the 24.

[tashley]

Hiya,

 

I had one for a while but sold it when my WATE came and now I regret it - never sell a Leica lens, as they say.

 

I got rid of it because the WATE plus a 28 cron seemed right to cover the short end but frankly I increasingly find the WATE to be a PITA and that the CV15 gives the same quality with much better useability. The 24 is the ideal 'next stop' in a CV15 based lineup.

 

AS to it's images, I have to say that what I both liked and didn't like about it was pretty much its LACK of a fingerprint. If you think how characteristic the look of a 35 cron is (if you can get one that focusses) and the same for the 50 lux and 75 cron, what stands out for me about the 24mm is that it is simply sharp and neutral. If it ever gives you a Wow it's because of its edge to edge sharpness (without being too aggressive) and clarity, rather than any special feel it imparts.

 

If you follow the link to my gallery and then look at the Viareggio Carnevale section, there are a lot of shots there taken with it - check the EXIF - and to me they are just neutral...in a good way.

 

Best

 

Tim

[carstenw]

Tim, given that you can use the WATE exactly like you use the CV15, why do find that it is a pain? I just got mine with the viewfinder, and I find it a blast to use. Yeah, unless you give up some of its advantages, you can't use it that fast, but I don't find this to be a problem so far.

[tom0511]

I find 21 fits better between 15 and 28mm.

The 24 is supersharp and contrasty, I find the 21 to be more creamy.

I own all three (21,24 and 28) and have not found out yet which I like best but lately for me its 28/2.0 because its f2.0 and 21.

cheers, tom

[jonoslack]

I increasingly find the WATE to be a PITA and that the CV15 gives the same quality with much better useability. The 24 is the ideal 'next stop' in a CV15 based lineup.

Hi Tim

Sorry you don't like the WATE - but if your CV15 gives the same image quality, I think you should be complaining to Leica (mine certainly doesn't) . . . . . . . mind you, it could be me that's wrong, but that vignetting . . . .

[kidigital]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Tom,

 

I'm with you on the 21. While I really think the 24 is a stellar lens, I found that it seemed to be a lens that ended up left behind when I selected a few lenses to carry around with the M8. I sold mine and picked up the 21. The 21 being a 28 on the M8 seems to be a much natural fit for me. Also, for all the accolades the 24 gets, I think 21 may get over-looked (even considering the use a viewfinder/don't use a viewfinder debates.) It's a very impressive lens.

 

If the WATE I've ordered with my discount ever arrives, it will be interesting to see if it or the 21 or both end up as part of the permanent kit.

 

Kurt

[tashley]

You two most respectful gentlemen are hard to disagree with BUT...

 

The CV weighs nothing and takes no space, and recent reviews seem to match my experience with it, which is that it is at least a match for the WATE. I have mine on a Milich adaptor and have no problems with vigging - but then I sometimes like a bit of vigging on a wide shot.

 

If I were 'close to base' and didn't mind about carting kit around, I'd probably choose the WATE because I'd probably be doing something where I really cared about the verticals and the Frankenfinder is helpful there. Otherwise... the disadvantages of the WATE:

 

* Bigger, heavier, requires Frankenfinder, which splits framing moment from focus moment. Of course I could just 'set and forget' the focus as I do with the CV but because it's there, I use it.

 

* Not one single filter that fits it has been seen in captivity AFAIK, months after it was released. The filter adaptors make hens' teeth look like raindrops in the rarity stakes.

 

* er... it costs more than 8 times as much.

 

Advantages of the WATE:

 

err... you can change focal length, and it's fun typing the word 'Frankenfinder' especially since I truly believe I invented it...

 

Best!

 

t

[carstenw]

Tim, no need to use the finder. You can use the WATE just like the CV15, except that you can choose three focal lengths. You should try it!

 

I do own both, but feel that you are unduly harsh on the WATE. It is a great lens, and the disadvantages are mostly self-imposed, other than weight and size.

[wparsonsgisnet]

Here's a shot taken yesterday, iso 320, 1/180, f5.8. Edmund's 1092Linear (very nice for foliage). I did not have to correct for wb; that is, this is about the right color for 3pm in Boston, with backlighting. Man, what great shadow detail, even with oncoming light.

[wparsonsgisnet]

Here's a crop. The kid is about 12 feet away, and the focus is on the side of his red shirt.

 

I really like what this lens does. I find the images draw me in and the bokeh is very gentle.

[jonoslack]

You two most respectful gentlemen are hard to disagree with BUT...

Ooooops - here we go!

 

The CV weighs nothing and takes no space, and recent reviews seem to match my experience with it, which is that it is at least a match for the WATE. I have mine on a Milich adaptor and have no problems with vigging - but then I sometimes like a bit of vigging on a wide shot.

Most of us like a bit of rough here and there.

If I were 'close to base' and didn't mind about carting kit around, I'd probably choose the WATE because I'd probably be doing something where I really cared about the verticals and the Frankenfinder is helpful there. Otherwise... the disadvantages of the WATE:

 

* Bigger, heavier, requires Frankenfinder, which splits framing moment from focus moment. Of course I could just 'set and forget' the focus as I do with the CV but because it's there, I use it.

 

Tim, you work out every day, you're as fit as a fiddle, and younger than most of 'em and you're telling me that you can't carry a WATE?!

 

If you want to use the WATE you can be laborious, and if you don't want to be laborious you can still use the WATE.

 

* Not one single filter that fits it has been seen in captivity AFAIK, months after it was released. The filter adaptors make hens' teeth look like raindrops in the rarity stakes.

 

I thought you'd sent yours off to John? I've got one (but I'm not using it [OH NO])

* er... it costs more than 8 times as much.

I think you can buy a Canon 400 wotsit including lens for less than the CV15

Advantages of the WATE:

 

err... you can change focal length, and it's fun typing the word 'Frankenfinder' especially since I truly believe I invented it...

 

t

I Believe you (about inventing it) but . . . . it's hardly a behemoth, and as far as i can see it does everything as well as the CV 15, and most things much better.

 

So THERE!

[jackal]

I dont want a WATE though

 

i want a 21mm ?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

/Mooooooooooooooogibang

[wparsonsgisnet]

... I dont want a WATE though i want a 21mm ?...

 

I really like the images from the WATE but would prefer a fast, wide, prime lens and it isn't there, so I'm wate-ing. The 24 solved my need for a 35-like lens with an image I really liked.

 

I suggest you read Reid's reviews of all the lenses in the range. That's how I made my choice and paid my money. Highly recommended!

[tashley]

Tim, no need to use the finder. You can use the WATE just like the CV15, except that you can choose three focal lengths. You should try it!

 

I do own both, but feel that you are unduly harsh on the WATE. It is a great lens, and the disadvantages are mostly self-imposed, other than weight and size.

 

Hi Carsten,

 

I have tried it - it was my 30% discount lens and I still use it on and off, but these days its the CV that gets in the bag much more frequently...

 

Best

 

t

[carstenw]

I am not sure if we mean the same thing. I meant that you should try using the WATE exactly as the CV15, ie. leave the finder at home and the WATE on 16mm, and just shoot away. I am sure that the minor extra space required (it is only about twice as long or so) is not that serious.

[wparsonsgisnet]

I had a question from a friend and realized that I hadn't posted the lens info. The pic of the kid in the baseball cap is with the 24mm 2.8A.

 

I can't thank Sean enuf for his reviews of wide lenses. This 24 is to die for.

[B&W]

I had a question from a friend and realized that I hadn't posted the lens info. The pic of the kid in the baseball cap is with the 24mm 2.8A.

 

I can't thank Sean enuf for his reviews of wide lenses. This 24 is to die for.

 

Do you use linear film or std film in C1 with the profile 1092Linear?