M240+Summilux 21 vs Sony A7s+Zeiss 16-35

Engelo · February 20, 2016

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I read a couple of reviews of the 21mm Summilux all of them prasing the lens as producing sharp and crisp pictures. Since I own the lens I always had a different impression - pictures look "soft", not very sharp! Doing a comparison with a Zeiss 16-35 on a Sony A7s, the Zeiss lens clearly produced sharper pictures than the m240 + Summilux. What are your experiences and views with regards to the lens?

February 20, 2016

Hi Engelo,

Take a look here M240+Summilux 21 vs Sony A7s+Zeiss 16-35. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

darylgo · February 21, 2016

It is not the sharpest lens in my system however it has beautiful tonality on the M240 at all apertures and it is sharp enough for my uses. Leica divided their 21 and 24mm lenses into super sharp slower (3.4 and f3.8) and sharp fast (f1.4). I guess I expect a sharpness compromise as a tradeoff for speed and have never really tested it against other lenses but rather determined it performs well enough, if not rather spectacularly for my purposes. I do remember selling all my Nikkor 21mm lenses after purchase of the Summilux, the Nikkors were not only softer but tonality didn't compare to the Summilux.

Perhaps the softness you speak of is due to a sample in need of Leica's attention, if you can test another copy that would help in this determination. My Summilux needed adjustment with both an M9 and M240 for proper focus accuracy.

Engelo · February 21, 2016

@ Darylgo: thank you for your post! A comparison Between my lens and another 21 Summilux would be interesting indeed. With regards to adjustment: the lens has already been at Leica for this, but to me, results seem to be unchanged.

hiepphotog · February 27, 2016

For its size, it is still the best 21/1.4 you can buy. I have no doubt that the new Sigma 20/1.4 would be sharper but it's much bigger as well. With that said, to expect a 21/1.4 t be very sharp at WO is unrealistic.

MarkP · February 28, 2016

It is not the sharpest lens in my system however it has beautiful tonality on the M240 at all apertures and it is sharp enough for my uses. Leica divided their 21 and 24mm lenses into super sharp slower (3.4 and f3.8) and sharp fast (f1.4). I guess I expect a sharpness compromise as a tradeoff for speed and have never really tested it against other lenses but rather determined it performs well enough, if not rather spectacularly for my purposes. I do remember selling all my Nikkor 21mm lenses after purchase of the Summilux, the Nikkors were not only softer but tonality didn't compare to the Summilux.

Perhaps the softness you speak of is due to a sample in need of Leica's attention, if you can test another copy that would help in this determination. My Summilux needed adjustment with both an M9 and M240 for proper focus accuracy.

This is my experience with the 21 Summilux vs SEM.

My 21 Summilux had focus shift (which would obviously affect sharpness at wide apertures) and went back to Leica for adjustment which fixed the problem. The lens reminds me a bit of my 28 Summicron - excellent micro contrast, colour and rendering, but with that more classic (Mandler?) lens feel to the photographs. Furthermore, it offers almost 3 stops more light that the 21 SEM and reduced DOF in an ultra-WA if you want to use it that way (in which case you will need a series VIII ND filter for daytime use and these are now hard to come by)

It is big and heavy, not razor sharp with modern colouring like the 3.4/21 SEM (but no slouch - it is a Leica), and it is not a lens for architectural work where you need to maintain those dead-straight lines. Because of it's size it does not get as much daytime use as my 3.4/21 SEM. If you only want a daytime lens, or tripod in low light then get the SEM as it's abettor all-rounder.

I'm not sure what more one could expect out of such a lens that allows such low-light hand-held work (except for it to be cheaper).

I hate agreeing with the Bard but "sharpness isn't everything".

These may give you some idea of why I like the lens.

Many of these would not have been possible hand-held in low light with a 21 SEM without really pushing the ISO.