Super Angulon 21 M-mount f/4 vs f/3.4

[EoinC]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm interested in hearing from those who have used one or both of these lenses (Warrior - Are you still out there?), either on film or digital M's. In my first bout of GAS in a while (I really thought I'd achieved immunity), i have my eyes on a f/4 for use on a M6 and a Monochrom.

 

I really like what I've seen, particularly shots with people up close. Images are joyously welcomed...

[Advertisement]

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

[iaeaix]

I have both. Did not have M6 or Monochrom but I have tried them on M4 and M9.

 

Both are very good lens on films, smooth tone transition.

The f3.4 has more contrast, no more no less , I like it very much.

The f4 has less contrast, but it would be very nice with BW, like the 1st 35mm summicron with early serial number.

 

On digital, it is different story.

F3.4 performs nice on M9(center region), when exposed correctly. Meter does not work right so it needs manual metering. The tone is actually very nice, M9 jpg is punchy but Angulon is not, so it balance well.

The F4 version does not work. The rear element is a little too fat to fit in any digital M I have tried (M9, M8, R-D1), it hits the cavity wall of the camera (actually scratched off the black paint of my cameras while I was trying). The only digital I managed to fit it in is Ricoh GXR M.

 

Sent from my DMC-CM1 using Tapatalk

[EoinC]

I have both. Did not have M6 or Monochrom but I have tried them on M4 and M9.

 

Both are very good lens on films, smooth tone transition.

The f3.4 has more contrast, no more no less , I like it very much.

The f4 has less contrast, but it would be very nice with BW, like the 1st 35mm summicron with early serial number.

 

On digital, it is different story.

F3.4 performs nice on M9(center region), when exposed correctly. Meter does not work right so it needs manual metering. The tone is actually very nice, M9 jpg is punchy but Angulon is not, so it balance well.

The F4 version does not work. The rear element is a little too fat to fit in any digital M I have tried (M9, M8, R-D1), it hits the cavity wall of the camera (actually scratched off the black paint of my cameras while I was trying). The only digital I managed to fit it in is Ricoh GXR M.

 

Sent from my DMC-CM1 using Tapatalk

Thank you, Iaeaix. Now you have me thinking. Primary use will be on the M6, but I would like to also use it on the M (246). I'd love to see some images, if you have any to share.

[iaeaix]

Thank you, Iaeaix. Now you have me thinking. Primary use will be on the M6, but I would like to also use it on the M (246). I'd love to see some images, if you have any to share.

Mostly I shot photos of my family, which I don't share.

I will try look for images which could be shared.

 

 

Sent from my DMC-CM1 using Tapatalk

[Guest JMF]

I have both. Did not have M6 or Monochrom but I have tried them on M4 and M9.

 

Both are very good lens on films, smooth tone transition.

The f3.4 has more contrast, no more no less , I like it very much.

The f4 has less contrast, but it would be very nice with BW, like the 1st 35mm summicron with early serial number.

 

On digital, it is different story.

F3.4 performs nice on M9(center region), when exposed correctly. Meter does not work right so it needs manual metering. The tone is actually very nice, M9 jpg is punchy but Angulon is not, so it balance well.

The F4 version does not work. The rear element is a little too fat to fit in any digital M I have tried (M9, M8, R-D1), it hits the cavity wall of the camera (actually scratched off the black paint of my cameras while I was trying). The only digital I managed to fit it in is Ricoh GXR M.

 

Sent from my DMC-CM1 using Tapatalk

 

Hi all, I also have both , have sold both and bought them again more than once .

Have used both extensively on M8, M9 , MM and film bodies with no glitch, just be gentle when mounting and dismounting , no harm to my cameras at all ! 

Manual metering is best , a good minus 3 stops exposure compensation can work at times .

 

Both lenses will fare well in colour on film bodies but expect the iltalian flag syndrome on digital bodies, which can be fixed with Cornerfix or the Lightroom Flat Field plugin depending on the initial exposure and your pp abilities.

All well on a MM obviously.

 

There's a  thread Philipus started here on LUF: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/237734-lets-discuss-the-super-angulon/

 and another one here on  RFF  : http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71058&page=37

Just found that one here : https://rangefinderforum.com/forums/printthread.php?t=71058&pp=25&page=44

 

Prices vary widely, some of the early 21 SA 4 lenses came in LTM with an original M adapter fitted. The 21 SA 4 accepts a e39 filter, the SA 3.4 will take  e48 one and share the hood with the early 28 Elmarits. earlier SA 3.4 lenses sport an infinity lock .

They share the same mininum focusing distance of 0.40m with RF coupling from 0.7m.

 

 

 

21 SA 3.4 1974 on Hexar RF and Provia 100 :

 

Macumba, RJ by JM__, on Flickr

 

Christophe Simon & the children of Cidade de Deus during a photography workshop. by JM__, on Flickr

 

21 SA 3.4 on M8

 

Rio de Janeiro by JM__, on Flickr

 

21 SA 3.4 on MMv1

 

early at the Mido Café by JM__, on Flickr

 

Two men walking by JM__, on Flickr

 

21 SA 3.4 on M240

 

surrounded by JM__, on Flickr

 

Some  21 SA 4 shots here : http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/237734-lets-discuss-the-super-angulon/?p=2745288 .

 

Cheers, JM 

[luigi bertolotti]

I have both, and used the f4 only on film, briefly said my feeling is :

 

- f4 : a fine collectible, nice to use in BW on screwmount bodies to enjoy "a certain taste"

- f 3,4 : an EXCELLENT lens , with the only limitation of metering on digital Ms : wasn't for this I wouldn't find many practical differences from my 21 2,8 asph.

[iaeaix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all, I also have both , have sold both and bought them again more than once .

Have used both extensively on M8, M9 , MM and film bodies with no glitch, just be gentle when mounting and dismounting , no harm to my cameras at all !

Manual metering is best , a good minus 3 stops exposure compensation can work at times .

 

Both lenses will fare well in colour on film bodies but expect the iltalian flag syndrome on digital bodies, which can be fixed with Cornerfix or the Lightroom Flat Field plugin depending on the initial exposure and your pp abilities.

All well on a MM obviously.

 

There's a thread Philipus started here on LUF: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/237734-lets-discuss-the-super-angulon/

and another one here on RFF : http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=71058&page=37

Just found that one here : https://rangefinderforum.com/forums/printthread.php?t=71058&pp=25&page=44

 

Prices vary widely, some of the early 21 SA 4 lenses came in LTM with an original M adapter fitted. The 21 SA 4 accepts a e39 filter, the SA 3.4 will take e48 one and share the hood with the early 28 Elmarits. earlier SA 3.4 lenses sport an infinity lock .

They share the same mininum focusing distance of 0.40m with RF coupling from 0.7m.

 

 

 

21 SA 3.4 1974 on Hexar RF and Provia 100 :

 

Macumba, RJ by JM__, on Flickr

 

Christophe Simon & the children of Cidade de Deus during a photography workshop. by JM__, on Flickr

 

21 SA 3.4 on M8

 

Rio de Janeiro by JM__, on Flickr

 

21 SA 3.4 on MMv1

 

early at the Mido Café by JM__, on Flickr

 

Two men walking by JM__, on Flickr

 

21 SA 3.4 on M240

 

surrounded by JM__, on Flickr

 

Some 21 SA 4 shots here : http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/237734-lets-discuss-the-super-angulon/?p=2745288 .

 

Cheers, JM

You made me thinking about try the f4 again on M9/M8.

Is it possible there is sample(or version within F4 version) variation?

 

Sent from my DMC-CM1 using Tapatalk

[Guest JMF]

You made me thinking about try the f4 again on M9/M8.

Is it possible there is sample(or version within F4 version) variation?

 

Sent from my DMC-CM1 using Tapatalk

 

You should, I never heard of any differences within the 21 SA 4 version besides the LTM or M mounts.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Super-Angulon_f%3D_2.1_cm_1:4

 

Have fun !

 

21 SA 4 on M8:

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!

[Guest JMF]

21 SA 4 on M9 (Cornerfix-ed):

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!

[EoinC]

Thank you,Iaeaix, Luigi, and Jean-Marc - I greatly appreciate your inputs.

[michaelwj]

I use a 3.4 on my batteryless M6 - the meter doesn't work anyway. I really like the photos I get from it, but more than that it is small and a pleasure to use.

I believe the f/4 version has a rotating front when focusing, causing the aperture scale to rotate which I don't like, but also uses 39mm filters which I do like. I use S7 filters and a few 48mm filters - I can share S7 filters with my pre-asph 35mm summilux so that's okay.

If you've come this far I assume you've read all the other threads here and on RFF. I have posted some of my photos in the SA RFF thread with the same username if you care to look. It's my favourite wide angle for people, but like others above I don't post many photos of my family - my main subject!

Good luck in your choice, I'm sure you'd be happy with either the f/4 or f/3.4, they both have their good and bad points but the images from both are more similar than different.

[EoinC]

I use a 3.4 on my batteryless M6 - the meter doesn't work anyway. I really like the photos I get from it, but more than that it is small and a pleasure to use.

I believe the f/4 version has a rotating front when focusing, causing the aperture scale to rotate which I don't like, but also uses 39mm filters which I do like. I use S7 filters and a few 48mm filters - I can share S7 filters with my pre-asph 35mm summilux so that's okay.

If you've come this far I assume you've read all the other threads here and on RFF. I have posted some of my photos in the SA RFF thread with the same username if you care to look. It's my favourite wide angle for people, but like others above I don't post many photos of my family - my main subject!

Good luck in your choice, I'm sure you'd be happy with either the f/4 or f/3.4, they both have their good and bad points but the images from both are more similar than different.

Thank you, Michael. I'll check the RFF threads. At this stage, it looks like the f/3.4 is taking the lead, but I like what i see from both lenses.

[philipus]

I also suffer, since a while actually, from Super Angulon Lust as the thread Jean-Marc links to shows (actually a lot of it is his "fault" due to the images he's posted in the I Like Film thread ). I still haven't bought one but when (!) I do it will be the f3.4 version. They don't come up very often though. 

 

One oddity is the square aperture which affects OOF highlights and flare except wide open. I think it is looks quite cool and of course it's only two blades from the hexagonal aperture on Hasselblad lenses so it feels normal to those of us who shoot that

 

I'm interested in hearing from those who have used one or both of these lenses (Warrior - Are you still out there?), either on film or digital M's. In my first bout of GAS in a while (I really thought I'd achieved immunity), i have my eyes on a f/4 for use on a M6 and a Monochrom.

 

I really like what I've seen, particularly shots with people up close. Images are joyously welcomed...

 

 

[NB23]

The f3.4 is a masterpiece.

I don't shoot digital with it but for film shooting, it is an essential, historical and unbeatable lens.

[lct]

Not impressed by the S-A 21/3.4 i must say. Vignetting is huge compared to my other 21's besides the mediocre R 21/4. Makes oversaturated skies at all apertures and there is a lot of CA with this lens. Also borders and corners are soft below f/8 on my digital bodies (M240, A7s mod). At the otherwise interesting focus distance of 0.4m, the focus tab must be used with the left thumb due to the long focus throw. Only pros to me are the relative compactness of the S-A and its remarkable sharpness in the centre of the frame but all in all i find my modest CV 21/4 a better lens, let alone modern Leica 21/2.8 asph and 21/3.4 asph. The latters have a minimum focus distance of 0.7m though vs 0.5m for the CV 21/4 and 0.4m for the S-A 21/3.4 but the CV can go down to 0.3m on my A7s mod. YMMV.

[michaelwj]

 

Not impressed by the S-A 21/3.4 i must say. Vignetting is huge compared to my other 21's besides the mediocre R 21/4. Makes oversaturated skies at all apertures and there is a lot of CA with this lens. Also borders and corners are soft below f/8 on my digital bodies (M240, A7s mod). At the otherwise interesting focus distance of 0.4m, the focus tab must be used with the left thumb due to the long focus throw. Only pros to me are the relative compactness of the S-A and its remarkable sharpness in the centre of the frame but all in all i find my modest CV 21/4 a better lens, let alone modern Leica 21/2.8 asph and 21/3.4 asph. The latters have a minimum focus distance of 0.7m though vs 0.5m for the CV 21/4 and 0.4m for the S-A 21/3.4 but the CV can go down to 0.3m on my A7s mod. YMMV.

 

 

 

As a counter, I love the vignetting. Combined with the sharp centre it really sucks you in to the pictures. The focus tab is perfectly positioned; 1m and 3m are more or less at the same place in the focus throw as other lenses, so you know when you've gone close, otherwise, I can scale focus by feel just the same as my other lenses, no need to readjust. Soft borders and corners must be a digital thing, it's sharp from about f/4 on film. Overall, it's got a great look about it, and matches my 35mm summilux pre-asph perfectly. It's just really awesome.

But then again, one mans fish is another mans poisson.

[lct]

I have no experience with this lens on film sorry. Here different focus throws at 0.5 metre:

 

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!

[NB23]

This is a lens for film. Legendary.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[EoinC]

This is a lens for film. Legendary.

Thanks - My main use will be on film, so it is just what I'm looking for.

[iaeaix]

You should, I never heard of any differences within the 21 SA 4 version besides the LTM or M mounts.

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/Super-Angulon_f%3D_2.1_cm_1:4

 

Have fun !

 

21 SA 4 on M8:

I tried the F4 on M8, it sits into the camera this time![emoji1]

 

Sent from my DMC-CM1 using Tapatalk