dante Posted January 11, 2018 Share #1 Posted January 11, 2018 Advertisement (gone after registration) Ok, so here's this spring's question. How compelling is the 21mm Super Elmar? I currently use an 18mm f/4 ZM Distagon (primarily with an M240), a 21/4.5 Biogon (with the M246 mono), and a 25/2.8 Biogon (with either or my Sony a6300). — The 18mm is hard to complain about save for its "hello, retrofocus" size. It is sharp corner to corner. — The 21mm f/4.5 has zero distortion, is tiny, and is hellishly sharp where it is sharp, but it tends to have softer corners on digital up to about f/8 (and some color shift that is correctable). That's actually not a big deal as it sounds, since I also use a Horseman 6x12 with a 35/4.5 Apo-Grandagon that barely covers 6x12 (because it's really a 6x9 lens) and doesn't get sharp in the extreme corners until f/22... — The 25mm... well, it has crushing resolution. It's just fantastic. The Super Elmar 21 seems to be as expensive as all three ZM lenses put together. So the bottom line question for people who have used the Super Elmars and the equivalent ZMs is, is the 21 SEM a "sell the house, sell the kids" proposition? I'm guessing it's not, but I'd like to hear any perspectives on that. I am trying to reduce the lens count around here (as well as the number of things that don't take 46mm filters). But neither of those considerations is driving the bus. Dante Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 11, 2018 Posted January 11, 2018 Hi dante, Take a look here ZM 18/21/25 vs Super Elmar 21?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Gregm61 Posted January 11, 2018 Share #2 Posted January 11, 2018 It doesn't sounds like anyone's going to make a compelling proposition for you. I like the Super Elmars, both the 18 and 21. The resolution and that they are automatically detected by my M262 and put in the EXIF data. Small pleasures, but that's what I prefer. I have a 21mm f1.8 Voigtlander Ultron as well, but I prefer the size of the Super Elmars and they're both better against the light compared to the Ulton. The pair are some of Leica's better contra-light performers in my experience, and capturing so much field of view, the sun often winds up somewhere in the frame and it's nice not having to think about where the sun is when shooting with them. 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dante Posted January 11, 2018 Author Share #3 Posted January 11, 2018 Thanks Greg! Great shots. Since I shoot black and white a lot, does the 21 vignette with normal-depth filters? Dante Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted January 11, 2018 Share #4 Posted January 11, 2018 Thanks Greg! Great shots. Since I shoot black and white a lot, does the 21 vignette with normal-depth filters? Dante I shoot a Monochrom and use the standard yellow B+W filters with it and have encountered no such issues Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
darylgo Posted January 12, 2018 Share #5 Posted January 12, 2018 You will not be disappointed with the 21mm if you are looking for outright resolution and sharpness well into the corners. It is part of Leica's 3 lens set, 18,21 and 24mm, designed for image quality in a diminutive size, where speed is not a priority. Where you will find Zeiss' strength is those beautiful rich colors. I wouldn't doubt that either manufacturers lenses could be made to look similar to the others with some time spent in Lightroom. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
henning Posted January 12, 2018 Share #6 Posted January 12, 2018 (edited) I've had the 18 Zeiss for about 10 years, and have used nearly all 21's over the years. At present, in 21 M-land I have the Summilux, the Elmarit ASPH, the Super Elmar and the WA Tri-Elmar. The 25 (and Leica's 24's) I've shot with but never owned as it's not a focal length I'm interested in for rangefinders. The Super Elmar is undoubtedly the 'best' of the bunch in terms of optical performance and all round ease of use. No problems with corner softness, ever; no problems with colour shift and no problems with filters. My 18 Zeiss really should go up for sale since it offers nothing the Tri Elmar doesn't, except volume and size. That said, the performance is good, if not outstanding and unless you are bothered by looking at less than perfect corners at 100% on screen no one will call you on using a sub standard lens. No one. The Zeiss 21mm f/4.5, while extremely good, should really be in front of film. There it shines and can offer an argument that it's up there with the Super Elmar. On digital it can't. That's just not what it was designed for. As for other available lenses, the 21/2.8 Zeiss is closer to the Elmarit ASPH than the Super Elmar, which is not necessarily a bad thing and as with the 18, no one will call you on it. The Voigtlander 21/1.8 is a bargain; it offers speed and very good performance that again is quite good, but it, even more so than the 21/2.8 Zeiss, doesn't have that final zing that the Super Elmar does. It should really be judged as an extremely competent alternative to the Summilux at a small fraction of the price and is really the most reasonable choice if a lot of low light shooting is contemplated. I had long waited for a fast 21, and for about 4 years before it came out I had known Mr. Kobayashi was working on a fast 21. Then Leica introduced the Summilux first, and I got it. A year or so later the Voigtlander lens came out. If it had been available, I would have bought it instead of the Summilux as I had the chance to shoot both together for a couple of weeks. Btw, I have a 4x5 Cambo Wide with various backs, including a Horseman 6x12 and also use the 35 Apo-Grandagon (as well as the 47 SA-XL and 65 Grandson). Gorgeous negs. Edited January 12, 2018 by henning Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post OleAndre Posted January 13, 2018 Popular Post Share #7 Posted January 13, 2018 (edited) Advertisement (gone after registration) I have had the Zeiss 21/4.5 but sold it for the Leica Super-Elmar 21 last summer. The Zeiss gave me some fantastic pictures, but I was bothered by the lack of resolution and sharpness towards the edges, and the quite severe and uneven vignetting. For its price however - i bought mine for about $450 - its a great lens. The Leica SEM is probably the most perfect wide angle lens I have used and I think that there are few lenses out there for the M system that is as good for landscapes as the SEM21. Resolution is very high, and it performs great from edge to edge wide open. I have only used in on an M246 where it draws grey tones in shadows very nicely (but so did the Zeiss). It has very nice 22 pointed sunstars as well, but I must admit that I prefer the Zeiss's 10 pointed sunstars better. A few examples with the SEM 21: All the best, Ole Edited January 13, 2018 by OleAndre 20 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kunzhobel Posted January 13, 2018 Share #8 Posted January 13, 2018 I have had the Zeiss 21/4.5 but sold it for the Leica Super-Elmar 21 last summer. The Zeiss gave me some fantastic pictures, but I was bothered by the lack of resolution and sharpness towards the edges, and the quite severe and uneven vignetting. For its price however - i bought mine for about $450 - its a great lens. The Leica SEM is probably the most perfect wide angle lens I have used and I think that there are few lenses out there for the M system that is as good for landscapes as the SEM21. Resolution is very high, and it performs great from edge to edge wide open. I have only used in on an M246 where it draws grey tones in shadows very nicely (but so did the Zeiss). It has very nice 22 pointed sunstars as well, but I must admit that I prefer the Zeiss's 10 pointed sunstars better. A few examples with the SEM 21: All the best, Ole wow 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ropo54 Posted January 13, 2018 Share #9 Posted January 13, 2018 wow+2 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mp240 guy Posted October 21, 2018 Share #10 Posted October 21, 2018 wow +3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
astrostl Posted October 22, 2018 Share #11 Posted October 22, 2018 My comprehensivel list of 21 SEM complaints, after factoring for speed: I wish the aperture ring were clickier. It's a practically flawless lens. I used the CV 21/4 for a while to see if I'd use the FL often enough to warrant an upgrade. Now I have a much better lens, with vastly better ergonomics, with coding and no purple corner concerns. I'm on an M10 rather than a Mono, though, so there's that. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
eujin Posted October 22, 2018 Share #12 Posted October 22, 2018 I've owned the Zeiss 18mm and now own the 21 SEM. The Zeiss is very nice and I had few complaints about it in terms of performance. I bought it to see how I would like shooting ultra wides. As it turned out, I liked it quite a bit. In terms of IQ, I thought it was great — as good as the 18 SEM to my eyes. I just didn't particularly like the handling of it, the size, and the lack of 6-bit coding. The 21 SEM is better in every way, but it's got its niggles as well. The aperture ring is way too easy to turn and mine developed a loose barrel housing (which was fixed under warranty by Leica). If you're going to keep it forever, I would get the 21 SEM. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fiftyasa Posted February 24, 2019 Share #13 Posted February 24, 2019 Ongoing review: https://fiftyasa.wordpress.com/2019/02/24/leica-super-elmar-m-21mm-f-3-4-vs-zeiss-biogon-t-2-8-21-mm-zm/ Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
james.liam Posted February 26, 2019 Share #14 Posted February 26, 2019 (edited) The singular lens that could conceivably give the 21 SEM a run for its money would be a digitally-reformulated ZM 4,5/21. ...which will never happen. My experience with 20-21mm FL previous to Leica have all been with Nikkors and Zeiss SLR optics. The latter was heads and shoulders above any Nikon but still demonstrated wave-like distortion (but sumptuous color). The 21 SEM is in a league of its own. Edited February 26, 2019 by james.liam Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktmrider2 Posted March 1, 2019 Share #15 Posted March 1, 2019 I can't comment on current Leica super wides, especially 21 or wider. I have owned a number of 21mm lenses including older Leica versions but I find 21 and less just too wide. I also had a 15mm which was never used. In fact, I gave my 21f4 away to a new photographer who only had an M3 and a 50. However, I do own the Zeiss 25f2.8 and it blows other lenses out of the water. I would strongly recommend it although most of my current photography is done with either a 35, 50 or 90. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
derleicaman Posted March 1, 2019 Share #16 Posted March 1, 2019 I have owned the 21/2.8 Elmarit and the 21/2.8 Elmarit ASPH, the ZM 18/4 and still have the 21/4 CV lens and the original 21/4 Super Angulon. At the time I purchased the WATE, I sold both the 21 ASPH and the 18 as I felt they were redundant. The Super Angulon was my dad's, so I will most likely hold on to it. The 21/4 is not worth a lot and works just fine on the MM, so I'll keep it for that. I also have the ZM 24/2.8 and can also say it is a fantastic lens! FWIW, Tom Abrahamsson had the 21 SEM and swore it was the best 21 ever made, and knowing Tom, he would know. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.