A Leica 21mm lens choice question

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello all,

 

I'm considering buying a Leica 21mm, which is one of my favourite focal lengths for the M series of cameras but I would like to read of some opinions on what are two choices I guess. I would like to know what the main differences are between the Leica SEM 21mm f 3.4 lens and it's earlier cousin the Leica 21mm f2.8 ASPH. The 21mm f1.4 is out of the question due to it's price and it's size, not worth it to me on both counts.

I do have the Voigtlander 21mm f4 that frankly I love for it's small size and great performance and it's essentially the same aperture as the f3.4 SEM, I also have the Voigtlander 21mm f1.8....that's good enough for what it is, it hasn't got stella performance wide open and it's a bit of a lump on the M's, but it's been quite handy for me despite those slight negatives.

I guess as I'm pretty happy enough with the Voitglander f4 Color Skopar and that might rule out the SEM f3.4 as being an expensive upgrade without too much gain, but that's not necessarily the case with 21mm f2.8 ASPH so I guess what I am really asking is how does the older Leica 21mm f2.8 shape up on the newer digital M's, in my case that'll be the 240's, MM1 and M10?

Thanks for any "real world" input.......

[convexferret]

I can't comment on the SEM but I do have both the 21/2.8 ASPH and the Voigtlander 21/4. They are fairly similar in the middle (all of the Voigtlander wide primes are very good in the centre) but the 21/2,8 ASPH is much better in the corners at all apertures. This is both on an M10 and an M246.

Edited August 22, 2018 by convexferret

[Advertisement]

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

[lct]

Only merit of the Elmarit 21/2.8 asph is f/2.8 to me but i have a SEM 21/3.4 and a CV 21/4 already. What i don't like on 21/2.8 asph is bulk (pic) and red edges on the M240 but i suspect it has less color shift problems on the M10 i have no experience with. Comparing CV 21/4 to SEM 21/3.4, i don't use them as identical lenses actually in that the SEM is sharper at f/4 so that it can be my default aperture with it. Now the main and admittedly trivial reason to use one or another lens is bulk for me so the CV 21/4 tends to be stuck on the digital CL while i prefer the SEM on M240 and SA 21/3.4 on the A7s mod but this is another story. 

 

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!

[Narsuitus]

If I did not need the light gathering of the 21mm f/1.4 (lens on right in image), I would choose the 21mm f/3.4 SEM.

 

Leica by Narsuitus, on Flickr

[John McMaster]

I had the 2.8 asph, but happily upgraded it to a SEM as I found it preferable in all ways (I have the Summilux as well for lower light).

 

john

[Gregm61]

The CV 21mm f1.8 really performs well on my M262 and M240, but I prefer the 21mm f3.4 Super Elmar for the size, 6-bit coding and sharpness across the field of view. The 21mm lens I've had the longest is a CV 21mm f4 that's about to go to a friend as it just sits in the drawer these days. Similar aperture compared to the Super Elmar it has for sure. Performance-wise, not so much. We'll leave it at that.

 

I also have a 6-bit coded and virtually mint 21mm f2.8 Elmarit-M ASPH I never use anymore with receipt of the Super Elmar and am about to send to Tamarkin as a part-trade against a second-hand M246.

[JSU]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm on my second 21/3.4 Super Angulon, I got it about 1998 and it replaced my first which I acquired in 1974, a victim of severe Schneideritis. For B & W specific images, whether film or digital with the M9-P, I still enjoy reaching for the S.A.

 

Soon after the original 21 Elmarit was upgraded to the ASPH version, I added that to my kit. I found it exceptional in every way on film except for the personality, that is the visual  character of the Elmarit ASPH compared to that of the S.A,

 

I still have both, and the S.A. is still my choice for specific B & W images while the Elmarit ASPH is the default choice for color or images that could ultimately be rendered either way.

 

When it was first announced, even before any were delivered, I got on the waiting list for the Cosina Voigtlander 21/1.8, in part on my experience with the CV 35/1.2. It is usable wide open and it does focus closer than the Elmarit ASPH (neither focus as close as the S.A.) but the 21/1.8 is awkwardly big for my taste. Regardless, the CV 21/1.8 is a completely usable lens and on the M9-P, it exhibits some of the natural light fall-off from wide open to f/4.0 that still charms me using the S.A. And, when push comes to shove, the CV 21/1.8 can make images at f/1.8, not a consideration with either of my other 21mm lenses and only possible with the 21 Summilux, a lens for which I have no interest.

 

If I could have only one of these lenses, I would go with the 21 Elmarit ASPH, it doesn't disappoint even if it lacks the charm of the S.A. And I have tried to shoot the S.A. for digital color, it just isn't worth the necessary effort and eventual frustration.

[Stein K S]

I'm on my second 21/3.4 Super Angulon, I got it about 1998 and it replaced my first which I acquired in 1974, a victim of severe Schneideritis. For B & W specific images, whether film or digital with the M9-P, I still enjoy reaching for the S.A.

 

Soon after the original 21 Elmarit was upgraded to the ASPH version, I added that to my kit. I found it exceptional in every way on film except for the personality, that is the visual  character of the Elmarit ASPH compared to that of the S.A,

 

I still have both, and the S.A. is still my choice for specific B & W images while the Elmarit ASPH is the default choice for color or images that could ultimately be rendered either way.

 

When it was first announced, even before any were delivered, I got on the waiting list for the Cosina Voigtlander 21/1.8, in part on my experience with the CV 35/1.2. It is usable wide open and it does focus closer than the Elmarit ASPH (neither focus as close as the S.A.) but the 21/1.8 is awkwardly big for my taste. Regardless, the CV 21/1.8 is a completely usable lens and on the M9-P, it exhibits some of the natural light fall-off from wide open to f/4.0 that still charms me using the S.A. And, when push comes to shove, the CV 21/1.8 can make images at f/1.8, not a consideration with either of my other 21mm lenses and only possible with the 21 Summilux, a lens for which I have no interest.

 

If I could have only one of these lenses, I would go with the 21 Elmarit ASPH, it doesn't disappoint even if it lacks the charm of the S.A. And I have tried to shoot the S.A. for digital color, it just isn't worth the necessary effort and eventual frustration.

You got me curious. You actually find the older 21 Elmarit asph to have less character than the new SEM? The «norm» seem to be the opposite in the sense that newer delivers sharper, but older deliveres what you describe as charm.

 

I have the 21 Elmarit asph myself and I must admit that I am not to impressed by «sharpness impression» as such, but still trying to find or define its charm... (not a big 21mm user though).

 

Thank you for all feedback on your experience!

[lct]

As far as "charm" is concerned i wonder if you're not mistaking the Elmarit 21/2.8 asph with the Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-asph. I have no experience with the latter though but our colleague Andy Piper (adan) likes this lens very much if memory serves.

[Stein K S]

As far as "charm" is concerned i wonder if you're not mistaking the Elmarit 21/2.8 asph with the Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-asph. I have no experience with the latter though but our colleague Andy Piper (adan) likes this lens very much if memory serves.

Sorry guys! My BIG mistake is I misread the SA to the SEM ;-)

[lct]

SA 21/4 and 21/3.4, which came before the Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-asph, do not work, or not normally, on digital Leicas.

[Ko.Fe.]

SA 21/4 and 21/3.4, which came before the Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-asph, do not work, or not normally, on digital Leicas.

On this day and age it is known exactly how it works on digital.

Just one example:

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/264341-super-angulon-21-m-mount-f4-vs-f34/

[mikeamosau]

I've not used the f2.8, but I have the Super Elmar and its one of my all time favorite lenses. Blows me away how incredibly sharp this lens is. Very nice small size, shares the same filters as my 35mm f1.4 which means less stuff to carry. I highly recommend it. 

 

If of interest, I wrote a little review and posted some images on my site at:

https://photobasecamp.com/review-leica-21mm-super-elmar/

 

Mike

[derleicaman]

I have always been a 21mm guy, going back to my dad's 21/4 Super-Angulon, which I still have. I had the 21/2.8 non-ASPH lens, and sold it some years ago. Always regretted it, and last year acquired the six bit coded 21/2.8 ASPH. Fantastic lens on the M9, the M9M and now on the M10.

 

Butttttt! Several months ago, I picked up a WATE for a great price. Now, the 21/2.8 ASPH is idle and I can't see having both in my bag. I also have the 21/4 CV lens. I'll never sell the SA for sentimental reasons, and the CV 21/4 is great when I really want to travel light. Three 21mm lenses is a bit too much.

 

Anyone interested in a mint 21/2.8 ASPH? :-)

[adan]

As far as "charm" is concerned i wonder if you're not mistaking the Elmarit 21/2.8 asph with the Elmarit 21/2.8 pre-asph. I have no experience with the latter though but our colleague Andy Piper (adan) likes this lens very much if memory serves.

 

I do.

 

But I would not necessarily recommend it to all comers, because I have my own perverse reason for liking it. It just pairs well with the other 1970-80s Mandler lenses I use or have used - 28, 35, 50 Summilux pre-ASPH, 75/90 pre-APOs, 135 Tele-Elmar - in terms of lower contrast and less-pink color rendering.

 

It has really blurry corners wide-open, and still softish down to about f/6.8. A journalists' or street lens, not great for landscape or architecture unless one stops down a lot. It is also rather large (60mm filters).

 

I've never even seen, let alone touched or tried, the f/3.4 SEM. It does seem to be a very strong lens overall, just from what I see from others' work.

 

I did try the 21 f/2.8 ASPH, back when it was available new. My impressions - a tiny bit less sharp than my pre-ASPH in the center @ f/2.8, but much sharper in the corners. With the trade-off that it has a lot of chromatic aberration (red and cyan bands both sides of black silhouetted tree branches in the corners, for example - easily fixed with a mouse-click these days). The pre-ASPH has fuzzy corners, but shows no color fringing at all.

 

If I were absolutely forced to give up my pre-ASPH, I would really have to try both the ASPHs myself to make a choice between them. I like having f/2.8, but the old, old f/3.4 from the 1960s-70s certainly worked for the photojournalists back then, so I might well choose the modern f/3.4 for its size, if the performance panned out as I expect.

[lct]

On this day and age it is known exactly how it works on digital.

Just one example:

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/264341-super-angulon-21-m-mount-f4-vs-f34/

 

I have no experience with the SA 21/4 but i can confirm that my SA 21/3.4 does not work at all on the digital CL and my M240 cannot meter normally with it. Common knowledge i guess but few people know that some Kolari modded Sonys, at least my A7s mod, work fine with the SA 21/3.4 with some cyan shifts at edges and corners though but this is easy to correct in PP. 

[CharlesL]

I split the gear fascination in two for budget reasons. The Elmar 24/3.8 is sharp and generally an excellent lens by all technical criteria. Then I have a Perar 21/4.5, a triplet which vignettes heavily and is subject to chromatic aberration. An example of the latter:

 

 

(Photo taken through a chain link fence, which is the smudge at the top left.)

 

I also had the CV Color Skopar 21/4. I found the colors muddy, or at least I never learned how to deal with that. Sold it.
 

[JSU]

About 10 hours late replying, but I would like to clarify I use my 21/3.4 Super Angulon on my M9-P when I am shooting specifically B & W. If doing digital color I use typically the 21 Elmarit ASPH unless I am needing the attributes of the CV 21/1.8, namely the f/1.8 aperture, the closer focussing or both.

 

My background is PJ, did 33 years at large metro papers and I am all about sharpness typically in the center 1/3, if the extreme corners go to fuzz it usually doesn't bother me. I wish I could use the Super Angulon on the M9-P for color, but the color shifts are asymmetrical and I have no interest in creating various Corner Fix actions to cover the multiple varied situations. It is, for me, a no brainer to reach for either the 21 Elmarit ASPH or the CV 21/1.8.

 

I've never felt the need to improve on my 21 Elmarit ASPH, the CV 21/1.8 was acquired on a lark because I was so impressed with the CV 35/1.2, I have no regrets getting it. I'm a bit older school in my choices of lenses, my 35 Summicron ver IV and my Tele-Elmarit (thin) are my essential looks. For variety I sometimes carry the CV 28/1.9 and usually pair it with the very fine Canon LTM 100/2.0. I also have the CV 15/4.5 ver III and the Tele-Elmar to cover the extremes. I've had a Canon LTM 50/1.5 for a very long time, I know it like the back of my hand. I recently added a Canon LTM 50/1.2 just because I had one for many years and can't recall what prompted me to get rid it, this new one (only had it for a month now) seems to be a good one once I cleaned some light internal haze which did wonders for the contrast.

 

Back on topic, I'll reiterate, if I could have but one 21mm lens, from my experience it would have to be the 21 Elmarit ASPH.

[Mr.Q]

I've had my share of 21mm lenses and decided to keep the CV 21/1.8.

 

The CV 21/1.8 is plenty sharp at F5.6-11 corner to corner, and the difference in IQ stopped down is negligible even compared with the best 21's (SEM and Biogon). What seperates the Ultron is it's versatility, with it's wide aperture and MFD.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Ernstk]

The lens I use 75% of the time is the 21/2.8 Elmarit M (Pre asph).

 

I treally like the way that it renders on the M-P 240 and the M8. It's also quite inexpensive.

 

M-P  21/28 Emarit M.   f5.6 1/30th 4000 ISO. Shot through a glass window at night, hence some reflections.

 

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!