Both 15mm and 21mm for travel?

[nightstreet]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I've been wondering whether I should get both a 15mm and a 21mm, would appreciate some thoughts.  This is for a compact setup for travelling around Europe and Japan, doubling up from time to time shooting real estate interiors (replacing a rental Nikkor 14-24mm). 

I recently traded in my D810 for the current Z7, had wanted an M10 but couldn't justify it, the lenses will be used with an adapter so really I should say as compact and light as I can make it.  The widest I used to shoot while travelling was 18mm on a DX, 27mm equvalent, and I want to go a bit wider than the usual 24mm or 28mm.  Originally I was eyeing a 20/21mm, however for the odd interior shoots I find myself shooting around 15-16mm a lot, and all the readings keep pointing me to the Voigtlander Heliar 15mm/4.5 (around $400 on ebay).

Previously while searching and buying a Hexanon 40mm/1.8, I came across the Hexanon 21mm, but then I think I would prefer the Elmarit-M 21mm/2.8 pre-asph (around $1,100 on ebay) , just wondering  whether for travelling purpose I would need both, or maybe one or the other would be sufficient.  Would appreciate some thoughts from those who travel a lot around Europe (France, Belgium, Germany...) and Japan.  I shot with a 35mm and an 85mm on my last trip to Japan, and I shot everything with my Hexanon 40mm on my recent trip to Belgium.  I also bought a Hexanon 135mm/3.2 but have not used it much.  (Also putting aside the fact that both the 15mm and 21mm would add up to more money than a new Nikkor 14-30S).

And my apologies, as this is not a strictly Leica question, just that the Elmarit-M 21mm is rather tempting.

[ChicagoMatthew]

It really depends on how you shoot... but I would bring the 21mm. You'll be able to use it indoors, and you can still get off some street work with it... shooting in crowds and things like that... a 15mm would be more of a one trick pony IMO. I have the 21mm super-elmar 3.4, its amazing.. the sharpest lens I have ever used and nearly zero distortion.. but its not that fast. 

I will also add I personally, I don't like changing lenses a lot, so I would carry an M with a 50mm and another with a 21mm. Or if I am only caring one, I have a 35mm. 

[mmradman]

So, what camera you wish to travel with, Z7 or M10?

If it’s Z7 and you wish wide, why not latest 14-30mm f4 zoom, it will cost you like one cheaper second hand M lens, it is even reasonably compact.  If you wish to cover wide range with single M lens the Wide Tri-Elmar aka WATE, covering 16-21mm f4 is the one, it works OK on Z7 but it cost serious money compared to others you mention.

[nightstreet]

41 minutes ago, ChicagoMatthew said:

It really depends on how you shoot... but I would bring the 21mm. You'll be able to use it indoors, and you can still get off some street work with it... shooting in crowds and things like that... a 15mm would be more of a one trick pony IMO. I have the 21mm super-elmar 3.4, its amazing.. the sharpest lens I have ever used and nearly zero distortion.. but its not that fast. 

I will also add I personally, I don't like changing lenses a lot, so I would carry an M with a 50mm and another with a 21mm. Or if I am only caring one, I have a 35mm. 

Thanks, I was leaning towards getting just the CV 15mm, now I'll think about just getting the Leica 21mm.  I understand the SEM is the best of the 21mm, but it costs 2.5 times the elmarit-m.  I don't change lens either, I bring 2 or 3 but would shoot with one lens all day.  I think I'll be OK wandering around Kyoto at night with a 21mm.  

[derleicaman]

Here's an article I wrote for the LHSA Viewfinder on the WATE. Having owned the first two versions of the 21 Elmarit, pre-ASPH and ASPH, I would recommend to the ASPH over the non-ASPH lens. The SEM is far superior to either one. I sold the non-ASPH years ago and about two years ago, acquired a nice copy of the ASPH. However, when the WATE came along at a great price I sold it and do not regret it. I still have a CV 21/4 that is surprisingly good and will do in a pinch if I need a dedicated 21.

Here's the article:

https://lhsa.org/2019/06/the-wate-wide-angle-tri-elmar-the-ideal-travel-lens

[nightstreet]

45 minutes ago, derleicaman said:

Here's an article I wrote for the LHSA Viewfinder on the WATE. Having owned the first two versions of the 21 Elmarit, pre-ASPH and ASPH, I would recommend to the ASPH over the non-ASPH lens. The SEM is far superior to either one. I sold the non-ASPH years ago and about two years ago, acquired a nice copy of the ASPH. However, when the WATE came along at a great price I sold it and do not regret it. I still have a CV 21/4 that is surprisingly good and will do in a pinch if I need a dedicated 21.

Here's the article:

https://lhsa.org/2019/06/the-wate-wide-angle-tri-elmar-the-ideal-travel-lens

Thanks for the notes, interesting thought about the CV 21/4.  I was reading up on that lens when thought the new 21/3.5 may be a good buy, but at $800 it's only a bit less money than the elmarit-M, that's as far as I got.  I hadn't considered the SEM or the WATE due to the relatively much higher prices. Now I'm reconsidering the CV 21/3.5...hmm.

Edited August 20, 2019 by nightstreet

[OR120]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, nightstreet said:

Thanks for the notes, interesting thought about the CV 21/4.  I was reading up on that lens when thought the new 21/3.5 may be a good buy, but at $800 it's only a bit less money than the elmarit-M, that's as far as I got.  I hadn't considered the SEM or the WATE due to the relatively much higher prices. Now I'm reconsidering the CV 21/3.5...hmm.

Have traveled quite a bit over the last 30 years mostly for work.  Not sure if I read through all the above comments but if you only have one camera body -- you might do best with a zoom. Maybe a 21mm - 50mm zoom range. If you had two bodies I would get a 21mm on one and either a 35 or 50 on the other body. My point being - if you only have one body and your searching through your bag looking for lenses you are missing the moment. Japan has been my #1 destination for many years. I'm with ChicagoMatthew - the 15mm is a one trick pony. 

No matter what you take you will have a wonderful time. If you just have one body - take just one lens and don't miss moments. Have fun don't worry about a bag full of gear.

 

1 hour ago, nightstreet said:

Thanks for the notes, interesting thought about the CV 21/4.  I was reading up on that lens when thought the new 21/3.5 may be a good buy, but at $800 it's only a bit less money than the elmarit-M, that's as far as I got.  I hadn't considered the SEM or the WATE due to the relatively much higher prices. Now I'm reconsidering the CV 21/3.5...hmm.

 

[Mark T]

If you are indecisive now about what to take and use, it will be worse when travelling. So I say no. Take one and get creative with it. Good luck.

[nightstreet]

Thanks all for your ideas. Will read up a bit more to see which 21mm to get.

[Photon42]

10 hours ago, mmradman said:

So, what camera you wish to travel with, Z7 or M10?

If it’s Z7 and you wish wide, why not latest 14-30mm f4 zoom, it will cost you like one cheaper second hand M lens, it is even reasonably compact.  If you wish to cover wide range with single M lens the Wide Tri-Elmar aka WATE, covering 16-21mm f4 is the one, it works OK on Z7 but it cost serious money compared to others you mention.

Good advice.

[spydrxx]

I had a 15 several years ago and found that I just didn't use it very often, although it was a good lens. I use my CV 21 much more, and would suggest that it will probably be more useful than a 15 for you in your travels.