gwelland Posted August 13, 2007 Share #21 Posted August 13, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Only in Leicaland would a 16-21 F4 zoom cost $5k. Personally, if I hadn't picked mine up at the 'before' pricing with viewfinder, it would take a LOT of convincing for me to pay $5k for it vs. sticking with a combination of CV or Zeiss wide primes. With the WATE at $5k, the faster Zeiss 21/2.8 & 15/2.8 combo seems positively affordable. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 13, 2007 Posted August 13, 2007 Hi gwelland, Take a look here Primes or WATE?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wparsonsgisnet Posted August 13, 2007 Share #22 Posted August 13, 2007 John, It is my *firm* opinion that the cost of Leica lenses is not a consideration. They retain their value (in current dollars) throughout their lives (some fluctuations may occur). The images these lenses produce are so stunning as to render most other lenses incidental. Of course if you're a Canon SLR devotee, you'll have a different viewpoint. Also, if you plan to take shots that need a long lens, go someplace else. I recently bot the CV15. It's ok -- but the images from it disappoint for one who is used to using better lenses. My rationale was that I wanted a fast, wide, prime lens, and I'm saving my ammunition for such a lens. I am prepared to buy a WATE, used, if one turns up. When I was thinking about this decision, I saw lots of nice pix on this forum from the CV15. When the images from the WATE appeared, I was not at all surprised to see them exhibiting a quality on a different level. I wish I had the WATE. I'm just waiting (sorry, it's hard not to pun with the acronym for this lens) to see what's coming from Leica. They certainly know they need something at the wide end. I have the *miraculous* 24mm f2.8-A lens. If I need something a little wider, I'm using the CV15 for the time being. Go for the WATE! Don't short yourself when the cost is not really relevant. G'luck, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted August 13, 2007 Share #23 Posted August 13, 2007 Stop the CV15 down to f/5.6 or f/8 and the images are very good. I agree that I prefer the images from the WATE, but I could only justify paying 10x more for a lens with 10% extra IQ because I also wanted the 18mm and 21mm focal lengths. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wparsonsgisnet Posted August 13, 2007 Share #24 Posted August 13, 2007 Carsten, I've noticed that it has to be stopped down. That definitely improves it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
chris_tribble Posted August 13, 2007 Share #25 Posted August 13, 2007 My 2 cents would be get the 28 - it's f2. This matters. I use it ALL the time. It's the default walk about. On the M6/M7 a 35 cron was my default. On the M8 the FOV of the 28 does all the things I want. If you want to go wider get the CV 15 + Milich adapter + Milich filter holder. Costs peanuts relatively and it's such a good little lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassimage Posted August 13, 2007 Author Share #26 Posted August 13, 2007 Thanks Guy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
teehas53 Posted August 13, 2007 Share #27 Posted August 13, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) It is my *firm* opinion that the cost of Leica lenses is not a consideration. They retain their value (in current dollars) throughout their lives... the cost is not really relevant. Due respect Bill (and point taken,) but the cost is extremely relevant when we're talking $4 - 5,000. for a lens. If one plans to shoot (as opposed to collecting) cost is always an important consideration. One has to do a LOT of wide angle work to amortize that kind of investment in these (for most people) rarely-used focal lengths. I see only a small difference between images shot with the CV15 and the WATE. It's all at f/4 - 5.6, as one would expect. By f8 or so, the CV is remarkably good. And the WATE is frankly not what I'd hoped it would be overall - not bad mind you, but not stunning (as it should be for the money!) At 21mm, the Zeiss kills it... T Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted August 14, 2007 Share #28 Posted August 14, 2007 Here John i shot this for you today in Kansas on a gig. The WATE and the 28 cron both at F 8 or so. BTW the WATE holds up very well against the cron and sorry Tom i had the Zeiss 21 and i would not use the word kills it . It's a touch sharper as well as the Leica 21mm is but the WATE is extremely good and the distortion is very well controlled and the difference is extremely small. I shot the WATE here at 16mm and cropped a touch, there was a ladder on the right i had to crop out. Shot from a scissor lift about 25 ft up, handheld 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/30924-primes-or-wate/?do=findComment&comment=329095'>More sharing options...
carstenw Posted August 14, 2007 Share #29 Posted August 14, 2007 Guy, what do you do in Arizona if a business wants a shot of their new building, with clouds in it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted August 14, 2007 Share #30 Posted August 14, 2007 Guy, what and where is that palace? Is it in Arizona? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted August 14, 2007 Share #31 Posted August 14, 2007 LOL i would have to steal some clouds from another shot. LOL We do get clouds though. This building is in Wichita Kansas and is a Aerospace company Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
teehas53 Posted August 14, 2007 Share #32 Posted August 14, 2007 ... Tom i had the Zeiss 21 and i would not use the word kills it... OK, I'll admit that was too strong a statement (guess I was feeling a bit cranky.) The WATE's performance is actually rather amazing if you think of it as a superwide zoom (which it essentially is.) One big advantage is it is only one lens taking up space in the bag, but covering three focal lengths. But I still maintain that any performance advantage it has is noticeably narrower than some other lenses one might compare in different focal lengths. It's too bad the price is headed from the stratosphere into low orbit. I guess what I meant to say is that fact alone definitely kills any bang-for-the-buck consideration people might have looked to attach to it. T Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted August 14, 2007 Share #33 Posted August 14, 2007 It's too bad the price is headed from the stratosphere into low orbit. For some the new price is more like escape velocity. I wonder if Leica has just killed another lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.