TimF Posted August 22, 2007 Share #1 Posted August 22, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) UK based readers might like to know that Jonathan Eastland takes a look at this new optic in the issue of BJP dated 22/8/07. For everyone else, the contents of the new mag should appear on the website in a day or so. Also included are features on Bill Jay and Alec Soth's "Fashion Magazine" project, so a good read. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 22, 2007 Posted August 22, 2007 Hi TimF, Take a look here New Zeiss 18mm f/4 Distagon ZM. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wattsy Posted August 22, 2007 Share #2 Posted August 22, 2007 Jonathan Eastland is a very experienced M user and usually a decent read but his 'review' of the M8 in a recent BJP wasn't one of his most convincing (and the images used to illustrate it were dreadful). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted August 29, 2007 Share #3 Posted August 29, 2007 Despite his experience, Eastland is prone to making the odd idiotic comment and in this latest review he doesn't disappoint. Commenting on the 1.3x crop factor of the M8 he describes the 24mm framelines as a perfect match for the new Zeiss 18mm lens (and a close fit for the RD-1 28mm framelines). That said, the lens looks very promising. Priced at around 700 quid it offers an attractive alternative to the ludicrously priced 16-18-21 Leica lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted August 29, 2007 Share #4 Posted August 29, 2007 I agree, an idiotic comment. I wonder what he thinks the M8 does with a 24mm lens? Agree with your comment, the WATE is looking seriously overpriced by comparison. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philippe D. Posted August 29, 2007 Share #5 Posted August 29, 2007 For everyone else, the contents of the new mag should appear on the website in a day or so.Thank You for the hint Tim, but as i try to read about this 18mm i got this: "You have clicked on a restricted link". Anyway, i guess i will buy this lens any how, doesn't matter what they wrote about it. It is surely a perfect 24mm on the M8. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted August 29, 2007 Share #6 Posted August 29, 2007 For those interested in a second opinion, I'll review the Zeiss 18/4 later this year. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rsh Posted August 29, 2007 Share #7 Posted August 29, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) I agree that the new current price of the 16-18-21 Tri Elmar is off the charts at $5,400.00 incl the viewfinder, but it is made in Germany where the labor is more costly than Japan and China. Also, It is a complex lens design from a mechanical standpoint, and it most probably uses exotic glass, which is also more costly. That and the weakness in the dollar have driven up the price. I know that the Zeiss 18 will be a terrific lens, but if I wanted that focal length, I would hold out for the Tri Elmar because it is three focal lengths in one lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted August 29, 2007 Share #8 Posted August 29, 2007 Also, It is a complex lens design from a mechanical standpoint Is it? Unlike the 28-35-50 Tri-Elmar, the WATE is a 'simple' 16-21 zoom lens with three focal length detents. You may be right about the glass cost - I have no idea if the WATE uses exotic glass or not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xjr Posted August 29, 2007 Share #9 Posted August 29, 2007 "That said, the lens looks very promising. Priced at around 700 quid it offers an attractive alternative to the ludicrously priced 16-18-21 Leica lens. Really ? £680 plus vat is nearly £800-00 for ONE lens plus the viewfinder presumably? total not less than £900-00. The 16-18-21 gives you 3 super wide angles plus the viewfinder for £2480-00 i.e. 826-00 for each focal length...so what is in fact ludicrous? Do not forget that the 16-18-21 is in fact a true zoom i.e. 16,17,18,19,20,21!! Only the viewfinder sets the limitation 16-18-21. It is not an attractive alternative...in fact its an expensive alternative to my reckoning. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted August 30, 2007 Share #10 Posted August 30, 2007 Really ? £680 plus vat is nearly £800-00 for ONE lens plus the viewfinder presumably? total not less than £900-00. The 16-18-21 gives you 3 super wide angles plus the viewfinder for £2480-00 i.e. 826-00 for each focal length...so what is in fact ludicrous? Do not forget that the 16-18-21 is in fact a true zoom i.e. 16,17,18,19,20,21!! Only the viewfinder sets the limitation 16-18-21. It is not an attractive alternative...in fact its an expensive alternative to my reckoning. Angelos, your analysis makes the pretty big assumption that anyone in the market for a superwide lens will want to own three lenses in a pretty narrow superwide range. You also assume that it is reasonable to calculate the value of a zoom lens based on the number of potential prime lenses it replaces. The reality is that for anyone in the market for a superwide lens (which becomes a more conventional wide lens on the M8), there are a number of options. Leica's offering now costs £3200 (including the viewfinder) and comes with some 'extra' focal lengths whether you want those or not. Zeiss has the new lens for £800 (sans finder). CV have the 15mm Heliar for the price of a bag of chips. Few mind paying through the nose for a best-in-class Summilux or Summicron (or for a mechanical or optical marvel like the 28-35-50 Tri-Elmar) but let's face it, the WATE is just a slow narrow range zoom lens with three focal length detents. Worth £3200? Don't make me laugh. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted August 30, 2007 Share #11 Posted August 30, 2007 Ian, IMO not that narrow, 21,24,28 FOV give quit a different look. Also 16mm is quit a bit wider (and usually more expensive) than 18mm, look at the price of the Zeiss 15mm, which is one f-stop faster, however not rangefinder coupled. I recently received my wate (as teh 30% discount lens) and have to say that I like it quit a bit. The advantages I see: -compared to cv 15 (which is a great lens IMO): wate is f4.0, fully usable at f4.0, also not to worry about cyan cast and vignetting, because wate is coded -compared to Zeiss 15mm: price, size, rangefinder coupling (ok, f2.8 is nice), coding -3 lenses in one, less weight, less space, less lens changing Now I see that the 18mm Zeiss or the 15mmCV could be more interesting for anybody who wants only one focal length in this range. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xjr Posted August 30, 2007 Share #12 Posted August 30, 2007 Few mind paying through the nose for a best-in-class Summilux or Summicron (or for a mechanical or optical marvel like the 28-35-50 Tri-Elmar) but let's face it, the WATE is just a slow narrow range zoom lens with three focal length detents. Worth £3200? Don't make me laugh. I do not understand the £3200 price since Ffordes are asking 2480 or so. I have used the 18mm focal length extensively and am a strong advocate of this focal length [18mm f2.8 Nikkor] . In fact I love wide angle photography and the so-called WATE wnen announced drew my attention and emptied my pocket....though I had to wait 3 months or so. One has to see the results to begin to understand this superb optical performance.The 15mm CV comes nowhere near this [ and I have used it]. Regarding the Zeiss 18mm f4 is probably a fine optic but if I can have 16,17,18,19,20 and 21 in one lense then indeed I am laughing as well. By the way very soon I believe that Leica will introduce 18,21,28 and perhaps 24 in the new Summarit-M class. They have no choice...with their ''exotic'' optics fading into "by order only" class. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicashot Posted August 31, 2007 Share #13 Posted August 31, 2007 Few mind paying through the nose for a best-in-class Summilux or Summicron (or for a mechanical or optical marvel like the 28-35-50 Tri-Elmar) but let's face it, the WATE is just a slow narrow range zoom lens with three focal length detents. Worth £3200? Don't make me laugh. I do not understand the £3200 price since Ffordes are asking 2480 or so. I have used the 18mm focal length extensively and am a strong advocate of this focal length [18mm f2.8 Nikkor] . In fact I love wide angle photography and the so-called WATE wnen announced drew my attention and emptied my pocket....though I had to wait 3 months or so. One has to see the results to begin to understand this superb optical performance.The 15mm CV comes nowhere near this [ and I have used it]. Regarding the Zeiss 18mm f4 is probably a fine optic but if I can have 16,17,18,19,20 and 21 in one lense then indeed I am laughing as well. By the way very soon I believe that Leica will introduce 18,21,28 and perhaps 24 in the new Summarit-M class. They have no choice...with their ''exotic'' optics fading into "by order only" class. How big is this lens on camera? Is it much bigger than the 21mm or 24mm Leica lenses? Are you able to post images please? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Philippe D. Posted August 31, 2007 Share #14 Posted August 31, 2007 How big is this lens on camera? Is it much bigger than the 21mm or 24mm Leica lenses? Are you able to post images please? It's all here: Leica Camera AG - Photography - Lenses and here about the Carl Zeiss: Distagon T* 4/18 ZM Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicashot Posted August 31, 2007 Share #15 Posted August 31, 2007 It's all here: Leica Camera AG - Photography - Lenses and here about the Carl Zeiss: Distagon T* 4/18 ZM thanks, but doesn't answer my questions..... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xjr Posted September 1, 2007 Share #16 Posted September 1, 2007 How big is this lens on camera? Is it much bigger than the 21mm or 24mm Leica lenses? Are you able to post images please? On the camera similar to a 50mm ASPH but feels lighter. As I do not have a scanner images not possible. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leicashot Posted September 2, 2007 Share #17 Posted September 2, 2007 How big is this lens on camera? Is it much bigger than the 21mm or 24mm Leica lenses? Are you able to post images please? On the camera similar to a 50mm ASPH but feels lighter. As I do not have a scanner images not possible. thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
atufte Posted October 25, 2007 Share #18 Posted October 25, 2007 Anyone know if the fact that the 18 ZM brings up the wrong framelines also interact with the RF/focus, mine is focusing fine, but the RF seem to "hang" or not be right, but with a measuring band i tested it from it's shortest 0.5m to 5m and infinity, and it seems spot on... would it help when i get the 28/90 mount...? which is off to JM for milling. Thanks in advance... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.