SVE 16-35 or Summilux M 21 1.4 ?

[darylgo]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, seekwul said:

@darylgosorry... who is Josh ? 

Thanks Jeff and helged for your help. 

@seekwul    I am assuming the store you're referencing is Leica Store Miami, Josh is very helpful and he is an encyclopedic source of information on Leica.  

[Advertisement]

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

[PBart]

I have the 16-35 for my SL2s and love it. Almost as good as a prime but you get the flexibility of zooming through other focal lengths. Of course primes will have a faster aperture and more compact but personally it's not a factor with that wide of coverage. I shoot interior design professionally and it covers the critical range I need. I also don't shoot wide open with it so that is something to think about when pixel peeping. I shoot around F/11 for interior work. However, I would prefer a prime if Leica came out with a 24mm and 20mm tilt shift lens. Thought to mention in case Leica is listening. 

[Photoworks]

1 hour ago, PBart said:

I have the 16-35 for my SL2s and love it. Almost as good as a prime but you get the flexibility of zooming through other focal lengths. Of course primes will have a faster aperture and more compact but personally it's not a factor with that wide of coverage. I shoot interior design professionally and it covers the critical range I need. I also don't shoot wide open with it so that is something to think about when pixel peeping. I shoot around F/11 for interior work. However, I would prefer a prime if Leica came out with a 24mm and 20mm tilt shift lens. Thought to mention in case Leica is listening. 

I think it is going to be a long time before you see a shift lens from Leica. The 28mm on R was just a rebranded lens.

The good news is that the sensor is better then others, and the canon lenses work better on the Leica then the sony or canon

[PBart]

21 hours ago, Photoworks said:

I think it is going to be a long time before you see a shift lens from Leica. The 28mm on R was just a rebranded lens.

The good news is that the sensor is better then others, and the canon lenses work better on the Leica then the sony or canon

Yeh, the Leica rep mentioned that many people requested shift lenses but it's not priority. Long time down the road if anything at all. I am interested in the Canon 24mm ts. Probably will get one soon. The 28mm on the R was a thought but not my favorite focal length. I like 24mm.

 

[aksclix]

29 minutes ago, PBart said:

Yeh, the Leica rep mentioned that many people requested shift lenses but it's not priority. Long time down the road if anything at all. I am interested in the Canon 24mm ts. Probably will get one soon. The 28mm on the R was a thought but not my favorite focal length. I like 24mm.

 

How about considering this? 😃
https://www.adorama.com/ve1545l.html

[Photoworks]

1 hour ago, PBart said:

Yeh, the Leica rep mentioned that many people requested shift lenses but it's not priority. Long time down the road if anything at all. I am interested in the Canon 24mm ts. Probably will get one soon. The 28mm on the R was a thought but not my favorite focal length. I like 24mm.

 

I find the Canon 24 ts-e II a very good lens, test it out when you get it, I have compared 4 and they all had variation in fringing from blue to yellow .

I also have the 17 and 15, but most to the time they are to wide angle effect. I started to take 4 shots stiched from the 24mm  on a rotating bracket and you get the same as the about 20 without the extreme distortion.

[aksclix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 4/12/2021 at 5:22 PM, Priaptor said:

Agree as I am interested in this lens as well. 

I found an article on the tri elmar lens on the SL2.. it's not encouraging.. seems like there is some softness upon zooming in.. THAT is a deal breaker for me.. I am hunting SHARP images and only that with my SL2..  

https://hintingimage.com/wate-sl2

 

I am also interested in seeing how the Zeiss 15mm f2.8 performs on the SL2.. that's another super wide option.. 

Edited April 15, 2021 by aksclix

[beewee]

21 minutes ago, aksclix said:

I found an article on the tri elmar lens on the SL2.. it's not encouraging.. seems like there is some softness upon zooming in.. THAT is a deal breaker for me.. I am hunting SHARP images and only that with my SL2..  

https://hintingimage.com/wate-sl2

 

I am also interested in seeing how the Zeiss 15mm f2.8 performs on the SL2.. that's another super wide option.. 

Your best bet is probably the Sigma 14-24mm DG DN. It’s amazingly sharp across the entire range. If you assume the 30 lp/mm MTF curve for the Leica 16-35 VE is around halfway between the 20 lp/mm and 40 lp/mm on the published MTFs by Leica, the Sigma 14-24 is noticeably better than the Leica 16-35.

[aksclix]

2 minutes ago, beewee said:

Your best bet is probably the Sigma 14-24mm DG DN. It’s amazingly sharp across the entire range. If you assume the 30 lp/mm MTF curve for the Leica 16-35 VE is around halfway between the 20 lp/mm and 40 lp/mm on the published MTFs by Leica, the Sigma 14-24 is noticeably better than the Leica 16-35.

I still have the Canon 11-24 which I really like and I don't know if the Sigma is better than that, optically.. its definitely smaller and lighter though... both can't take filters in front.. 
What filters do you use with the sigma 14-24? 

I've always wanted the 16-35 but I don't think I need it.. 16 isn't too wide for me.. I know I won't need it 90% of the time.. it's the 10% I am worried about..

I have the 23mm in GFX for landscapes anyway along with the Laowa 17mm on the way now.. I am itching for the 16-35 but I really shouldn't get one.. 

 

[beewee]

Currently, I don’t use any filters with the 14-24. I rarely ever use any filters on any of my lenses. I did look into filters for the Sigma 14-24 a while back and there are a couple companies that make drop-in filters for the 14-24 but rear- mounted filters tend to degrade image quality much more noticeably than front mounted filters.

There’s a good comparison of drop in filters for the Sigma 14-24 here: https://wild-places.com/2020/01/06/rear-filters-for-sigma-2-8-14-24mm-dg-dn/

I do like the 16-35 but I find it hard to justify the price given is performance. Corner sharpness is decent but for its price, I would expect it to outperform the Sigma. I’m leaning towards using the Sigma for the 14-21 range and probably getting one or both 24/28 SL primes as some point. 24mm is my preferred focal length so I’d be more keen to get the best quality possible for 24mm.

The only reason for me to purchase a 16-35 zoom is for situations where I really do not want to change lenses. Like shooting on a boat or in a desert.

[profus]

On 4/12/2021 at 11:36 PM, beewee said:

You should also take a serious look at the Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN (don’t confuse it with the older DG HSM version). The DG DN is a fantastic lens and amazing bang for the buck. It’s IQ is comparable to the 16-35, if not slightly better on the wider end between 16-21mm. It will also perform better on the corners on the SL2 as compared to all the wide angle M primes when used on the SL2.

Can only confirm. Sigma 14-24mm f/2.8 DG DN is a great lens, I am very happy with it!

[seekwul]

Quick short answer - spoke to Josh, went with the 16-35. It's on the body now, going to take it out for a walk tomorrow.

[PBart]

On 4/14/2021 at 3:43 PM, aksclix said:

How about considering this? 😃
https://www.adorama.com/ve1545l.html

15mm is super wide but interesting option for some applications. For real estate photographers it's good but my interior designer clients like the feel of 24mm since it's more selective with composition and shows the details better. 

[Tailwagger]

Personally, I've found the SEM21 unacceptably soft in the corners on the SL2. OTOH, the WATE seems to perform quite a bit better.  You might consider, as I do, that it is the best compromise for use on both the M and SL2 assuming speed is not an issue.

Edited April 23, 2021 by Tailwagger

[Tailwagger]

3 hours ago, Priaptor said:

Decided on the 21 mm SEM with Leica adapter. Love the fit. Just got it  and will go out and shoot some test shots. 

You likely already realize this, but be sure to test at or near infinity, not nearby brick walls and such. 

[aksclix]

4 hours ago, Priaptor said:

Thanks.

Yes I am doing some tests at parfocal at F8 as well as invoking some "closeup" just to test focus peaking the latter I will rarely use. My real use for this lens is strictly landscape. I am hoping to do the China Wall in MT weather permitting and decided I really want a 21 and SL2 and as lightweight as possible. 21 has always been my favorite focal length for landscape and looking through the options just decided to pull the trigger. Who knows, maybe I will go back or add an M10 or M11 in the future.

As I said, few things in photography are as thrilling as holding M lenses. 

 

Did you consider the R 21-35 as well? Do you know (or anyone here) if that is a good performer on SL system?

[AZach]

The Vario-Elmar-R 21-35 balances well with SL, easy to focus, practical and useful FL range for travel, walk-around  etc. A solid performer.

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!

 

[trickness]

On 4/25/2021 at 1:44 PM, Priaptor said:

I went around in circles on this. I listened to everyone on these threads, had my finger ready to push the trigger on more lenses than I care to admit to in the B&H and/or Adorama basket and for my purposes I finally said to myself, yes, the SL16-35 would be the lens of choice in wide angle for the SL2, the WATE gives more options in the M lens wide angle "zoom" type lens, your R21-35 likewise a legitimate consideration as were some of the Sigma, especially their 24mm.

I finally just took a step back and said, I shoot at 21 for most of what I looking for, need a lightweight alternative to all the choices I listed and am not concerned about speed for my application and why I went with the 21 SEM. With adapter most other M variants start pushing over 550+ grams, the 21-35 likely over 600 (at which point I would likely just go with the SL16-35 so my rationalization for the SEM was as above. 

I never really considered the R21-35 specific to your question. I really looked at it as I would a computer. Specific needs, size and weight and not necessarily all the bells and whistles. 

I've shot some photos with the SEM on my SL that blew me away - so crisp and 3-D, and lightweight. Great choice! Sadly sold mine but perhaps will replace with the 21 SL when that finally ships.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[caissa]

It’s a different idea, but for 21 I always liked the Contax Distagon 2.8/21 very much. But it is not small. For landscape a wonderful lens.

So for small the WATE is great (sounds crazy). Can also be used with filters. But the SL 16-35 is now the best I know (and not too big, it is constant length). No flaring (which was a problem with the Contax).

Edited May 15, 2021 by caissa

[MrFriendly]

Is it true that Leica SVE 16-35mm is actually designed by Konica Minolta?  https://www.diyphotography.net/patent-shows-the-5500-leica-sl-16-35mm-was-actually-designed-by-konica-minolta/