SVE 16-35 or Summilux M 21 1.4 ?

[Priaptor]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

8 hours ago, AZach said:

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!

 

Thanks and why I picked it as my landscape choice. Where I am going I need something like this. 

[Priaptor]

13 hours ago, aksclix said:

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

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. 

[Advertisement]

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

[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.

[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/

 

[beewee]

19 minutes ago, MrFriendly said:

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/

 

The optical formula is designed by Konica-Minolta but there’s more to a lens design then the optical formula. Leica still needs to design the mechanical structure, motors, electronics, housing, and all the manufacturing processes that go into making a lens.

An analogy would be that the optical formula is like an ingredient list for a dish but there’s more to a recipe than the ingredient list. And even if you had the exact recipe from a Michelin star restaurant, it doesn’t guaranty that your dish will look and taste the same as what you will get from the restaurant.

Edited November 15, 2021 by beewee

[caissa]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Who cares ? Or rather why should anyone care ?

Probably all zooms are designed by other companies than Leica. Leica never had the skills to design/invent the latest and greatest zooms. There are specialists for that and it is wise to use this specialist knowledge instead of inventing something inferior on one’s own.

The quality of the lenses comes from the precision of tolerances in manufacturing. And as far as that the zooms are fine.

There are specialists, so there are different specialists for different lenses. So the zooms are designed by several different designers. (Panasonic, Konica, Sigma, ...). Leica is the “customer” who decides which priorities will be selected, so in this sense they are still Leica designed, with a “Leica look” and quality. But also with a Leica price tag.

Edited November 15, 2021 by caissa

[BernardC]

Side note: Konica-Minolta isn't the company that used to make Maxxum cameras and lenses. That retail division was sold to Sony a long time ago. They are part of a network of high-end Japanese optical sub-contractors which nobody has heard of, outside of the industry.

As caissa stated, there's nothing wrong with using specialists, as long as the finished product meets requirements. It's like hiring an architect when building a house.

I think that Leica designed the 70-180 APO, and 35-70/2.8R zooms. Other than those ultra-expensive showpieces, they seem to have cooperated with sub-contractors for their zooms. It's not a new thing, the first R zooms were made by Angenieux (who knew more about zooms than anyone else in the world at that time).

[Priaptor]

On 5/14/2021 at 4:02 PM, trickness said:

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.

I got tired of waiting but yes, if the 35mm SL APO is any indication of what the 21 "may" be I too am sold on it. 

 

[Andrew Gough]

I must say that I am also disappointed with the speed of lens releases with the SL series. This is supposed to be their professional series... The 21 & 24mm were to ship in 2020 according to their lens roadmap, and here we are at the end of 2021. I realize that covid has played an issue, but they should have released the 21mm instead of the 28mm. Remember they all use the same lens barrel design...

Anyway, I hope that early 2022 will see the release of the 24 or 21mm.

 

[beewee]

1 hour ago, Andrew Gough said:

I must say that I am also disappointed with the speed of lens releases with the SL series. This is supposed to be their professional series... The 21 & 24mm were to ship in 2020 according to their lens roadmap, and here we are at the end of 2021. I realize that covid has played an issue, but they should have released the 21mm instead of the 28mm. Remember they all use the same lens barrel design...

Anyway, I hope that early 2022 will see the release of the 24 or 21mm.

 

Just based on my observations of the internal lens design, the 75 and 90 share a similar optical design, same with the 35 and 50 so they got released fairly close to each other. The 28 shares more similarities with the 35 than it does with the 24. The 21 and 24 are similar but not quite as similar as the 35/50 and 75/90 so they may require more development effort. Also, I expect it’s easier to design and manufacture a cutting edge tele prime and standard prime then it is to design and manufacture a cutting edge wide and super-wide prime so Leica probably chose to start on the tele end first to flesh out their production processes before tackling the harder designs.

In terms of the 24 and 21 release dates, I suspect they will still be staggered by at least 6-12 months. In one of Peter Karbe’s presentation, he showed off the internals of the unreleased primes and it was clear that the internal mechanical design for the 24 was much more mature than the 21. The 21 lacked details on the optical lens mounting in his presentation whereas the 24 had most of it flushed out.

Given COVID, I suspect Leica’s production rate is a little lower due to supply chain issues, additional social distancing requirements in manufacturing, etc… To add to this, I expect the overwhelming demand of the 35 APO M probably means Leica is putting more manufacturing resources to supply as many 35 APO M lenses as they can push out and that detracts the capacity to prototype and produce SL lenses. With most Leica lenses, they tend to have the highest demand in the first 12 months after announcement so if they were to release new SL lenses too closely together, they will then bunch up production demand when they already have a production crunch from the 35 APO M side.

[Andrew Gough]

I have no doubt that all of your reasons are valid. But these lenses were originally on a road map with a 2018 release, then 2019 and so on. It's the end of 2021 going into 2022, and yes covid has been and issue, but it should be manageable buy now. Releasing the 28mm should have been delayed in favour of the 21mm. I support Leica as much as the next guy, and I am heavily invested in the SL system. But, I fear that I will be on my THIRD generation body before these lenses are released. Maybe a few less special editions and a little more bread and butter is required.

SL lens production needs to be ramped up to take care of demand. That said, the 35mm and 28mm are widely available now. Hopefully, the 21mm & 24mm should be forthcoming. Heck, even a road map would be nice.

Edited November 24, 2021 by Andrew Gough

[Jeffra]

For me it came down to:

• Autofocus vs manual
• Flexibility vs fixed lens
• Size/weight vs compact/lighter
• IQ not really an issue to me as both very good
• Own the 21 SEM currently

Decided to stay with 21 SEM for now. However, the autofocus and flexibility of the 21-35mm range is compelling.  

[fbonde]

On 4/17/2021 at 4:34 AM, seekwul said:

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.

Did you like it?

[seekwul]

20 hours ago, fbonde said:

Did you like it?

I do like it ! 

It's large and heavy, but I like the results. I am also more confident of the autofocus vs manual focus with my aging eyes.

[tom0511]

Am 25.4.2021 um 19:44 schrieb Priaptor:

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. 

Good choice. In my experience it is better than the wate at 21 mm and better than the 21/1.4 (if you dont need the speed) in regards of sharpness. And detail in the corners. The 16-35 is even better optically but it doesnt work on the M and its much bigger.

 

[JCR33]

Unless size and weight are your main concerns, I would definitely go for the 16-35 Vario.

Reasons

1. Made for SL
2. Autofocus
3. get 16-35 instead of 21 only

I got mine when it was first launched and it has been a pleasure to use, especially for architectural and landscape shots.

Some examples to share

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!

 

 

Edited January 3, 2022 by JCR33