Elmar 18mm VS Tri Elmar 16-18-21

[malfaris]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi

We all know primes have advantage in terms of details/ clarity, and zoom are more practical . having said that I noticed two things about the Tri Elmar seeing many samples mostly here, most ppl using them at 16mm , second it seem it suffers from distortion and lake of sharpness, like I wish the images have little more sharpness /details.

I saw some samples of Elmar 18mm and I didn't noticed the distortion ,so it seems well corrected? however I saw very little images it seems not very popular which maybe explain why it got discontinued .

I also loved the Elmar 21mm samples but I have a coming project that will need wider angle.

what do you think, by the way I almost pulled the trigger on a used Tri-elmar but decided to wait little more

Edited August 26, 2021 by malfaris

[Advertisement]

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

[Gobert]

Be carefull with judging lenses on forum pictures. Forum pictures are low res.

Being a user of the tri-Elmar I cannot underline your view on lack of sharpness (besides the question how you define sharpness). Distortion? Yes a little. But it is a wide angle lens. Unless you need it for architecture, nobody will notice.

A couple of years ago I changed my perfect SEM 21 for the flexible WATE. I’ve never regretted this.

[malfaris]

thank you Gobert, glad you like your tri-elmar. yes my project will involve architecture besides the common use of wide angle. little distortion to be expected. but I wonder how it differ compared to the 18mm elmar.  my dealer doesn't have 18 elmar in stock however, he have tri-elmar I might pass by him to test it by myself . I saw an image of 18mm elmar almost no distortion I was impressed. and the details are amazing too.

[jaapv]

1 hour ago, Gobert said:

Forum pictures are low res.

Not THAT low-res. 4 MP and 5000 KB can hold a lot of data...

[Jean-Michel]

I have the Tri-Elmar. It is a very fine and useful lens. It does have some distortion with is irrelevant in most situations. Doing the best possible architectural work is probably best done with a technical camera with all movements. Using any fixed lens no matter how wide it is is fine, but will never give the results one can expect from a technical camera.

For the Tri-Elmar documentation, including distortion diagram, see https://us.leica-camera.com/Corposite/Service-Support/Support/Downloads?category=93719&subcategory=93748&type=&language=93871

[Guest]

Trouble with the 18mm SEM is you have to pay a fortune just to get a filter holder which mounts 77mm filters and that is if you can locate one!!! 

What utter nonsense !! 

For images at better resolution than the rubbish on here see if there is anything relevant on the fred miranda forum which has beautiful clear images.

[derleicaman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I used to own the ZM 18/4 Distagon, which was a great lens. In preparing to write on the 18 SEM for the LHSA Viewfinder, I shot both lenses on a trip to Boston some years ago. I found the lenses virtually identical in look and performance.

When the opportunity to pick up a WATE at a very reasonable price a few years ago, I sold the ZM 18 and my 21/2.8 ASPH, as they were now redundant. I do not regret that decision at all. I wrote up the WATE for the Viewfinder. Here's the liink:

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