Leica 21mm Elmarit 2.8 - - or others?

[cesc]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I would like to know your thoughts about this subject. I am shooting mostly 35mm at home, and street. BUT, I am considering adding more dramatic perspective to my shots, so a wide angle lens to add this extra action while shooting my kids playing at home, etc. So because I will use it indoors too mostly, I found the elmarit 21mm 2.8 second hand. But I don't know anything about it. Would it be a good choice for a second (or primary) lens for a wide angle lens with my summicron asph v1 35mm ?

 

Thanks for your comments!

Edited April 1, 2022 by cesc

[wda]

It could be, but I find it both remarkable and challenging. It calls for some thought to use it effectively,  but will satisfy from the outset. 

[a.noctilux]

Hello Cesc,

In my view, even if I use a lot 21mm, using it without experiences would lead to unpleasing results.

Perspective "control" is something to learn, so why not.

21mm can give more room but also more emptyness if not use with care.

In your situation, I'd look for sometimes (months or years), for your kid "portraits", a more reasonable lens in 28mm or 24mm.

21mm for kid portraits may not be pleasing experiences.

 

Only you can experience and decide if it's for you or not.

Not everybody can perform J-L Sieff 21mm mastering ( some pics are not with 21mm ! ).

...

See here for more

21mm "perspectives"

[Luke_Miller]

I have both the 21 and 24 Elmarit-M lenses. They are excellent on both my digital M and SL bodies. 

[lct]

Film or digital? Elmarit pre-asph or asph? On which camera? Can make a big difference... or not.

[Ronazle]

Many will wince at this reply but I find the 21mm on full frame too extreme for most street shots and seldom use it or wider lenses (i.e., 18 or 15 mm) except for an effect or when I can't get back far enough.  I try to use them level if possible and waste the bottom of the frame.  28mm is the widest I am comfortable (result wise) with on most street shooting. This is a general reply sort of ignoring the many variables,  regards, ron

 

[cesc]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

21mm I would use it more as a action "point and shoot" scenes with this persp from their point of view. I am a bit concerned that moving from 35 to a 28mm is not going to be a big change. Thanks again for all your comments

[cesc]

1 hour ago, lct said:

Film or digital? Elmarit pre-asph or asph? On which camera? Can make a big difference... or not.

Leica MP, just film, and pre-asph probably...

[cesc]

3 hours ago, a.noctilux said:

Hello Cesc,

In my view, even if I use a lot 21mm, using it without experiences would lead to unpleasing results.

Perspective "control" is something to learn, so why not.

21mm can give more room but also more emptyness if not use with care.

In your situation, I'd look for sometimes (months or years), for your kid "portraits", a more reasonable lens in 28mm or 24mm.

21mm for kid portraits may not be pleasing experiences.

 

Only you can experience and decide if it's for you or not.

Not everybody can perform J-L Sieff 21mm mastering ( some pics are not with 21mm ! ).

...

See here for more

21mm "perspectives"

Jeanloup Sieff! I discovered his work long time ago. I didn't thought about the wide angle shots" that's true!

[ejg1890]

Due to its angle of view a 21mm and wider would be considered more for landscape and architecture, I sure wouldn’t consider it as an action point & shoot. Because of the its viewing angle objects in the scene appear smaller and further away. Also with these wider angle lenses there is a higher level of distortion that can be extreme which lead to very unflattering portraits as heads/faces could be heavily distorted if not careful. Of course “benefits” of these wide angles are its depth of fields at more often aperture’s and slower shutter speeds for indoors use. I’m not sure you can do 1/20 second with a 50mm lens without. I have a 21mm but don’t use it for “people” or street. For what your describing I would do 28mm, or 24mm at the widest.  

My thoughts anyways.

[lct]

33 minutes ago, cesc said:

Leica MP, just film, and pre-asph probably...

You don't need an asph lens then but if you intend to use the lens on digital too i would envision Leica's 21/2.8 asph, 21/3.4 asph or WATE preferably. 

[RayD28]

I'm not 100% sure the author is right about an iPhone's focal length specifications but if you have an iPhone 11 you can get a sense of the difference in focal lengths it features.    

The iPhone 11 and 11 Pro have three cameras, each with the same 12-megapixel resolution Apple has offered for years. The main wide-angle camera has an f1.8 aperture and the equivalent focal length of 26mm (in 35mm-format film-era camera terms). The more telephoto lens has a 52mm-equivalent focal length and an f2.0 aperture -- significantly better at capturing light than last year's f2.4 lens. And the new ultrawide lens has a 13mm equivalent focal length (that means a 120-degree field of view) and an f2.4 aperture.

Here is the link.  https://www.cnet.com/tech/mobile/apples-iphone-11-camera-packs-wide-angle-photography-punch/

[cesc]

Also I have seen the biogon 25mm.. not Leica

[RexGig0]

There is discussion of 21mm lenses, in this thread, which is now active:

I have really liked using my Zeiss Biogon C 21mm f/4,5 ZM, on a Monochrom Type 246. It is not a “fast” lens, but is notable for very low distortion, perhaps the best, in this regard, among all 21mm lenses, for any system. Digital color images will show color shift, but this should not be a factor with film images, and is not a bother with monochrome digital.

[rinatus]

I actually use 21mm Elmarit for people shots. Not often, but I do. It‘s also very good for ‚moving targets‘ indoor as it‘s easy to focus. The only caveat ist that you need to be very close and be aware that there will be a lot of context in the background. The pictures can be very rewarding if done right. A less extreme alternative is 28mm. While it seems like a minor change from 35mm, you still get more context and it‘s better/easier to use for general people photography than 21mm.

[John Robinson]

This shot taken with the Elmarit-M 2.8/21 (pre-ASPH version) on a Leica M2 with Fuji Superia 400.  I find this an interesting lens:  disappointing on digital, superb on film (like so many lenses designed in the film era).  A fallen tree in the woods, showing how easily the roots are torn up in the soft chalk soil during a wind-storm.

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!

[Ernstk]

I'm intrigued by some of the replies on this thread, especially those claiming that that 2.8/21 Elmarit M can be difficult or challenging to use.

I find the complete opposite to be the case. It's the lens that I use (pre asph) 80% of the time on my M8 and my M-P 240. It's a Mandler lens and it renders beautifully on both cameras.

I use it without an external viewfinder and it's remarkably easy to 'learn' its field of view.

To me, it's arguably the most natural complementary lens on a rangefinder. The field of view is close to perfect and equates almost to the human eye FOV.

I would have no hesitation in recommending it.

 

 M8, 2.8/21 Elmarit M, (Pre asph) OOC Jpeg

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!

Ernst

Edited June 4, 2022 by Ernstk

[John Robinson]

3 hours ago, Ernstk said:

I'm intrigued by some of the replies on this thread, especially those claiming that that 2.8/21 Elmarit M can be difficult or challenging to use.

I find the complete opposite to be the case. It's the lens that I use (pre asph) 80% of the time on my M8 and my M-P 240. It's a Mandler lens and it renders beautifully on both cameras.

I use it without an external viewfinder and it's remarkably easy to 'learn' its field of view.

I used it on an M8 (1.3 crop factor) without any problems but found on the M9 that it showed a lot of colour shifts around the edges.  Perhaps the M-P 240 has better correction for the 21? On the SL it is not bad (especially if used in APS-C mode for video) but an R-series 21 is much better.

I have been very impressed with its performance on film.

I certainly agree it is easy to frame without an external viewfinder.  With zone-focusing it is quite easy to get framing without even looking through the viewfinder.

[Ernstk]

21 hours ago, John Robinson said:

I used it on an M8 (1.3 crop factor) without any problems but found on the M9 that it showed a lot of colour shifts around the edges.  Perhaps the M-P 240 has better correction for the 21? 

Virtually all of my work is B&W so I've never really noticed the colour shifts on the M-P

Ernst

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M