Super angulon 21mm f4 vs Voigtlander 21mm f4

[poli]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi all, 

i am considering a 21mm for my m-a. I am looking at a nice super angulon f4 in good condition. On the other hand a new Voigtlander cv f4 seems a more sensible alternative  (cheaper and new). Curious wha your thoughts and experiences are. I am not planning to use this 21mm on a digital m, so not worrying about Italian flag problems. 

[derleicaman]

I have my dad’s original Super Angulon f4 he used with his M3’s back in late 50’s. Wonderful lens for back then, but not the best choice today. The rear lens elements protrude deeply into the body, so forget about metering. Dangerous with a digital M as you might damage the sensor. Plus after 60 years, hard to find one that isn’t fogged, etc.

I have the original CV 21/4 in LTM, and use it with a coded mount adapter. With the M9, it had some Italian flag issues, but no problems using it on the M10. You can probably find these new, but dirt cheap used. You don’t need to spend $$$ on the newer versions. I throw it in the bag when I travel, as it is so small you don’t know it’s there.

[Advertisement]

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

[Jul]

41 minutes ago, derleicaman said:

Dangerous with a digital M as you might damage the sensor

I was not aware of that. My super-Angulon does not seem to hurt my M9
even if it is sometimes set on the infinity lock between two shots.
With which digital M is it a problem?

Poli, if your other lenses are from the fifties or the sixties,
I'd definitely go for the Super-Angulon.  If they are "modern"
lenses, the Voigtlander will be a better fit.

[pippy]

2 hours ago, derleicaman said:

...Dangerous with a digital M as you might damage the sensor...

With the greatest possible respect, Bill, that's absolute nonsense.

I don't know why on Earth you think that might be the case but it's simply not true. Having used the 21 f4 on a variety of digi-M cameras over the years (M8.2 / M9 / M9-P / M Monochrom / M-D Typ-262) the protrusion of the rear element structure of such a non-retro-focus lens design has never been an issue nor have I ever read of a verified report from anyone encountering such a situation. This 'problem' seems to be an Internet Myth perpetuated by people who have never, themselves, used the lens in question on such a camera body.

TTL metering, as you quite rightly say, is completely out of the question (details as to why are oft-posted on the www) but the rear-most element of the S-A does NOT touch the shutter-blades let alone touch the sensor.

The main drawback with using the 21mm f4 S-A on a digital body (pre M11 which seems to cope far better in this regard) is that the micro-lenses on the cover glass in front of the sensor are not designed to cope with light hitting them at such an acute angle which leads to pronounced colour-shift on a 'normal' body and equally noticeable vignetting on a Monochrom body.

There are a few 'workarounds' to correct the colour thing and, oddly enough, with the Monochrom I find that, subject-dependent, the heavier vignetting sometimes actually adds an aesthetically pleasing air to many images taken with the lens but, truth be told, the 21mm f4 S-A is hardly a perfect choice for an All-Rounder on a Digi-M.

Considered purely as a beautifully designed/manufactured lens, on the other hand, the 21 f4 cannot be faulted. It comes from the days where Quality In Every Respect was the name of the game. It takes 'standard Leica' 39mm filters; is beautifully machined; incredibly tiny in comparison to everything which came later and, from f5.6 down, renders as sharp from edge-to-edge and corner-to-corner as anyone would ever require. Just from my own point of view - being someone for whom the 21mm is an occasional visitor - I wouldn't wish to own anything else.

I have no personal experience with the Voigtlander so cannot possibly comment.

Philip.

Edited July 10, 2022 by pippy

[TomB_tx]

I got the Voigtlander 21 f4 quite a while back, and have had very nice results with it on my M6 and M9. I don't use an ultra-wide much, so the low price and tiny size are ideal for me to pack in my kit for when its needed. It's great on film, with just a slight edge color effect on my M9. It seems good on my M10 also, but haven't used it for any "real" shots yet - just tryouts.

[derleicaman]

2 hours ago, pippy said:

With the greatest possible respect, Bill, that's absolute nonsense.

I don't know why on Earth you think that might be the case but it's simply not true. Having used the 21 f4 on a variety of digi-M cameras over the years (M8.2 / M9 / M9-P / M Monochrom / M-D Typ-262) the protrusion of the rear element structure of such a non-retro-focus lens design has never been an issue nor have I ever read of a verified report from anyone encountering such a situation. This 'problem' seems to be an Internet Myth perpetuated by people who have never, themselves, used the lens in question on such a camera body.

TTL metering, as you quite rightly say, is completely out of the question (details as to why are oft-posted on the www) but the rear-most element of the S-A does NOT touch the shutter-blades let alone touch the sensor.

The main drawback with using the 21mm f4 S-A on a digital body (pre M11 which seems to cope far better in this regard) is that the micro-lenses on the cover glass in front of the sensor are not designed to cope with light hitting them at such an acute angle which leads to pronounced colour-shift on a 'normal' body and equally noticeable vignetting on a Monochrom body.

There are a few 'workarounds' to correct the colour thing and, oddly enough, with the Monochrom I find that, subject-dependent, the heavier vignetting sometimes actually adds an aesthetically pleasing air to many images taken with the lens but, truth be told, the 21mm f4 S-A is hardly a perfect choice for an All-Rounder on a Digi-M.

Considered purely as a beautifully designed/manufactured lens, on the other hand, the 21 f4 cannot be faulted. It comes from the days where Quality In Every Respect was the name of the game. It takes 'standard Leica' 39mm filters; is beautifully machined; incredibly tiny in comparison to everything which came later and, from f5.6 down, renders as sharp from edge-to-edge and corner-to-corner as anyone would ever require. Just from my own point of view - being someone for whom the 21mm is an occasional visitor - I wouldn't wish to own anything else.

I have no personal experience with the Voigtlander so cannot possibly comment.

Philip.

You are quite correct about the 21/4 SA not being protruding enough into the lens cavity to hit the sensor. My bad. I think I was confusing it with the collapsible lenses not being on the approved list. The only one I know for sure will not work on the digital M cameras is the original collapsible 90/4 Elmar.

However, both versions of the Super Angulon were Schneider designs, and most likely not actually made by Leitz. These were not the first lenses not designed by Leitz, but made for them by Schneider, being the Xenon 50/1.5 LTM lens. Schneider has a very high reputation for quality as well, and they also made the PA Curtagon-R and the PC-Super-Angulon lenses for Leica and the R system. The PA Curtagon is so different from contemporary Leica R lens construction, it is obvious Leica did not make this specialized lens.

[poli]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for all your input. The historical aspect of the angulon draws me to that lens. And since I will be using it on the meterless M-A I might go for that. Keep you posted 😉

[a.noctilux]

@poli

I did not want to influence your choice, as mine is "no brainer" with the S-A 4/21 ( don't know the Voigtlander though ) for M-A.

Designed so long ago, not "great" for digital ( if more than usable on monochrom, with infinite choice of colored E39 filters !), this lens really shines on film use.

I used mainly for so long with the lens natural friend MDa ...

have fun 👍

 

with Tmax 100, the lens rendering is at top

 

Edited July 11, 2022 by a.noctilux

[pippy]

1 hour ago, poli said:

Thanks for all your input. The historical aspect of the angulon draws me to that lens. And since I will be using it on the meterless M-A I might go for that. Keep you posted 😉

In case you have not already gone through his review of the 21 f4 here's the ever-entertaining Mr. Rockwell's musings on the lens. The colour-shift problem encountered when using the lens on a digi body is well illustrated here but, of course, with an M-A this point is completely irrelevant. FWIF in the first few excursions with my example I did find the reflectivity of the chrome-finish (as mentioned in the link) could cause me a second's hesitation when setting the aperture but quickly got the hang of various methods to circumvent the issue.

Taken as a whole it's a very accurate report;

https://kenrockwell.com/leica/21mm-f4.htm

Good luck with your choice(s)!

Philip.

[Ouroboros]

1 hour ago, poli said:

Thanks for all your input. The historical aspect of the angulon draws me to that lens. And since I will be using it on the meterless M-A I might go for that. Keep you posted 😉

If I had to choose from only the two you listed, the S-A 21mm f4 would be my choice too, based purely on my experience of the original CV 21mm f4 ltm color-skopar.  I didn't like that lens at all, mainly for the ugly flare that rears it's head at every opportunity and cheap feel compared to other CV lenses.

 I'd also take a look at the ZM 21mm f2,8 biogon and the Voigtlander 21mm f3.5 color-skopar before spending the money on a 60+ years old S-A f4, but if you can find a good, clean S-A 21mm it would make a nice and interesting partner for your M-A

[shirubadanieru]

ricoh 21mm f3.5 & skopar 21mm f3.5 or even the super angulon f3.4 are much better options. The SA f4 rotates completely as you focus / change aperture, which to me makes it one of the least (probably the least) ergonomic leica lens in real use. That being said, it's a beautiful lens, so I get the attraction to it!

[pippy]

On 7/10/2022 at 10:09 PM, poli said:

...I am considering a 21mm for my m-a. I am looking at a nice super angulon f4 in good condition...I am not planning to use this 21mm on a digital m, so not worrying about Italian flag problems. 

I'm not sure whether you shoot much to be rendered, ultimately, in monochrome with a digi-M camera, Poli, but, just in case you do, then the S-A might still be a good choice.

Vignetting / colour-shift when the 21 f4 is used with a digi-M has, quite rightly, been mentioned. Quite by chance I was testing-out, this afternoon, how the 21 f4 performed on an M Monochrom when various coloured filters were employed; primarily to see if / how much the lens needed to be adjusted to counteract for inherent focus-shift in the various spectra.

Details are fairly irrelevant but I thought it might be worthwhile showing the amount of sensor-fall-off there is when an image is snapped / converted in/to black'n'white. The test involved UV; Yellow; Orange; Red and POOTR (circ. pola) filters.

This (test) pic was taken with the 21 f4 sporting a Leitz Red filter on an M Monochrom body. It's SOOC and the inherent natural vignetting is plain to see but not, IMO, displeasing;

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!

Were you to acquire an f4 Super-Angulon I'd suggest that you use it with a digi-body just as confidently as you might with a film camera.

Philip.

Edited July 12, 2022 by pippy

[derleicaman]

Pippy, you are correct, the 21/4 Super Angulon mounted on my M10 without issue. It was a tense few moments, but no problem there. Of course, no metering, and be the Italian flag issue is brutal with a nice graduated purple band on the right side. Sharpness is just fine. I'll play with shooting it in monochrome, there should be no problems then.

[poli]

Thanks pippy! Good to know that I could use it on the m10-d if I would want to.

[a.noctilux]

1 hour ago, poli said:

Thanks pippy! Good to know that I could use it on the m10-d if I would want to.

You can but

can we see the results ?

With my plain M10, the borders are "weird" when used with my S-A 4/21.

Fine with Monochrom, though.

[poli]

19 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

You can but

can we see the results ?

With my plain M10, the borders are "weird" when used with my S-A 4/21.

Fine with Monochrom, though.

also when converted to bw? or bw jpg OOC? 

[a.noctilux]

Just now, poli said:

also when converted to bw? or bw jpg OOC? 

I see, must be fine in b&w 😉.

[timo01]

i have the Voigtländer VM 21mm 4,0 Color Skopar Pancake and i love that little lens! 

 

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 July 12, 2022 by timo01

[pippy]

On 7/12/2022 at 10:50 AM, poli said:

also when converted to bw? or bw jpg OOC? 

By way of illustrating how a very simple bit of adjustment in post-prod can change the inherent vignetting on an image here are two versions of the same snap shot yesterday using the 21mm f4 S-A (with Leitz Red Filter fitted) on the M Monochrom.

First (obviously) is SOOC and the second with a bit of adjustment using the 'Vignetting' slider in Photoshop;

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!

In my version of Ps the 'Vignetting' slider is in the 'Correct Camera Distortion' sub-menu of the 'Filters' drop-down box.

Hope that might be of interest to some.

Philip.

EDIT : The chap - seen on the post - who appears to be about to jump into the water is still there today!...

Edited July 15, 2022 by pippy

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M