sparkie Posted October 1, 2007 Share #1 Posted October 1, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi, can WATE users help me weigh up whether I should get one or not. Can you list the Pros and cons. And some alternatives to the WATE I already have the CV15. But nothing in between up to 28mm. Potential worries are: 1. IR Filter - is it possible to fit one on this lens. 2. Cyan corners (with filter) from a few pictures I have seen posted. Is this being satisfactorily dealt with firmware yet, or is this a PP job 3. Image quality - how good is it compared to other FL primes If you lost yours (heaven forbid ) would you buy one again? -- i guess thats the acid test Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 1, 2007 Posted October 1, 2007 Hi sparkie, Take a look here WATE owners: Pros and cons. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
dseelig Posted October 1, 2007 Share #2 Posted October 1, 2007 Yes either the Leica filter adapter or John Mikch's which is much smaller and gives less flare filter is closer to the front element. Get insurance call the Hartford great insurance and after 2 incidents in 3 years totalling 4300 dollars no raise in rates. David Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted October 1, 2007 Share #3 Posted October 1, 2007 Havent had it for very long time but allready love it. I also have the cv15 and Leica 21/2.8asph. pros wate: - image quality seems very good so far - 3 lenses in one - no messing around with hand coding, vignetting, cyan corners or whatever - quick change between focal length cons (no big deal for me) - should get a millich filter adapter - choosing the focal length in a menue (like the mate which selects the focal length) - The Frankenfinder is big - I prefer the Ricoh GRD external 21-28mm finder. Works great for me so far. cheers, Tom Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rwfreund Posted October 1, 2007 Share #4 Posted October 1, 2007 Still waiting to gather the parts for ir filter use, but after a few days, I am impressed with the image quality, especially its low distortion compared to other wides I have owned. I actually like the bubble level in the frankenfinder. I wish the camera body had one built-in! -bob Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtZ Posted October 1, 2007 Share #5 Posted October 1, 2007 Hi, can WATE users help me weigh up whether I should get one or not. Can you list the Pros and cons. And some alternatives to the WATE I already have the CV15. But nothing in between up to 28mm. Potential worries are: 1. IR Filter - is it possible to fit one on this lens. 2. Cyan corners (with filter) from a few pictures I have seen posted. Is this being satisfactorily dealt with firmware yet, or is this a PP job 3. Image quality - how good is it compared to other FL primes If you lost yours (heaven forbid ) would you buy one again? -- i guess thats the acid test Great lens!!! I would buy a new one if it get lost (or stolen). I couldn't live without You can get the Leica adapter + 67mm filter (they come together if you order it as one of the freebies when you register your M8) or you can get John Milich WATE adapter + E49 Leica IR/UV filter. The second solution is much better, by the way. No cyan corner when you use a Leica filter. With the WATE you cannot use other filter than Leica brand if you don't want to have cyan corners. f4 but you don't have many other lenses in 16 and 18mm faster than f4, do you? And at 21mm you have the Elmarit f2.8 only... Image is great. WATE + MATE are great lenses and a great combination for travelling and a normal use of your M8 Cheers! . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkie Posted October 1, 2007 Author Share #6 Posted October 1, 2007 Havent had it for very long time but allready love it.I also have the cv15 and Leica 21/2.8asph. pros wate: - image quality seems very good so far - 3 lenses in one - no messing around with hand coding, vignetting, cyan corners or whatever - quick change between focal length cons (no big deal for me) - should get a millich filter adapter - choosing the focal length in a menue (like the mate which selects the focal length) - The Frankenfinder is big - I prefer the Ricoh GRD external 21-28mm finder. Works great for me so far. cheers, Tom hi tom, how does the WATE at 21f4.0 comare to your 21/2.1 at f4 are you saying there is no cyan corners even with the IR filter on? I have the GRD also, I think the finder is a fixed 28mm no Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkie Posted October 1, 2007 Author Share #7 Posted October 1, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) >>>>> No cyan corner when you use a Leica filter. With the WATE you cannot use other filter than Leica brand if you don't want to have cyan corners. hmm, why is that. I would have thought B+W IR cut filters would perform the same >>>>>> f4 but you don't have many other lenses in 16 and 18mm faster than f4, do you? And at 21mm you have the Elmarit f2.8 only... zeiss 15/2.8 cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtZ Posted October 1, 2007 Share #8 Posted October 1, 2007 >>>>> No cyan corner when you use a Leica filter. With the WATE you cannot use other filter than Leica brand if you don't want to have cyan corners. hmm, why is that. I would have thought B+W IR cut filters would perform the same >>>>>> f4 but you don't have many other lenses in 16 and 18mm faster than f4, do you? And at 21mm you have the Elmarit f2.8 only... zeiss 15/2.8 cheers Yes, I forgot the ZM 15/2.8 No, B+W IR/UV filters are not the same. This have been discussed here many times. For real wide angles you get better results with Leica filters. Search here about WATE and filters. You will find also some pictures where you can see the difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olsen Posted October 1, 2007 Share #9 Posted October 1, 2007 Hi, can WATE users help me weigh up whether I should get one or not. Can you list the Pros and cons. And some alternatives to the WATE I already have the CV15. But nothing in between up to 28mm. Potential worries are: 1. IR Filter - is it possible to fit one on this lens. 2. Cyan corners (with filter) from a few pictures I have seen posted. Is this being satisfactorily dealt with firmware yet, or is this a PP job 3. Image quality - how good is it compared to other FL primes If you lost yours (heaven forbid ) would you buy one again? -- i guess thats the acid test 1) Yess! Comes included if you make a good deal. 2) Few lenses for the M-system produces so little cyan corners, thanks to filter and camera internal software compensation! 3) The WATE offers excellent optics which is 'typical Leica' regarding drawing, resolution and contrast. The backside of the coin is distortion. Which is typical for 'zooms' like this I.e. Canon EF 16-35 mm 2,8L. But distortion can be corrected with SW. I am not sure if I would buy it again if I 'lost' mine. It is damned expensive and the difference between the WATE to Voigtländer 15 mm 4,5 Super Wide Heliar Asph can hardly defend the ten fold price difference. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
boilerdoc Posted October 1, 2007 Share #10 Posted October 1, 2007 It's a d----- expensive lens with the finder but, you know what, you get what you pay for. It is a superb lens. And with the Milich adapter/Leica filter is even better! The finder helps with the parallax when shooting up close. I would replace it in a hearbeat! Steve Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanhulsenbeek Posted October 1, 2007 Share #11 Posted October 1, 2007 You can get the Leica adapter + 67mm filter (they come together if you order it as one of the freebies when you register your M8) or you can get John Milich WATE adapter + E49 Leica IR/UV filter. The second solution is much better, by the way. Manuel, Much better? Smaller, handier, cooler, sure! But much better in the sense of color, sharpness, filterflare? Please explain! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlm Posted October 1, 2007 Share #12 Posted October 1, 2007 the advantage of the Milich adapter is that is uses a smaller filter, 39mm vs 67mm, has no entry port for back light and dirt, does not interfere with the view, and it also uses the standard hood and a Leica filter. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted October 1, 2007 Share #13 Posted October 1, 2007 49mm John. i know it was a typo Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGeoJO Posted October 1, 2007 Share #14 Posted October 1, 2007 I got the WATE and I am ready to order a JLM filter adapter but I could not locate any 49mm Leica IR cut filter anywhere . The right size B+W filter is readily available but since it is a UWA lens, at least the 16mm setting is, it may render a slight cyan shift in the far corners. I'd rather go with a Leica filter in this case. Leica, oh, Leica, you want people to use IR cut filters to get the proper color balance but you don't make the filters available for us to buy/use - what's the deal? I wouldn't mind using B+W filters on other lenses, as matter of fact, I do, just not for an UWA lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted October 1, 2007 Share #15 Posted October 1, 2007 Pro: great lens! (get the Milich filter adapter) Con: terrible workflow. I kept my CV15, but the WATE is better, just more fiddly to work with, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtZ Posted October 1, 2007 Share #16 Posted October 1, 2007 Manuel, Much better? Smaller, handier, cooler, sure! But much better in the sense of color, sharpness, filterflare? Please explain! Some people in the German forum were complaining of having the refection of the white letters in from of the lenses reflected on the IR filter with the Leica original adapter and the 67mm filter. Some wierd effects were visible on some pictures. It looked like a red clock. I'm sure you can find this thread. It has also been discussed here. And it's smaller, handier, cooler... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guy_mancuso Posted October 1, 2007 Share #17 Posted October 1, 2007 I had a huge red circle in the middle when the sun was behind me. no thanks i love John's setup Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
woodyspedden Posted October 1, 2007 Share #18 Posted October 1, 2007 Pro: great lens! (get the Milich filter adapter) Con: terrible workflow. I kept my CV15, but the WATE is better, just more fiddly to work with, If you decide to buy the WATE I have an extra Milich adapter with filter I would like to sell. I recently moved and could not find it so bought another from John. Of course immediately thereafter I found the original. I will sell it for the original price of the adapter from John plus the price of the filter. Woody Spedden Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkie Posted October 1, 2007 Author Share #19 Posted October 1, 2007 Yes, I forgot the ZM 15/2.8 No, B+W IR/UV filters are not the same. This have been discussed here many times. For real wide angles you get better results with Leica filters. Search here about WATE and filters. You will find also some pictures where you can see the difference. ok. thanks i havent been interested in WATE threads till now and didnt know there was a difference in IR filters till now. cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sparkie Posted October 1, 2007 Author Share #20 Posted October 1, 2007 I am not sure if I would buy it again if I 'lost' mine. It is damned expensive and the difference between the WATE to Voigtländer 15 mm 4,5 Super Wide Heliar Asph can hardly defend the ten fold price difference. Yes this thought has crossed my mind more than ten times! The CV15 is a steal buck for buck Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.