Jump to content

21mm Lens for M8 - asph, non-asph or Zeiss?


urban-exposure

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Unfortunately the f4 of the CV is not bright enough for me. If I was willing to sacrifice this much light then I would happily go for the new Zeiss 18mm for an even wider view, however f2.8 is my absolute limit which restricts me to the Leica E-60 or the Zeiss.

 

Judging by some other threads, the Zeiss is a brilliant lens, but perhaps more trouble than it is worth in terms of coding etc.

 

It looks like my only option then is the Leica E-60 pre-aspherical. If anyone can comment on whether there is a significant difference in quality between the aspherical and non-aspherical versions of this lens, then that would be of interest to me.

 

Hi James,

 

I got your e-mail as well but thought I might as well reply here since they may be others interested in your question. First off, I find that when my eye is centered in the finder and is tracking the subject, the M8 finder shows approximately the field of view of a 24 mm lens focused at about 7 feet or further. I myself could never use the full M8 finder to know my edges with a 21 mm lens. I use a CV 28 finder, as mentioned above. I do not wear glasses.

 

I haven't tested the older Leica 21 but one difference between it and the Zeiss will likeky come down to contrast. The Zeiss 21 is already a higher contrast lens than the current Leica 21. How you feel about that quality may play a big part in choosing which lens will work better for you.

 

Added: Just saw your later post. Enjoy the Zeiss.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 46
  • Created
  • Last Reply
Why "obviously" for the former and "unexpectedly" for the latter?

 

Cheers,

 

Fair question. I did point out that this was a personal evaluation based on my shooting style and subject preferences. And in that context an extra stop is an undeniable advantage, even if all other factors were equal.

 

And the Elmarit is a lens with a great reputation. Discovering that the Zeiss lens was every bit as good at less than 1/3rd of the price was unexpected to me. But, having learned this pleasant fact, I will now be investigating other Zeiss lenses.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Fair question. I did point out that this was a personal evaluation based on my shooting style and subject preferences. And in that context an extra stop is an undeniable advantage, even if all other factors were equal.

 

And the Elmarit is a lens with a great reputation. Discovering that the Zeiss lens was every bit as good at less than 1/3rd of the price was unexpected to me. But, having learned this pleasant fact, I will now be investigating other Zeiss lenses.

 

The Zeiss has the highest contrast of the four current 21 lenses. Some like that and some don't. Technically, though, its a high achievement. Frankly, I think we're spoiled for choice and I love that about M cameras.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Link to post
Share on other sites

I have read Sean Reid's reviews (great by the way) although I’m hell-bent on the over priced Elmarit. It will take awhile since I just entered the Leica culture and therefore, I’m broke. The 28-cron’ along with M8 wasn’t easy, not to mention the usual accessories that seem to grow like wildfire. Still, my lens set will comprise of the 21-28-50-Lux’. So, what’s' another 7k amongst friends.

Regards,:rolleyes:

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...