SL-APO 21 vs 21/3.4 M SEM

[tom0511]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am interested if anybody has compared those lenses or wants to comment how they compare in terms of image quality?

I mean AF is not so important for a 21mm lens IMO.

[Advertisement]

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

[helged]

On 1/3/2024 at 10:53 AM, tom0511 said:

I am interested if anybody has compared those lenses or wants to comment how they compare in terms of image quality?

I mean AF is not so important for a 21mm lens IMO.

I have both, but haven't run comparison between the two. Both are good, but SL21 is excellent. A big plus for the latter (for me) is close focussing; already exceptional sharpness at f2; sealed body; outstanding rendering; very natural colour; performs well for astrophotography.

SEM21 was my wide lens fav prior to SL21; it delivers remarkably given the small size of the lens. It can be used for IR-shooting (no IR ghosting), which is a big plus (like on M8). Excellent sharpness at f8. Not the best astro-lens wide open. Overall, not at the level of SL21. But what to except; SEM21 is not the newest lens, and it is made for the M-system.

Final edit: I think both lenses handle highlights well (flaring/reflections), possibly with a small edge to SEM21. 

Edited January 6, 2024 by helged

[Donald M]

It is quite a sit, but red dot cameras thoroughly compared all recent wide angle lenses (including M 21mm): 

 

[la1402]

Corners are not great on the SEM even on an M - i would expect the APO SL to be much, much better.

[Stuart Richardson]

It is interesting in that test that the 14-24 seems to win at the edges quite handily in all the tests, but they are comparing edges that are much closer to the camera than the point of focus. That suggests to me that it is not necessarily sharper edge to edge, but rather that  it has more field curvature. It would be nice to see a test that took place outside or somewhere where the plane of focus was fully visible. It does seem like the 21mm APO Summicron has the least CA. Just wish I had them all in hand myself to run my own test for my own use! Always hard to judge when others are doing the work...

[tom0511]

I also watched it today...nice to have some comparison. In my case I would rather see some longer distance images and also images and more complexe light. I would really have the feeling that I get  "something extra and special" when spreading out such a price for a f2.0 prime lens. Not thatI doubt the 21 app is a great lens...its more-how much "greater" is it and can I see it in real world images.

Edited February 19, 2024 by tom0511

[S Maclean]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The SEM 21 has always been one of my favorites, easy to use on the M system with zone focusing or Hyperfocus. For Shooting from the hip, so to speak it is hard to beat.  This said, I recently borrowed a 21 sl super apo and it is two different worlds on IQ.  The SL is far far superior, the f.2 plus close focusing make it magical for OOF area rendering (blowing even the M 21 lux out of the water.

But....one is SL, the other M, One is great for street and casual photography, the other is a more committed lens in use (like all SL really). 

If you are doing landscapes, cityscapes or don't mind carrying around the SL for street the, the SL super Apo is unbeatable.  If you are just looking for a more open field of view for context on street etc then I'd stick to the SEM.

I am thinking on getting an SL APo, but I have a hassleblad 25V that renders perfectly for landscaping, astro etc, also close focuses and has a F2.5 medium format, So I am thinking the 21 SEM would be redundant.

These are taken with the SEM both on zone focusing and while walking.

 

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!

[robb]

I shot both at f4 handheld and they both felt very similar to me with no real deviation in true focal length.  Apo edges were sharper.  Middle seemed the same.  3.4 had a very nice size.  I would not hesitate to use the 3.4 in most situations but since the apo is weather sealed and has AF and no need to select the lens length in a menu… it wins on sl2

Robb