Any first hand experience with below wide lenses would be appreciated

[ALScott]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I can't decide on a wide lens.  I think I have narrowed it down then discover another possible option.  I had a 17-35 I used all the time but now thinking I may not want to go that wide to avoid the ultra wide distortion you get.  This will be used only on an SL3 and for all kinds of shooting.  

The 21 APO but will it add enough to the 24-90 to warrant the purchase either in width or IQ?

Super Elmar 21 or 18 

Tri Elmar 16-18-21

Last is SL 16-35, all of the above would save some weight and bulk which would be nice.

[LocalHero1953]

I sold the 16-35SL mainly because I didn’t use it fully as a zoom, but almost entirely at the wide end, where I found the distortion hard to handle. I don’t have much experience of super wides, so I’m hesitant to criticise it too much. I have had the Super Elmar M 21 before and don’t recollect distortion being a big problem, just the usual compositional problem in such wides of managing horizontals and verticals. I replaced the 16-35 with the Super Elmar 18 for video at Super 35 in confined locations, not stills. I haven’t used it enough to comment on it really.

[Geoff C. Bassett]

I'm saving up to buy the 21 APO. I've rented it 3 times and been very sad to send it back to the rental company each time. It's a perfect wide. If you can afford it, you will not regret buying it. I think it definitely has the additional wide angle to benefit owning alongside the 24-90, and it's performance is superior.

[ALScott]

56 minutes ago, Geoff C. Bassett said:

I'm saving up to buy the 21 APO. I've rented it 3 times and been very sad to send it back to the rental company each time. It's a perfect wide. If you can afford it, you will not regret buying it. I think it definitely has the additional wide angle to benefit owning alongside the 24-90, and it's performance is superior.

Honestly this is how I am leaning.  The SL3 with the lenses I have, none are APO's, seems to deserve at least one.  I shot some pics at a family gathering and the 24 was just short for some inside shots.  I think 21 might have done it.  Plus, I really want to see what it can do.  I have the 50 lux and everything I shoot with it is absolutely amazing to my eye.  Truly like nothing I have ever shot before and it seems the 21 APO would do the same or more.

[LeicaR10]

ALScott,  I suggest you take a look at the link below.  It will take you to a Leica lens photograph site that is arranged by nearly all the M and SL lenses you mentioned.  I believe that I made this available to you before.   At the end of the day and IMO, it really gets down to the content of the photograph, not the camera or lens used.  There is also a thread in the L mount lenses that has photographs taken with SL 21 Apo.  If you are not sure, perhaps renting the lens first from Lens Rentals and see if the lens helps create the content you envision.  Photographers will offer their sage advice to include myself, but its solely your decision.   r/ Mark

Try:  https://onfotolife.com/lenses?lens=Leica  

[FlashGordonPhotography]

In wides I have the WATE, 21 APO SL, 20 DGDN, 16-35 SL, 14-24 SL and Sigma and the 20-60 Panasonic. Out of that group the 21 APO SL is noticeably the best lens optically, followed by the tiny Sigma. The best of the zooms is the 14-24 unless you need filters.

I an also finding that I’m shooting wider than 20mm more rarely. The AO SL 21 with the 24-90 is a potent combination although the prime is somewhat better than the zoom. I do think there’s enough difference to the 24mm start of the zoom to carry both. My kit here is the 21, 24-90 and 90-280 or 100-400, generally.

For a light kit the little SIgma is really excellent. It’s basically as good as the 24-90 zoom. I like pairing it with a Sigma 24-70II for a lighter weight combo. The only downside of the 21 is the lack of weather sealing. There’s also a wider option if you want. My kit here is the Sigma 20, 24-70 and Sigma 70-200 plus a TC.

The 14-24 is mostly for landscapes and architecture and I have it as a backup when I travel. The 20-60 is my city walk around lens, when I’m not specifically doing photography.

The 21 APO will not disappoint. It might lead to more APO purchases though. 

Gordon

[jdlaing]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Look for a good quality Konica Hexanon Dual 21-35.

[ALScott]

5 hours ago, jdlaing said:

Look for a good quality Konica Hexanon Dual 21-35.

Hard no.  I can't take throwing anything else into this mix.  I am already locked into indecision.  I am pretty sure I am down to 16-35, for filter options over 14-24, or APO 21.  I wish there was at least an 18 APO and this would be a no brainer.  I am leaning toward the 21 even though it's so close to my VE 24-90 zoom just because it's an APO and I would really love to experience shooting with an APO lens.  It's not an APO, but the 50 lux I have is so unbelievable I really would like to see what any APO can do.

[Dr. G]

I tried the Sigma 20 1.4, Sigma 24 1.4, and Leica Super-Vario-Elmarit-SL 14-24 before ultimately deciding on the 21 Super APO SL.  It's an amazing lens.  There is a thread with images from it here and you can get a good idea of it's capabilities.

As far as it being wide enough to be used with your 24-90, I would say yes - but I'm only comparing it to the Sigma 24.  Those extra three mm make a big difference.  You might want to look at your metadata in LR to see how often you were using anything wider than 21 and see if you liked the results.  FWIW, I use all primes (APO 21/35/50/75) and the 50 Lux-SL.  The 21 is so sharp that I can "sort of" use it as a tighter 28mm in APS-C mode on the SL3 without any issues at all.

[Virob]

I do a lot of landscapes and started with the Panasonic 16-35 before the 21 APO became available. The 21 is clearly a much better lens and a joy to work with, but I was worried I would miss the 16-20 range from the zoom, and carried both around. Recently, I’ve been taking just the 21 to see how that works for me. There are definitely times I want something wider. The horizontal angle of view with a  21mm lens is about the same as the vertical angle of view on a 14mm lens. Since I shoot most of the time off a tripod, it is usually very easy to do a mini pano with the 21 to get the view of a 14mm and stitch in post. there is so much resolution doing this, cropping that mini pano from 14 to 20mm equivalent, gives more than enough image data. I haven’t directly compared with the zoom, but suspect I am getting better results.