guidomo Posted May 3, 2009 Share #1 Posted May 3, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I cannot decide between these two new lenses and would be interested to hear how others have made their choice. Apart from the obvious difference in FOV, the way I see it is as follows: - The 21 is the "breakthrough lens", first of its kind. It is bigger and heavier than the 24 and has two aspherical surfaces. I assume it has a higher production cost. - The 24 is the "user lens", smaller and lighter. And the M8 has framelines for it. Given the above I am surprised Leica offers them at the same price point. I do not know how they compare performance wise, Sean's article on the 21 is not out yet. Any comments or sample shots appreciated. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 3, 2009 Posted May 3, 2009 Hi guidomo, Take a look here Summilux 21 or 24?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jaapv Posted May 3, 2009 Share #2 Posted May 3, 2009 My 24 is in the post. I decided it would be the more universal lens, more likely to be used often. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
roberts2424 Posted May 3, 2009 Share #3 Posted May 3, 2009 For my style of shooting I've relied on the 21mm for at least 80% of my images for the past 30+ years. Check out photographers like Garry Winogrand who relied on this focal length religiously or Henri Cartier Bresson who also was have known to use it a lot. (That's if you're into street / documentary photography.) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted May 3, 2009 Share #4 Posted May 3, 2009 The 24 allows one to frame and focus with the same finder. For work at wide apertures, some may find that to be an advantage. Cheers, Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
richam Posted May 3, 2009 Share #5 Posted May 3, 2009 Hmmmm.... Don't have the as yet unavailable 21 or 24 Summilux, and not sure I could justify the $6k expense anyway. I do have the f2.8 Elmarit 21 and 24. For the M8, my little 28mm Elmarit is the standard lens, so 24mm is too close. When traveling, I always take the 21mm along and use it frequently. I do many landscapes, cityscapes, and tourist trap scenes where it may be difficult to get all I want into the frame (example attached). I sometimes use the entire built-in finder as a guide, but more often use the Leica 21-24-28 external finder, set between 28 and 24. (Not sure why this works; theoretically 28 should be just about right). The finder is bright and has a lot of barrel distortion, which helps leveling the camera. I'm not sure why you want the extra 2 f stops; I like to use my 50mm Lux (pre-asph) for most available light or narrow DOF needs. It has nice bokeh and narrower DOF than a 21 or 24 at the same distance. If you analyze why you want the f1.4 capability, you will probably arrive at the right answer. If you don't really need the f1.4, you can get a 21 or 24 Elmarit f2.8 for less; more compact, but they are still pricey. I might have gone for a 21 Lux instead if they had been available at the time. It would have been nice for available light interiors. Good luck with your decision. 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! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/83835-summilux-21-or-24/?do=findComment&comment=888250'>More sharing options...
guidomo Posted May 4, 2009 Author Share #6 Posted May 4, 2009 Courtesy of E. Puts below is a size comparison of the two lenses (also including the new 24/3.8). I wonder how they balance on the M8. 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! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/83835-summilux-21-or-24/?do=findComment&comment=889250'>More sharing options...
AtelierM Posted May 4, 2009 Share #7 Posted May 4, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I found the size/weight and ability to use the built in range finder important for myself. I was on a list for a 21mm Summilux, but after stopping in Photo Village and examining the 24mm Summilux on my M8 it became an easy decision. I found it lighter and smaller than expected and easier to use than my 75mm Summicron. It is quite easy to focus and does well in low light situations. Mikeual 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! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/83835-summilux-21-or-24/?do=findComment&comment=889304'>More sharing options...
Ecar Posted May 4, 2009 Share #8 Posted May 4, 2009 I cannot decide between these two new lenses and would be interested to hear how others have made their choice. Apart from the obvious difference in FOV, the way I see it is as follows: - The 21 is the "breakthrough lens", first of its kind. It is bigger and heavier than the 24 and has two aspherical surfaces. I assume it has a higher production cost. - The 24 is the "user lens", smaller and lighter. And the M8 has framelines for it. Given the above I am surprised Leica offers them at the same price point. I do not know how they compare performance wise, Sean's article on the 21 is not out yet. Any comments or sample shots appreciated. I have just started a thread with some comments and a few pictures (not the greatest stuff, but I'm trying to provide some samples in different situations) after a few days with the 21. In a nutshell: great lens, with some drawbacks due to what is, indeed, a "breakthrough" design. Not very scientific I'm afraid, but I hope it helps in making your decision. Happy to answer questions if I can. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted May 4, 2009 Share #9 Posted May 4, 2009 I have the same problem... what to do? 24 or 21? Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AtelierM Posted May 4, 2009 Share #10 Posted May 4, 2009 The photos attached were the first few I took with the lens. They were reduced in size for posting--no other adjustments--late afternoon/early evening, all at f/1.4. Erwin Puts has a good review of both lenses which shows some side by side comparisons of the 21 and 24. 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! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/83835-summilux-21-or-24/?do=findComment&comment=889461'>More sharing options...
markgay Posted May 4, 2009 Share #11 Posted May 4, 2009 I found the size/weight and ability to use the built in range finder important for myself. I was on a list for a 21mm Summilux, but after stopping in Photo Village and examining the 24mm Summilux on my M8 it became an easy decision. I found it lighter and smaller than expected and easier to use than my 75mm Summicron. It is quite easy to focus and does well in low light situations.Mikeual Thanks, Mikeual, for that. These pages are full of people commenting on the size of lenses without a single point of reference. Your photograph should silence talk of monstrous summilux wides. Mark Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted May 4, 2009 Share #12 Posted May 4, 2009 I have the same problem... what to do? 24 or 21? Hi Ruben, How do you want to work with the finders? Cheers, Sean Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted May 4, 2009 Share #13 Posted May 4, 2009 (edited) Hello Sean, no... I don't want. My idea is working with the 21mm without finders... just guessing the framing. I would use it for street photography at short distances. I am worried by the size of the 21mm, the weight and the optical performance. The 21mm MTF curves are higher than those of the 24mm, but the sagittal and tangential lines are much more separated stopping down. I found this shocking! I don't know how this translates to real world images. Erwin Puts doesn't make this point clear to me. Besides, I am worried by fringe and flare at full aperture in the 21mm lens. The biggest advantage of the 21 is the FoV on the M8: a true 28mm FoV. Perfect. But too wide on full format 35mm... For 4995 euros I want a top performer, small and light enough for every (and all) day use... . Edited May 4, 2009 by rosuna Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted May 4, 2009 Share #14 Posted May 4, 2009 Hi Again Ruben, My take on that lens should be ready in the next few days. You realize that the the full frame of the M8's finder is about a match for a 24 at infinity. If you don't want to use an accessory finder, why shoot what you can't see? The 24 will match what you're seeing rather than adding more or less random (if it can't be seen when framing) extra area to the outer edges of the picture. My advice then, FWIW, is to consider the 24 if you don't want to use external finders. If you're willing to use the external finder then the question becomes more complicated, IMO. Cheers, Sean Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted May 4, 2009 Share #15 Posted May 4, 2009 This is probably more of a secondary concern, if that, but the 21mm f1.4 is unique in the world, whereas Canon also offers a 24mm f1.4. If you really want to explore something photographically unique, the 21 Lux is your lens. If you prefer having framelines, or the 24mm focal length in general, get the 24. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted May 4, 2009 Share #16 Posted May 4, 2009 (edited) I agree with you, but there are more points to consider... The optical performance of the two lenses seems to be... different. And I would like to know how much, and the exact quality of the differences. The handling is also a key factor for me. A large and front-weighted lens (just like the Summilux 75mm) isn't confortable to use. In addition, that large front element makes the lens more fragile... more exposed... The third factor is related to discretion. The front lens element is quite large, and it makes the thing more evident for the people to which I point the camera + lens combo... The fourth factor to consider is viewfinders. The 21mm needs an external viewfinder for precise framing, but on the other hand you don't need to be very precise in focussing... ... Edited May 4, 2009 by rosuna Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted May 4, 2009 Share #17 Posted May 4, 2009 This is probably more of a secondary concern, if that, but the 21mm f1.4 is unique in the world, whereas Canon also offers a 24mm f1.4. If you really want to explore something photographically unique, the 21 Lux is your lens. If you prefer having framelines, or the 24mm focal length in general, get the 24. That is a very good additional point too... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted May 4, 2009 Share #18 Posted May 4, 2009 It is true, but personally I find the 75 Lux very nice to handle, and have no problem with the front-weight or the exposed element. There is some amount of personal preference here. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted May 4, 2009 Share #19 Posted May 4, 2009 I agree with you, but there are more points to consider... The optical performance of the two lenses seems to be... different. And I would like to know how much, and the exact quality of the differences. The handling is also a key factor for me. A large and front-weighted lens (just like the Summilux 75mm) isn't confortable to use. In addition, that large front element makes the lens more fragile... more exposed... The third factor is related to discretion. The front lens element is quite large, and it makes the thing more evident for the people to which I point the camera + lens combo... The fourth factor to consider is viewfinders. The 21mm needs an external viewfinder for precise framing, but on the other hand you don't need to be very precise in focussing... ... I have some thoughts on the above if you're interested but before I write them all down I'll ask if you are. This lens is very much on my mind because I'm writing about it now in another window. Cheers, Sean Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rosuna Posted May 4, 2009 Share #20 Posted May 4, 2009 Yes, I am here... reading... I am interested... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.