jimleicam3 Posted August 22, 2009 Share #1 Posted August 22, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have seen a couple of threads on this lens about problems with attaching the filter, and the viewfinder. However, I saw this lens at my local photo shop, it seems fairly compact and light. So the question is: Is there a love/hate relation with this lens? Would it be a great travel lens? I know that some may take offense because this has been reviewed before, but I would really like to get some feedback, positive or negative, on this lens. As always, I feel that the advice that I have gotten from this forum has been outstanding. Thanks, Jim Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted August 22, 2009 Posted August 22, 2009 Hi jimleicam3, Take a look here Questions about WATE 16-18-21 mm f/4. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
marknorton Posted August 22, 2009 Share #2 Posted August 22, 2009 Jim, There are no significant issues with image quality, though I guess some might complain about distortion but I am not among them. The issues with this lens are all to do with the filter and the lack of lens coupling to the camera to tell it what the selected focal length is. Unlike the original Tri-Elmar ("MATE") which did tell the camera what the selected focal length is, you have to do this manually with the WATE using the menu. Only a few button presses but if you get it wrong - or forget - the camera will apply the wrong in-camera correction. The issue with the filter is that the over-sized filter is there for full-frame but on a cropped camera, you can get away with the smaller filter used in the Milich adapter, an idea Leica has copied with its M8-only filter for the 18mm Super-Elmar. Things may change on 09/09, depending on a) whether we get an M9, whether it is full-frame and c) whether Leica have cracked the IR problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olsen Posted August 22, 2009 Share #3 Posted August 22, 2009 I bought my 16-18-21 mm f/4 along with the M8, with which it cooperates very well. I use the Leica filter system, which is far from perfect since it is without a good sunshade. I also bought this dedicated viewfinder, called the Frankenfinder, which is large, but the only viewfinder I have, besides the one for my Hasselblad SWC, that has a water pass that helps keeping the camera streight. At the same time i bought a 16-35 mm 2,8L II zoom for my 1Ds III. Even if I crop the files to about the same crop level as the WATE/M8 combo and stop it down to 4,0, the WATE/M8 combo is far better. To my view, the WATE/M8 combo was the best digital wide angle combo on the market. - Was, until these new Leica fixed focal length wide angle lenses came along, which I havn't tried. I use my WATE on my M8 60-65% of the time. Half of that time with the filter ( - now I look forward to the M9 which I hope will free us from all this filter hassle, or...?). I use it both with the Frankenfinder and a Voigtländer 21 mm viewfinder, which is more compact. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimleicam3 Posted August 22, 2009 Author Share #4 Posted August 22, 2009 Thanks for your replies! The thought of making a new lens purchase so close to 9/9/09, very confusing, I may just wait and see what happens in September. Thanks again. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanhulsenbeek Posted August 22, 2009 Share #5 Posted August 22, 2009 I can only concur with the commentary of earlier posters: an excellent lens. The comparison pictures in the July LFI copy show that the new lenses are not radically better. Just about equal, but we have to wait till Sean Reid's tests to really know the differences. Just one caveat: the setting of the right focal lenght in the M8 menu is very important. Any mistake or carelessnes will result in bothersome corner redshift etc. I just experienced that again to my "chagrin". Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ho_co Posted August 23, 2009 Share #6 Posted August 23, 2009 Mere agreement. Lens is convenient and excellent. I use the Milich adapter for the UV/IR cut filter, which leaves the lens just as easy to work with as out of the box. The problems are as others have said: 1) You must tell the M8 any time you change focal length; if you forget, CornerFix is the remedy. 2) You must also remember to tell the finder any time you change focal length. As I see it, the lens can only improve with age: 1) If the M goes full-frame, you've got one heck of a wide-angle range in the WATE. 2) When a later camera overcomes the M8's IR sensitivity, you will no longer need to tell the camera each time you change focal length. Remember, the Tri-Elmar 16-18-21 was introduced with the M8, before the camera's IR sensitivity was recognized. Vignetting for all three focal lengths is the same, so the camera needs only one correction. The only problem arises with the physical nature of the UV/IR cut filter. Do away with the filter, and you lose the need to compensate differently for different angles of view. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tranber Posted August 23, 2009 Share #7 Posted August 23, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have one and i'm enjoy with it even the viewfinder is big. The aperture f:4 off course show me sometimes my limites, but mostly times, I take pictures in Asia, and the DOF of this lens allows you to use Hyperfocale MAP. So if you get one, you will enjoy. I have nothing to criticize to this lens. Close to be perfect for me. Some pictures I take on the rain forest of Borneo here "lecontientperdu.com" Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted August 23, 2009 Share #8 Posted August 23, 2009 Some pictures I take on the rain forest of Borneo here "lecontientperdu.com" "The Lost Content"? Are you sure you don't mean Le Continent perdu Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
vanhulsenbeek Posted August 23, 2009 Share #9 Posted August 23, 2009 "The Lost Content"? Are you sure you don't mean Le Continent perdu The link works with lecontinentperdu.com Some more Borneo pics at: Borneo: Pictures of Serawak and Sabah "Le Continent Perdu" is a misnomer. The Lost Continent, by Edgar Rice Burroughs - Amazon.com: The Lost Continent (9781592244966): Edgar Rice Burroughs: Books - rather loosely depicts the Roraima Tablemountain (Tepui) in the south of Venezuela. (Sorry: climbed in my Leica R5 time: no pics at hand) The Lost Continent is also my favourite amongst Bill Bryson's works: travel in the US deep south. The audiobook is truly hilarious: recommended Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted August 24, 2009 Share #10 Posted August 24, 2009 I have both the WATE and the MATE. The WATE requires a strange filter adapter to use any filters. However I have a 49mm to 67mm adapter for my MATE, so I can use the same filters on both. For me the Frankenfinder is useable, it's better than having several finders. These two lenses, Frankenfinder and a few filters make up my day kit. Very usable, excellent images. No real complaints except for the f4... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tranber Posted August 24, 2009 Share #11 Posted August 24, 2009 sorry but "le continent perdu" is a movie to, directed by Robert and Raymond Hakim, prix special du jury Cannes 1955, about Indonesia ans specially Borneo. So it is not a misnomer Anyway I enjoy the Wate, enjoy to! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
guidomo Posted August 25, 2009 Share #12 Posted August 25, 2009 Unlike the original Tri-Elmar ("MATE") which did tell the camera what the selected focal length is I hope they will retain the MATE support in the M9 - although it is now a legacy lens. I guess the electronics needs to read which framelines are being brought up in any case - because of the combination of 6-bit code + framelines to identify the lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ivar B Posted August 25, 2009 Share #13 Posted August 25, 2009 Probably some of you are more critical than I am, but I had the WATE and I frequently did not bother to change the focal length setting and used the prompted 18mm setting even If I used 16 or 21mm focal length. In my view, the results were still excellent with no need for corner correction. It is a great lens, and the reason I sold mine was just that I felt I did not use it enough to justify owning such an expensive lens. I have since bought a Zeiss 4/18 (before the Elmar 3.8/18 was launched). I know that Sean Reid reported that the Zeiss lens was sharper in the centre while the WATE was more even across the field, but you need to look hard to see this effect in practice. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.