Olsen
Well-known
Olsen
Well-known
Your comments reveal that you really haven't tried or even held a WATE.
1. The WATE is certainly less brittle than the Leica average. But the front glass is vulnerable and demands that either the sun shade or the filter is being applied.
2. Besides the Noctilux, the WATE is a unique lense since it is the widest Leica lense offered. It also offers 'three focal lengths in one' and as such is a complicated construction that costs - some - money to design and make.
The M8/WATE is the best digital wide angle combo I know of. The Leica WATE is decidedly better than Canon's 16-35 mm 2,8L II in combo with 1Ds II, a combination which costs the same as M8/WATE combination, interestingly enough. Sure, the WATE is expensive, but matches the price of competition.
3. On a M8 the WATE offers picture angles similar to 18, 21 and 28 mm, - three far different angles of views, and focal lengths with quite different effects. It is very practical to have all these three focal lengths in one and the same lense.
4. I am a great fan of Carl Zeiss lenses, and indeed, the ZM 18 mm 4,0 is an excellent alternative to the WATE. The ZM 18 mm 4,0 is very sharp in the center while the WATE offers high resolution evenly over the total picture surface; as such a more modern design. The WATE comes with coding included while the ZM 18 mm 4,0 demands that you code yourself. Or work over the files with 'Cornerfix' etc. Nor is the ZM 18 mm 4,0 rangefinder coupled. Not that much of an issue, but I find that my WATE pictures comes out much sharper than my Voigtländer 15 mm just because the WATE pictures is correctly focused. - Except for that the 15 mm Super Wide is a markedly inferior design.
5. Yes, the Frankenfinder is large and bulky, but I find the libelle very usefull and use it often even on my Canon. And I use the M8/WATE with the Voigtländer 21 mm viewfinder, the most compact there is. Leica must meet the demands of the professional photographer. Not just 'tourists'.
" 6. who needs 18 when you have 16 ?
7. who needs 16 when you have 18 ?"
- This you will fast find an answer to when you see the result of the use of these two focal lengths. Rather, on the M8 it is the difference between 18 and 21 mm you see. Just as significant.
8. Sure, the filter should be included. Implicitly, what you are pointing at, again, is the 'high price' of the WATE. Sure, the price is high, but it is competitive as I pointed to above.
9. When you switch on the M8 when the WATE is mounted, the camera asks you what focal length you want to shoot with. When you have chosen this, you are ready.
10. Not really. But I miss a good sun shade when I use the WATE with the filter. - Which would have turned into a monster. Without the filter the WATE is quite compact.
11. A faster wide angle lense would have to be larger and even more expensive. Further, it would offer a narrow DOF at larger apartures, - not always an advantage. I prefer larger apartures on my SLR-cameras because they offers brighter viewfinders and more reliable AF. This is not an issue on a Leica M camera. The aparture 4,0 - nor the somewhat limited low-noice/high-ISO properties of the M8 has limited me from taking cityscapes in marginal light.
The ZM 18 mm 4,0 is indeed a cheaper alternative together with Voigtländer 15 mm 4,5 - far inferior to the WATE however, and a 21 mm of some sort. How a 24 mm and a 28 mm - which gives a picture angle like a 28 and a 35 mm is complimentary to the WATE is beond me.
The greatest downside of the WATE, to me, except for the price, is the distortion which is very pronounced and at least 'just as bad' as on Canon 16-35 mm 2,8L II. Leica should offer a software fix - included in the price, to this like Hasselblad is doing.
mac_wt
Cameras are like bunnies
I own a Vivitar 283. After it fried a (cheap) radio receiver, I put a multimeter to it and measured some impressive voltages from it. I hope you checked yours or protect your M8 in some way. Following link might be usefull: http://www.botzilla.com/photo/strobeVolts.html
Regards, Wim.
Olsen
Well-known
No. It is no problem using a Vivitar 283 on a M8 - and a range other cameras. Most cameras today are 'wired' in such a way that it does not matter.
jackal2513
richbroadbent
ahhhhhhhh, I see, I get it, ok............. thanks ever so much for putting me staight on that.
I have to say though that's very weird because i really do distinctly remmeber buying one from ck-fotolab in spain and then using it for 6 months, putting some of the pictures form it up on my flickr stream, printing a few and then finally deciding to get rid of it by ebaying it to a nice chap who lived in chicago.
But hey, never mind, I must be wrong because clearly you know more about me than me, more about lenses, leica, in fact more about everything than me. Perhaps it was a dream, or a nightmare you could say, or maybe i fell into psychosis just a split second before I wrote my first post in this thread and made it all up out of sheer madness and confusion.
*shakes head*
maggieo
More Deadly
I used a Vivitar 272 for a while, but was told that it would fry my M8, so I got a newer (and bigger) 285hv, which is a low voltage version of the mighty 285.
Are you saying that I can, in fact, use the 272 without worry on the M8?
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
I like to use DCE tools, but as it is 8-bits, only when I am far into processing. Works flawlessly and has some other nice goodies, like easy perspective correction and an effective hot pixel/jpg-artifacts tool too.
Olsen
Well-known
Most modern cameras are 'wired' in such a way that old flashes can be used. At least; I have used my M8 extensively with my two Vivitar 283 without any problems. The other Vivitar flashes you mention I haven't tried.
I have also used my M8 with my Canon 550EX, but then I have to calculate the amount of light needed and set the flash output manually. - Or let it just pump out max capacity reflected in the ceiling. Leica should come up with a multi-flash system like Canon's E-TTL that lets you control several flashes from a transmitter on the camera. The trick with good flash photography is 1)to use several flashes, with 2)one or several pointing towards the camera, 3)giving indirect light reflected from a white surface, - like a white ceiling.
Olsen
Well-known
I am curious to know; what is the real color of you M8, Jaap? Is it gray or is it green, as it appears in your avatar at the Leica Forum? Attached you'll find a picture of my M-series cameras: M8 w/WATE, my MP with - the-most-bashed-of-all-lenses; the N-n-n-octilux - and my Zeiss Ikon with the excellent Biogon 25 mm 2,8
Attachments
ZebGoesZeiss
Established
Blimey, that finder is larger than the lens...
Dfin
Well-known
Olsen, love the photo by the Swedish lake,it has a very painterly effect. With your indoor flash shots, have you tried cutting the flash by 2 stops when mixing natural light?
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
Olsen
Well-known
No, but that is something I will try.
Olsen
Well-known
Fine! This is an invitation to show some WATE pictures.
jaapv
RFF Sponsoring Member.
Last edited:
visiondr
cyclic iconoclast
If you look at the specifications of the WATE you see a lot of barrel distortion. What's it like in practice?
Olsen
Well-known
Jaap,
These two are the most elegant M8s I have ever seen!
These two are the most elegant M8s I have ever seen!
Olsen
Well-known
- Read my earlier posts and you will see that it is the distortion that I find as the '2.worst' downside of the WATE with exception of price. That said, it is 'very Leica' with high resolution evenly over the picture surface combined with high contrast and beautiful color rendition. But house corners and door sills curl in the sun. In this respect it is 'just as bad' as Canon's 16-35 mm 2,8L II. The latter has poor corner sharpness mounted on a 1Ds II. So, I consider M8/WATE as the best digital wide angle combo on the market.
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Are you comparing the WATE/M8 vs. the 16-35/1DsII combination? The Canon has poor corner sharpness on a full-frame sensor. Mount it on an 1D with a crop sensor like the M8's and you crop away the problematic areas.
Olsen
Well-known
Sure, I am not absolutely sure exact where the 1,3 (or 1,33) crop line goes, but the Canon 1Ds II/16-35 mm 2,8L II combo, which I use parallel to the M8/WATE combo, is so unsharp far into the picture that the it crosses any probable crop line.
Otherwise, the M8 sensor is very similar to the 1Ds II in resolution. The M8 sensor is very much like a cropped 1Ds II-sensor. The WATE is not the only Leica lens that is outstanding compared to Canon's. The best lens on my 1Ds II is the Canon EF 35 mm 1,4L. Still I regard my Leica 35 mm 2,0 on the M8 as even better, though it is cropped. - So, the M8 is outstanding, through it's excellent lenses.