vieri
Leica Ambassador
Thank you very much Helen, I am flattered 😱 now I just need to get the 21 (will be 10 more days!) and then - I'll hope that my work will be up to your expectations 😉
Torn Between Two Lenses - Super Angulon 21/3.4 vs Elmarit M 21/2.8 pre-ASPH
- Thread starter deepwhite
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 39
- Views 9K
Thank you very much Helen, I am flattered 😱 now I just need to get the 21 (will be 10 more days!) and then - I'll hope that my work will be up to your expectations 😉
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Congrats DEEPWHITE.....Tres Cool
Look forward to your pixs & posts
VIERI:
Love your work as well / the color band shots were great as well as MP@MOMA
Best to You both
helen
Look forward to your pixs & posts
VIERI:
Love your work as well / the color band shots were great as well as MP@MOMA
Best to You both
helen
Last edited:
tomasis
Well-known
no way, I have shot a couple hundreds with SA and Rd1 recently. just for test shooting purposes. It has heavy vignetting there, most at left and right edges (shortest). But I like vignetting as a feature so SA surprised me at another aspect too. It is hell sharp, at least enough sharp for me. I noticed it could not render background sharply when it is focused at infinity. I remember that Erwin Putz wrote something like that SA do such thing as described above. So it is okay as well though I will test with films and compare.
Rendering remind me much of something very own unique. I could not relate much this to 35mm lenses but rather to medium format. Especially when I tried shot at nature. Contrast is medium, it supress highlights suprisingly well. It remind me much of another lens Hex 90/2.8 (it means plenty of mid greys). Very flare resistant and doesnt encounter coma, aberations or such I could detect in last shoots. This lens surprised me really much. You know I didnt expect much from the model from 1960 and I bought the lens after a lot "hearsayings". SA is hell hot contender for other 21mm lenses and I dont really regret of the buy.
IMHO Zeiss lenses are very boring at B&W for them who look for signatures except sonnars of course. So my reason to go for SA is very good. I'm always intrigued of Holga look of Noctilux now I get that same from Anglulon 😉 I own another 25mm lens CV Skopar. It is good decent lens but SA is only slightly larger when both are attached to bodies. Mechanically SA feels good and confidence inspiring. CV is a joke compared to old 1960 lens. Of course technically speaking.
All said above is IMHO
tomasis
Well-known
deepwhite and vieri, congrats with the purchase.
maddoc, great pictures. I could believe that it is only films when SA reveals full its character.
x-ray, you need keep you low. You dont need boast a lot about. Everyone have some few cents, not a bunch of hefty cheap dollars, dude.
maddoc, great pictures. I could believe that it is only films when SA reveals full its character.
x-ray, you need keep you low. You dont need boast a lot about. Everyone have some few cents, not a bunch of hefty cheap dollars, dude.
summilux
Well-known
summilux
Well-known
x-ray: you know, truth is not always appreciated, people prefer a bit fantasy in this life.
i always appreciate your straightforwardness and integrity of your writings in this forum, and i believe i speak for a few here too.
i always appreciate your straightforwardness and integrity of your writings in this forum, and i believe i speak for a few here too.
deepwhite
Well-known
x-ray:
Maybe you're right. Maybe not. I'm not pro enough yet to tell.
Yet during my years in the record business, I learned a lot of lessons. Some of them are pretty heavy. For example, I bought my first microphone for USD$2000, and that was 13 years ago. I believed that the more expensive it is, the better it will be.
Then after a while I found that my recording didn't sound as good as other entry-level microphones. That's when I "learned" that what I believed might be wrong. Price tag doesn't translate into sound quality.
Yet still later, I found that the problem was on the USD$150 mic preamplifier I used with the $2000 microphone. I "learned" that your sound quality equals the "weakest link in your chain". (Pretty much the same as photography I guess.)
Then I "learned" a lot. I "learned" that all microphone preamplifiers sound almost the same; "characters" are just imagination and wishful thinking and brand worshipping. Later I got a pair of better monitors and "learned" that the characters are really there.
To this day I'm still not sure if what I believed today will still be correct tomorrow. Luckily I'm experimental enough and always learned my lesson rock solidly.
------
I have put together shots from different lenses, of the same subject, and compare. So far I can tell, about 80% correct, the Summicron 35/2 IV shots from the Nokton 35/1.2 shots. As for the others, I don't have other two lenses in the same focal length so I'll just have to shut up on this.
As for the SA21/3.4 ON AN R-D1S, please let me say that its very distinguishable to my eyes. Not just because of the vignetting.
Last but not least, mr. x-ray, your works are fantastic, so you can really say that you know more than I do. This is my own decision, so if in the end it turns out that I'm wrong, it will be a very good lesson for me too. Yet if in the end it's not just our wishful thinking, then maybe you can find some time, borrow an SA21/3.4 and an R-D1(s), try this combination yourself and let us know what you think.
------
summilux:
Sometimes "truth" is not un-appreciated. It's just not "confirmed" or "obeyed".
Like when I buy something that's too expensive for me, it doesn't mean that it's not too expensive for me. Neither does it mean that I don't agree with people that said it was too expensive for me. I just still buy it anyway.
Maybe you're right. Maybe not. I'm not pro enough yet to tell.
Yet during my years in the record business, I learned a lot of lessons. Some of them are pretty heavy. For example, I bought my first microphone for USD$2000, and that was 13 years ago. I believed that the more expensive it is, the better it will be.
Then after a while I found that my recording didn't sound as good as other entry-level microphones. That's when I "learned" that what I believed might be wrong. Price tag doesn't translate into sound quality.
Yet still later, I found that the problem was on the USD$150 mic preamplifier I used with the $2000 microphone. I "learned" that your sound quality equals the "weakest link in your chain". (Pretty much the same as photography I guess.)
Then I "learned" a lot. I "learned" that all microphone preamplifiers sound almost the same; "characters" are just imagination and wishful thinking and brand worshipping. Later I got a pair of better monitors and "learned" that the characters are really there.
To this day I'm still not sure if what I believed today will still be correct tomorrow. Luckily I'm experimental enough and always learned my lesson rock solidly.
------
I have put together shots from different lenses, of the same subject, and compare. So far I can tell, about 80% correct, the Summicron 35/2 IV shots from the Nokton 35/1.2 shots. As for the others, I don't have other two lenses in the same focal length so I'll just have to shut up on this.
As for the SA21/3.4 ON AN R-D1S, please let me say that its very distinguishable to my eyes. Not just because of the vignetting.
Last but not least, mr. x-ray, your works are fantastic, so you can really say that you know more than I do. This is my own decision, so if in the end it turns out that I'm wrong, it will be a very good lesson for me too. Yet if in the end it's not just our wishful thinking, then maybe you can find some time, borrow an SA21/3.4 and an R-D1(s), try this combination yourself and let us know what you think.
------
summilux:
Sometimes "truth" is not un-appreciated. It's just not "confirmed" or "obeyed".
Like when I buy something that's too expensive for me, it doesn't mean that it's not too expensive for me. Neither does it mean that I don't agree with people that said it was too expensive for me. I just still buy it anyway.
x-ray
Veteran
I think I'm finally getting to understand the forum thing. Write only what people want to read and you'll be a success and maybe even a magazine writer. Personal and professional experience doesn't count. It's all about what glamorizes ones lust.
My time is better spent on my work and not here. Final post
Helenhill, you can now have the title of alpha male.
My time is better spent on my work and not here. Final post
Helenhill, you can now have the title of alpha male.
deepwhite
Well-known
While this is true in many cases, there's another aspect of truth you've missed, dear x-ray.
I've been moderators for two forums and know how people like to hear what they wanted to hear. Yet, being a moderator, most of the time an "adviser" for new comers, when it's my obligation to say what I believe which is against people's wishes, I just have to say it, and then try not to get pissed off when people don't listen.
But that's because I'm a moderator, not just a member.
Your work definitely show your personal and professional experience, and therefore I personally do hope that this is not your final post. But, just like the lens choice is mine, this choice is yours.
Thanks for your detailed reply, although I chose the other route.
tomasis
Well-known
deepwhite, I feel the same. I accept that other have different opinions than my own because it is just nature of the human beings. It is really no absolute truths, only relative, subjective. The way X-ray is writing at, it piss me of and I lost respect when he over generalize the whole and he believes that he is speaking the absolute truth. Look, people dont buy best lens by highest resolution, sharpness, contrast or because it is cheapest. For some reason, price is not always deciding factor for choosing a lens, sometimes build quality, handling can be the deciding factor also. Hektor may be not sharp or cheap, but it can give a look for just some people. It applies Summarex or anything else. Thats why I dont mind Xrays post being last so I dont need be pissed of again.
sirius
Well-known
Well, x-ray, you are one of my favorites here, not only for generously offering advice but having such stellar images to share. Your pictures are the real thing while most pictures here often look like images people take just so they can use a camera they really like.
Many of the pictures you have in your gallery were taken with a Leica. Obviously there was something in the Leica optics and cameras that you loves and made you choose it over, say, Nikon, which also has tremendous cameras and glass. I know that you have become very disgusted with Leica business practices and build quality with recent products and have firmly moved over to Zeiss.
You are so right that most lenses perform the same now, especially at mid-aperture. I think the difference is that Leica lenses (and Zeiss) are optimized for wide apertures. I think the performance at f2 or f1.4 is really why I have bought these cameras and lenses. I own a wonderful Canon DSLR and it makes lovely images, but there is something more appealing to me when I compare a photo from the R-D1 with a leica lens. Whether the photo is any good, I'm not sure, but qualities of rendering move me a little more. That is, after all, why someone searching for self-expression chooses a tool, be it a holga, medium format, a 4x5, a rangefinder...There is a certain point where it all becomes moot. Is a pencil better than charcoal?
All said, I wish I was making images as moving as the ones you produce. Forget the camera!
Maybe one day...
Many of the pictures you have in your gallery were taken with a Leica. Obviously there was something in the Leica optics and cameras that you loves and made you choose it over, say, Nikon, which also has tremendous cameras and glass. I know that you have become very disgusted with Leica business practices and build quality with recent products and have firmly moved over to Zeiss.
You are so right that most lenses perform the same now, especially at mid-aperture. I think the difference is that Leica lenses (and Zeiss) are optimized for wide apertures. I think the performance at f2 or f1.4 is really why I have bought these cameras and lenses. I own a wonderful Canon DSLR and it makes lovely images, but there is something more appealing to me when I compare a photo from the R-D1 with a leica lens. Whether the photo is any good, I'm not sure, but qualities of rendering move me a little more. That is, after all, why someone searching for self-expression chooses a tool, be it a holga, medium format, a 4x5, a rangefinder...There is a certain point where it all becomes moot. Is a pencil better than charcoal?
All said, I wish I was making images as moving as the ones you produce. Forget the camera!
Maybe one day...
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Last edited:
noimmunity
scratch my niche
Reading this thread is like watching a scene from the Seven Samurai, in which the experienced swordsman is unceremoniously taken out by a gun.
X-ray's departure would be a loss for RFF, but the archives are full of valuable posts from him and others. Sometimes I just think that mining the archives is the best way to relate to this place.
Last edited:
cam
the need for speed
vieri -- i am soooo jealous! the cheapest i found it for here was 1700 euro (absolutely mint, mind you, a collectable).
deepwhite -- congratulations! i truly think you made the right decision. i got the 21/2.8 pre-asph in the package with my R-D1 but almost never use it because of the weight and bulk. i don't mind that inconvenience in long fast lenses for portraiture, but for wide angle it really bothers me. after bringing my 21mm Elmarit recently on holiday and never using it even though i wanted to go wider, i realised i will have to look around for an SA that is more my price range.
btw, charming as the vignetting can be, it also can be annoying as hell for certain photos. i've found that the Epson Raw software does a very nice job of lessening it (and sometimes getting rid of it completely).
deepwhite -- congratulations! i truly think you made the right decision. i got the 21/2.8 pre-asph in the package with my R-D1 but almost never use it because of the weight and bulk. i don't mind that inconvenience in long fast lenses for portraiture, but for wide angle it really bothers me. after bringing my 21mm Elmarit recently on holiday and never using it even though i wanted to go wider, i realised i will have to look around for an SA that is more my price range.
btw, charming as the vignetting can be, it also can be annoying as hell for certain photos. i've found that the Epson Raw software does a very nice job of lessening it (and sometimes getting rid of it completely).
vieri
Leica Ambassador
Try here (I assume you live in Europe, but not sure where):
http://www.newoldcamera.com
they have a great selection of used lenses & cameras - including a few S-A for much less. 😀
Usual disclaimer, I am not related nor affiliates with NOC in any way besides being an hopefully happy customer (will get my stuff in a few days, so cannot comment on lenses or cameras' conditions etc).
cam
the need for speed
thank you, vieri!
europe, yes, in paris. do you happen to know if they speak english? my italian is not so good...
europe, yes, in paris. do you happen to know if they speak english? my italian is not so good...
vieri
Leica Ambassador
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
FWIW, I am having trouble understanding why this thread was moved to the Optics & Lenses forum, since the instructions say this is not the place to discuss specific lenses. Of course, I don't know where it was moved from, but I imagine it might have been under Leica M or LTM. Why would one of those not be more appropriate, consistent with the instructions in blue at the top?
As I understand it, this section is for more technical discussions--say, about Seidel abberations, or Abbe numbers, and such. Or has the thinking on this changed, perhaps on the basis of usage (I see where many folks do discuss specific lenses, or want to compare this vs. that).
As I understand it, this section is for more technical discussions--say, about Seidel abberations, or Abbe numbers, and such. Or has the thinking on this changed, perhaps on the basis of usage (I see where many folks do discuss specific lenses, or want to compare this vs. that).
deepwhite
Well-known
Hi Rob,
This thread is in the "Leica M" forum now. The reason why you can still see it in the Optics & Lenses forum is because that's where I started this thread by mistake. The moderator moved it for me but left a "ghost thread" so that we can still follow it.
This thread is in the "Leica M" forum now. The reason why you can still see it in the Optics & Lenses forum is because that's where I started this thread by mistake. The moderator moved it for me but left a "ghost thread" so that we can still follow it.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
Oh, OK. So it started here & "moved" means it was moved elsewhere--in this case to the Leica M forum? Got it.
"Ghost thread," huh? Still learning how the forum works . . .
"Ghost thread," huh? Still learning how the forum works . . .