Is the 21/3.4 Super Angulon M highly desirable?

I use mine for architecture, as the distortion is very low. It is also more compact than the ASPH. Drawback: you can't meter with it. I deal with that by using it on my M2 or M3, as neither has a meter in the first place!
 
infrequent said:
i think maddoc will agree with me on this but if this color is wrong, i don't think we need it to be right! ; )

http://www.flickr.com/photos/maddoc2003jp/2623363149/in/pool-792707@N24
Click to expand...

Exactly ! :D;)

Here is one with "correct" colors:

2318444684_c9ed9a7e1c.jpg


BTW, in this one the diamond-shaped aperture can be seen.
 
Both of maddoc's photos show why some people should never use the SA21/3.4: if you're taking the pictures of a boring building, and your job is to provide the most faithful images of it, then using an SA21/3.4 would simply make it look to beautiful!
 
I think the [FONT=trebuchet ms, Arial, Helvetica]Super Angulon 1:3,4 f=21mm is desirable: very much so, in fact; I am in the market for a good specimen.
[/FONT]
 
Thomas, the Super-Angulon-M 21/3.4 fits very well onto a M2 ! :) I just gave it a try ... :D

Cheers,

Gabor
 
maddoc said:
From my experience with the Super-Angulon-M 21/3.4, it should appeal to somebody who likes photos taken with the 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH, 40mm Summicron-C, Noctilux. Very sharp stopped down, very low distortion, and very resistant to flare. Unfortunately for some, it shows quite some vignetting wide open.
Click to expand...

I would agree with this completely as its character was the reason I bought it. There are certainly no shortage of 21mm lenses on the market that are sharp, amazing and dont vignette. All the people that criticize this lens for its apparent short comings are in many way totally missing the point of the lens. If you want a more "perfect" 21, you certainly have options. If you want a 21 that looks super cool with a vibe all its own, its hard to argue with the f3.4 21.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom