Zeiss 21mm f4.5 & travel

[mervynyan]

I am going to Italy next week. I have decided to only bring ZM 21mm f4.5 lens with CV 21 viewfinder and leave 35,50,75 at home, as I also have a Nikon D700 with CV 40/f2.

Since I have not extensively tried using this lens, I hope some of you can help me with few questions.

1. This lens I read is not rangefinder-couple, hence I can't use rangefinder finder, do I have to try to focus the image on built-in viewfinder then?
2. By using hyper-focus, the index mark only goes to f11, how do I guess f16 and f22 hyper-focus range?
3. Using CV21mm viewfinder, does it cover the real photo or do I have to center the photo with the built-in viewfinder?


Cheers,
Mervyn

 

[Tom A]

The ZM 21f4.5 is range finder coupled so there is no problem there. The hyper focal marking ending at f11 is simply that beyond that - it is all in focus.
With the 21 finder on the camera, you focus with the rangefinder in the camera and then "frame" with the 21 finder on top. The finder is not exact - you tend to get a bit more than you see through the finder. Shot a roll prior to going. Focus/frame close/mid range and at infinity and compare the prints to what you saw. Just use some cheap color neg film and a 1 hour processor. The frame line coverage changes from close up to infinity and the finders are either set up for infinity or medium range, depending on the manufacturer.
In bright light, you can bypass the rangefinder focussing, guess the distance and hyperfocal. With things in close, you are better off checking the focus though as guessing between 0.5 and 0.8 meter is tough.
Have a great trip.

 

[Frankie]

You could also place a piece of matte film at the image plane with the shutter set at B and held down to observe. It helps if you mount the camera on a tripod. The image will be up side down, so use vertical building edges as reference targets.

Such a direct compariosn between the view finder and the image plane is the only reliable way to determine lens coverage...and free of cost.🙂

 

[kdemas]

Mervyn,

Enjoy your trip! I have been tempted to buy that 21mm for travel myself after really enjoying my Zeiss 25mm. Please let us know your thoughts when you return.

Tom- If I am not mistaken you've really enjoyed the ZM 21mm thus far?

Kent

 

[Tom A]

Kent, I think that the ZM C Biogon 21f4.5 is the best 21 I have ever used- and being a wide angle fanatic, I suspect I have tried them all at some time.

 

[kxl]

I assume you're using film rather than a DRF? If you are, then on a 21mm, all you really have to do is set your aperture to f8 and focus distance to about 6 ft or so. Everything from around 3 feet to infinity will be in focus. With a bright external viewfinder, you've got a very nice WA point & shoot.

I do the same thing with my ZM 25mm, albeit my presets are f8 and focus distance of between 8 and 10 ft.

 

[mervynyan]

Well, I am back. Quick developed and scanned a roll of expired Fuji Reala 100 from 1-hour photo, I like it as it is, no flare at all when point it to the mid-day sun at St Marco SQ.

http://www.drifterphoto.com/p242706047

 

[italy74]

Mervyn
too bad I didn't know you came here.. I always like meeting members of the cafe especially when coming from far. I'm glad it looks you had lot of fun here 🙂

 

[kshapero]

Ah the 21mm and ZI, made for each other. I have the LTM CV version. Love it.

 

[raid]

Kent, I think that the ZM C Biogon 21f4.5 is the best 21 I have ever used- and being a wide angle fanatic, I suspect I have tried them all at some time.

Tom,

Have you tried out the W-Rokkor 21mm 4.5?

 

[Tom A]

Most likely I have tried it - not owned it though. I tend to keep "favourites" - my 21f3.4 SA, an early Biogon 21f4.5 (1957), a Ricoh 21f3.5 LTM and a couple of the ZM Biogon's as well as the VC 21f4's. I did have the Elmarit 21f2.8, the Asph Elmarit 21f2.8, the Kobalux 21f2.8 and other less memorable versions, including the SA 21f4.0 LTM.
The last couple of weeks I have been shooting with the new m-mount 15f4.5 Heliar. Love the fact that i can stick 52mm filters on it. Somehow It makes the 21's feel like a "normal" lens!
The ZM C Biogon 21f4.5 works like a 38mm Biogon on the SWC Hasselblad - my "bread and butter" kit for many years. It was, and still is, one of my favourite cameras - and the smaller 21f4.5 is just as good.
I am fascinated with the 21f1.4 Asph Summilux, but at $6000+ it is not on the horizon (yet). There has to be a better reason for spending $6000 than just speed and I haven't figured one out so far.

 

[maddoc]

Tom, I would be very interest to hear how you compare the Ricoh 21/3.5 LTM to the Super-Angulon-M 21/3.4. I have only seen a few example shots taken with the Ricoh.

 

[Tom A]

The Ricoh is good, small lens. It is closer to a VC 21f4 than a 21f3,4 SA. The SA has a "signature" of its own with the bitingly sharp center and the drop off towards the corner @ 3.4.
The Ricoh 21f3.5 is small and compact (and LTM) - the focussing and the "pin" on the aperture ring is easy to confuse. The finder for it is horrible - huge and heavy and not that precise.
There are some samples of the Ricoh 21mm f3.5 on our Flickr site (as well as with the 21mm f3.4).

 

[italy74]

Tom
what about the Zeiss Ikon SW? Coming without the rangefinder system, have you to go only with the focus marks on the lens? Or what? Another thing. I know that it works only with the accessory finders (15 - 18 - 21/25 - 25/28): still, I see that there's a kind of preview lever in front of it: maybe a 35 lens could be accommodated on the SW or not?
Besides: I've never seen the back of the Zeiss Ikon nor the SW. I know there's - for this last one - a particular method to indicate correct exposure but I really can't imagine how it works, since in the finder I guess there's no other mark than the 21/25 framelines.. Could you post something about that please?

 

[noimmunity]

I am fascinated with the 21f1.4 Asph Summilux, but at $6000+ it is not on the horizon (yet). There has to be a better reason for spending $6000 than just speed and I haven't figured one out so far.

The cynical take would be that it substitutes for photographic vision by enabling the photog to shoot pics that other people simply cannot take.
In your hands obviously an irrelevant consideration!
For subjects that need a really wide view with a very clear separation between close objects and background, this lens ought to be unrivalled. Or for wide views of interiors in low light. I think it would be great for dimly lit buddhist temples!

 

[Tom A]

Hmm. I like the justification for shooting with the 21f1.4 inside dimly lit temples. On the other hand, you are supposed to be in a serene state in those and thus should be able to handhold at 1 sec. even with a 2.8!
I will venture to do some " back" shots of the ZM and SW Zeiss today. The SW is a great carry along body for un-coupled lenses. I use my venerable Zeiss 28f8 (yes f8 is the maximum aperture - take that Summilux!). Stopped down to f11 it is sharp virtually across the board. Great pre-war lens, lots of "character" (flare, coma etc).

 

[mfogiel]

Dino,
The SW shows you a light at the back when you press the shutter: green =ok, orange=borderline, red=wrong exposure... The lever is used for locking the exposure reading before recomposing and shooting, what you normally do when a lot of sky is in the frame ( you lock the exposure on the shadows ).

 

[italy74]

Ok, Marek, thanks, so it's the AE-LOCK that lever.