fleetwoodjazz
Established
My rangefinder set up includes one ZI, one M6 with the Biogon 35m and the Sonnar 50mm, I am looking to add one wider lens .
After mulling between 21mm and 25mm and with the Biogon already in much use, I feel that a 21mm makes much more senses in my case. The local shop here can supply the Zeiss 21mm Biogon (both 2.8 and 4.5 version) + viewfinder for roughly 1500 USD which is quite expensive so I need a careful selection.
The choice couldn't be anymore difficult knowing that for 1500, one can roughly buy a brand new Bessa R4 + one VC 21mm f4 + one VC 25mm f4. VC quality control does worry me a little bit though. Which one would you choose? And why?
Cheers
After mulling between 21mm and 25mm and with the Biogon already in much use, I feel that a 21mm makes much more senses in my case. The local shop here can supply the Zeiss 21mm Biogon (both 2.8 and 4.5 version) + viewfinder for roughly 1500 USD which is quite expensive so I need a careful selection.
The choice couldn't be anymore difficult knowing that for 1500, one can roughly buy a brand new Bessa R4 + one VC 21mm f4 + one VC 25mm f4. VC quality control does worry me a little bit though. Which one would you choose? And why?
Cheers
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
The Zeiss 21mm/4.5 + VC finder should bring it in under $1200(US), no?
Papercut
Well-known
i went through the decision-making process buying a 21mm recently too. After running through the images on the m-mount group (flickr) for all of the prime suspects, I decided that for my uses (primarily street work, not architecture nor landscape) that both the Zeiss and Leica choices were not necessary (extra money for virtually same performance or tons extra money for speed that I would rarely, if ever, use), and went with the CV 21/4 (in m-mount). But then I splurged on the Zeiss 21mm finder (which cost as much as the lens), simply because looking through a friend's 28mm Zeiss finder was so amazingly wonderful. But that was a luxury splurge that I could easily have done without; still, since for my use I rarely have to bother focusing, the viewfinder is the main way I "interact with" the lens, so I am grateful that it is extra bright.
So far I have no complaints about the CV 21. Seems well enough built, though the aperture stops feel less "weighty" than my Zeiss Biogon -- just a little more tinny feeling when it clicks into place.
I doubt there's any "wrong" choice with any of the 21s, even the venerable Super-Angulon has considerable appeal (for me). It's all about your intended use and budget.
So far I have no complaints about the CV 21. Seems well enough built, though the aperture stops feel less "weighty" than my Zeiss Biogon -- just a little more tinny feeling when it clicks into place.
I doubt there's any "wrong" choice with any of the 21s, even the venerable Super-Angulon has considerable appeal (for me). It's all about your intended use and budget.
Last edited:
back alley
IMAGES
i have used them all.
the cv 21 and 25, the zm 21, 25 and 28.
i also had a r4a which is a great camera.
i now use the zm 21/4.5.
if you go with the r4a/m camera then i would recommend the cv 21 or 25 as they are tiny and do not block the finder. i prefer a 21 to a 25 lately.
if you stick it on the zm body any of the lenses would be fine but the zm 21 and 25 are outstanding.
hard to make a bad choice here.
the cv 21 and 25, the zm 21, 25 and 28.
i also had a r4a which is a great camera.
i now use the zm 21/4.5.
if you go with the r4a/m camera then i would recommend the cv 21 or 25 as they are tiny and do not block the finder. i prefer a 21 to a 25 lately.
if you stick it on the zm body any of the lenses would be fine but the zm 21 and 25 are outstanding.
hard to make a bad choice here.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
The 21f4.5 ZM Biogon is one of the best 21's made by anyone! However, it is not needed i your case as you state you are mainly interested in "street" and people. Go for a R4M (or A) and the 21f4 M-mount. Great main camera for wides - and a great back-up for your other bodies.
The 21/35/50 kit is classic and you can do just about anything you want with it.
The quality of the 21f4 (and the 25f4) is very good. It is small and compact and optically very competent. I carry a R4M in my bag all the time - usually with the 21f4.5 or the 21f4 VC. On a recent trip to Europe for three weeks I just took a M2 with a 50f1.5 C-Sonnar, a MP with a 35f1.4 Nokton SC and the R4M with the new 15f4.5 in M-mount (mainly to get used to it). Great, portable package and though there were a couple of times when I missed a 75/90 - it wasen't critical. 55 rolls of Neopan Presto 400 and a change of clothing (clothes can easily be picked up on the road - cameras and film is more difficult) - all went into a small shoulder bag and my ratty looking Brady bag. No checked luggage - no lost luggae and first out of the terminal!!!!
The 21/35/50 kit is classic and you can do just about anything you want with it.
The quality of the 21f4 (and the 25f4) is very good. It is small and compact and optically very competent. I carry a R4M in my bag all the time - usually with the 21f4.5 or the 21f4 VC. On a recent trip to Europe for three weeks I just took a M2 with a 50f1.5 C-Sonnar, a MP with a 35f1.4 Nokton SC and the R4M with the new 15f4.5 in M-mount (mainly to get used to it). Great, portable package and though there were a couple of times when I missed a 75/90 - it wasen't critical. 55 rolls of Neopan Presto 400 and a change of clothing (clothes can easily be picked up on the road - cameras and film is more difficult) - all went into a small shoulder bag and my ratty looking Brady bag. No checked luggage - no lost luggae and first out of the terminal!!!!
mfogiel
Veteran
For street and people, a 21mm is an overkill - you would have to stick it in their face to get a meaningful human presence in the frame, and streetwise, you have to start worrying about the verticals, etc. The 25/2.8 Biogon is the way to go - probably the sharpest 25mm lens ever made, but also great to shoot from the hip.
Last edited:
maddoc
... likes film again.
Marek, that first one is a killer shot !! 
Papercut
Well-known
yeah, no meaningful human presence here -- guess i was too far away!
point is: people shoot differently, in different situations, with different methods and there are no hard and fast rules
OP: if you pick up a used 21 (any of them really), you can try the focal length and see if it works for you -- that is, if you don't already know so from experience -- if it doesn't, sell it and move on to something else.
point is: people shoot differently, in different situations, with different methods and there are no hard and fast rules
OP: if you pick up a used 21 (any of them really), you can try the focal length and see if it works for you -- that is, if you don't already know so from experience -- if it doesn't, sell it and move on to something else.
Last edited:
fleetwoodjazz
Established
The first thing is thank you all for the input as well as great pictures. Personally I never shoot ultra wide before (my widest lens was the Pentax 31mm) so it's also a bit difficult to tell exactly which focal length would suit me better.
Indeed that the 25mm could be an easier choice for the wideness goes more "gradual" rather than being shocked at how wide the 21mm can be in the first moment.
I don't really understand why Tom A first said I do not need the 21mm 4.5 and later on recommend me towards the R4 + VC 21mm? Maybe a typing mistake? The CZ 21mm 4.5 looks to my eyes very sharp and contrasty wide open. Only the pricing goes a little bit overstretching in my view.
Indeed that the 25mm could be an easier choice for the wideness goes more "gradual" rather than being shocked at how wide the 21mm can be in the first moment.
I don't really understand why Tom A first said I do not need the 21mm 4.5 and later on recommend me towards the R4 + VC 21mm? Maybe a typing mistake? The CZ 21mm 4.5 looks to my eyes very sharp and contrasty wide open. Only the pricing goes a little bit overstretching in my view.
Papercut
Well-known
fleetwoodjazz:
Unless i'm misreading him, Tom A's point was that the extra expense of the Zeiss (over the CV) may not be necessary, depending on your subject matter.
The only way to know if a focal length will suit you is to try it out over a period of time to see if it fits your vision (or your vision adapts to it). The 24/25 is a common choice, but it seems like a "normal" wide angle to me, not really "ultra wide". I've found that the visual impact of the 21mm is quite flexible: if the view contains vanishing points, near-far relationships, or leading lines, it tends to emphasize space quite dramatically, but if the view is more or less flattened, then it appears quite "normal". The same would be true of the 24/25 length too, but to a lesser extent, of course. So the only way, imo, is to try one or the other (or both!) for yourself and then assess the results And that's why I think buying used is a smart choice: you can sell off a used lens for pretty much what you paid for it (+/- 5-10%, which is pretty low "rental fee") if it doesn't agree with you.
Unless i'm misreading him, Tom A's point was that the extra expense of the Zeiss (over the CV) may not be necessary, depending on your subject matter.
The only way to know if a focal length will suit you is to try it out over a period of time to see if it fits your vision (or your vision adapts to it). The 24/25 is a common choice, but it seems like a "normal" wide angle to me, not really "ultra wide". I've found that the visual impact of the 21mm is quite flexible: if the view contains vanishing points, near-far relationships, or leading lines, it tends to emphasize space quite dramatically, but if the view is more or less flattened, then it appears quite "normal". The same would be true of the 24/25 length too, but to a lesser extent, of course. So the only way, imo, is to try one or the other (or both!) for yourself and then assess the results
And that's why I think buying used is a smart choice: you can sell off a used lens for pretty much what you paid for it (+/- 5-10%, which is pretty low "rental fee") if it doesn't agree with you.
Last edited:
DGA
Well-known
Totally agree, excellent shot.Marek, that first one is a killer shot !!
My wide focal length is the 28mm (M-Hex), it's wide enough for street shoots
but without too much distortion.
For me, 21mm looks too much so I would have gotten the 25mm.
As far a I know (form friends) the Biogon is indeed an excellent piece of glass.
ampguy
Veteran
I think that CV M-mount 15 would be nice, I check the classifieds for them regularly.
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
I agree on the 25 for street, though I use the ZM28 now. But the R4A + CV21 is an absolutely superb combination. There is nothing else quite like it.
kshapero
South Florida Man
I've also taken no change of clothing, then washed my clothes once a day in the hotel sink until a maid walked in on me once. Tom, love to see a photo of your camera bag filled with your rigs.
back alley
IMAGES
28 is the easiest of the wides to use
25 gives an edgier shot than the 28, i prefer the 25
21 forces you to move closer and to think about the shot more
i use a 21 on the rd1 which = about a 32mm fov, my 'normal' lens is a 35 so that fits nicely for me.
i really like a 15 on the rd1, it becomes a 23mm fov and i use it like a p & s camera.
i suggest you get a cv 25 and try it out on the zi, if you like it there is always the zm 25 or the r4a/m. on the zi you can use the entire finder view for the 25, works great.
25 gives an edgier shot than the 28, i prefer the 25
21 forces you to move closer and to think about the shot more
i use a 21 on the rd1 which = about a 32mm fov, my 'normal' lens is a 35 so that fits nicely for me.
i really like a 15 on the rd1, it becomes a 23mm fov and i use it like a p & s camera.
i suggest you get a cv 25 and try it out on the zi, if you like it there is always the zm 25 or the r4a/m. on the zi you can use the entire finder view for the 25, works great.
philipp.leser
Established
You could also watch for deals on the CV 21mm in LTM, because it used to include the viewfinder. I got mine new for <300 Euros and really love it!. You could always add an R4a/m later if you want to and sell the viewfinder.
Regards,
Philipp
Regards,
Philipp
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
yes. my point was that unless you do critical architectural work, the 21f4.5 is a bit of an overkill. For the same money you can pick up a 21f4 and a 25f4 VC - shoot with both and decide which one to keep. The R4M/A is just for convinience - a good finder costs almost as much and you will have an extra body with an excellent meter.
I think the term super-wide or ultra wide needs to be "adjusted". For me the ultra-wides start at 18mm and descends to the 12f5.6! The 21/25 are now just plain wide-angle lenses!
21 and wider lenses have a fairly steep learning curve. Initially one tends to get a severe case of "wideitis" and shoot everything with them. After a while you get to know the lens and start using it to the best of its ability. You also re-define the term "close enough".
I think the term super-wide or ultra wide needs to be "adjusted". For me the ultra-wides start at 18mm and descends to the 12f5.6! The 21/25 are now just plain wide-angle lenses!
21 and wider lenses have a fairly steep learning curve. Initially one tends to get a severe case of "wideitis" and shoot everything with them. After a while you get to know the lens and start using it to the best of its ability. You also re-define the term "close enough".