ZM 21 vs Leica 21

T

TJV

Well-known
Local time
1:45 PM
Joined
Nov 27, 2006
Messages
595
Location
Cloud Nine
View My Gallery
A frequently debated topic, I know. Lets keep this civil! Straight answers please. Who out there owns one of these and what are your own subjective opinions?..

On the M8, there is an obvious advantage of buying the Leica 6bit coded Elmarit because of the pending cyan corner corrections promised in FW 1.10. I've read the new reviews on Lumious Landscape and find them rather usesless and subjective. All I really want to know is this:
How does it compare, as is without cyan correction etc, to that of the Leica version when it is also used "uncoded". Is the build quality in the same ball park? It is rumoured that Phase One will incorperate red vignetting reduction into the next upgrade to C1, so would this mean that I could effectively do the 6bit corrections myself in software?
Should I just save for the Leica version? If I was talking about using this on a film body, I'd flag Leica and just go with the Zeiss. Digi complicates things. :bang:

Tim
 
TJV,
I can't help you on the uber expensive Leica 21mm however the Zeiss 21mm Biogon is one of two of my favorite lenses for this camera. Take a look at my Flickr account for representations of its performance under an array of lighting conditions.

As to the coding you can hand code the Zeiss or you can use Lightroom and take care of light fall off and cyan shift when using IR filters manually (similar to 6-bit coding but post process and more refined). I find Lightroom to be an ideal RAW converter and post process application of the M8 so far.

Ted

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/185/370569571_4d3475a116_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/134/370569591_f84176ffd5_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/164/370569576_5749ed2941_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/172/370892783_fe84b7dab4_b.jpg

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/127/370582712_1e0edde1d1_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
patrickho777 said:
Hi TJV,

Have you made the decision yet? I am 99% sure on ordering an M8. I am also undecided on which 21mm to purchase. Maybe you can share your experience in this forum.
Click to expand...

Hey,
no, I still haven't made a decision. I think for the money the Zeiss lens is amazing but the lack of 6bit coding or realistic workflow fixes for cyan corners etc in C1 etc is worrying. I think the Leica lens is better, just not sure if it's double the price better not taking into account the coding issue.

Tim
 
The Leica lens is smaller however on the M8 it has more light fall off then the Zeiss. The Zeiss can be corrected for cyan corners easily in Lightroom (free for trial) as well as light fall off or can be user 6-bit coded and hence have the same performance as the Leica in this respect but with less deleterious corrections so better IQ. Aside from the form factor (size), or the brand name, I'm not sure as to the why of going Leica at this focal length; an inductive argument at best in favor of one lens or the other. However until new points are made in favor of the Leica from an IQ standpoint, I cannot see the additional expense nor have I seen images that would compel me to choose the Leica over the Zeiss were they priced the same (which of course they are not). Perhaps you should save the extra money for a lens where Leica has a clear superiority like a Summilux or perhaps a Summicron or Noctilux.

http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/M8_5/m8_5.html
 
Last edited:
Well, what do want out of your images, is the most important question, I suppose. I personally like a real inky oof at maximum aperture but without an overbearing halo effect, (read: glow and /or aberration), of older vintage lenses, so I shoot a first generation 21 elmarit. Early eighties. (I just picked up a 90 summicron, vintage 1991, for the same reasons.) My elmarit, test-bench wise, is no match for the 21 ZM. From corner to corner Zeiss, unlike Leica, shows amazing consistency. My 50 planar has the same consistency. If you are leaning towards the Zeiss, just get it and hand code the thing with a sharpy.

Here are two examples of my 21:

http://www.leica-camera-user.com/landscape-travel/14816-east-harlem-east-river.html

And, yes, I shoot with the M8. Good luck.

-grant
 
When you really need the best quality available and you use the 21mm focal length quite often you should go with the Leica21Asph.
I've compared it with the other WA around, it is a huge step from the old non-aspherical version!
It is the most expensive but also the best (image quality and build quality) 21mm-lens ever made.
I'm always wondering why people expect that a three times cheaper lens has the same quality, if you want the same quality from Zeiss you have to take real Zeiss like the 2,8/15. Quality was/is NEVER cheap (and never will be)!
You've spent so much money to get the M8, you shouldn't make compromises with the lenses (especially because <ou can use them for decades).

But when you only want to shoot some pictures with 21mm Leica/Zeiss is maybe too much, the Cosinas (labeled as Voigtländer or Zeiss) are nice lenses - especially for more exotic types of lenses you rarely use.
 
Last edited:
georgl,
I shoot the Zeiss Biogon 21mm lens on my M8 as my standard lens. The Leica has a better form factor in that it is smaller and smoother in operation (somewhat). The Zeiss has better sharpness corner to corner. Both paint differently- some will prefer one to the other. I like the Zeiss's three dimensionality especially when you have layers of subject matter going from razor sharp focus to in focus to just out of focus as in the following picture. The decision of which lens is the proper choice is personal but not clear cut in favor of one over the other from an objective point of view- if anything the Zeiss is ahead in this department.

The link below shows the three-dimensional effect as I describe it above. I'd love to see some examples of the Leica but they are few and far between so I must guess this lens does not sell that well. Also see Irwin P's review of these lenses in my link provided. Perhaps you can provide some images shot on the Leica 21mm asph as I’d like to get a feel for it’s signature.

Ted
http://www.flickr.com/photo_zoom.gne?id=370569591&size=l
http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/M8_5/m8_5.html
 
Last edited:
georgl said:
When you really need the best quality available and you use the 21mm focal length quite often you should go with the Leica21Asph.
I've compared it with the other WA around, it is a huge step from the old non-aspherical version!
It is the most expensive but also the best (image quality and build quality) 21mm-lens ever made.
I'm always wondering why people expect that a three times cheaper lens has the same quality, if you want the same quality from Zeiss you have to take real Zeiss like the 2,8/15. Quality was/is NEVER cheap (and never will be)!
You've spent so much money to get the M8, you shouldn't make compromises with the lenses (especially because <ou can use them for decades).

But when you only want to shoot some pictures with 21mm Leica/Zeiss is maybe too much, the Cosinas (labeled as Voigtländer or Zeiss) are nice lenses - especially for more exotic types of lenses you rarely use.
Click to expand...

My two main lenses on the M8 are 35 Lux Asph and 28 Elmarit Asph, with a 50 cron only very occasionally. I'm not really into my super wides, and almost never use my 28 on my film bodies though I feel that the 28 equiv on digi (read 21mm 35mm terms) would be a useful tool and open a few doors in reportage work. I like to get close and used to almost exclusively use 28mm when photographing people but got sick of the distortion on edge of frame close subjects. The 1.33 crop goes some way to keep this to a minimum, it seems.

I think the Zeiss lens is incredible value for money although i've never actually held one or seen one in the flesh. The point is that I have no time to waste in correcting my images and tweaking for cyan etc. I think self coding is an option, just not one that I want to dabble with. To use your words, I didn't spend all this money on Leica gear (film and digi) to do something as unreliable and impermanent as drawing a code on a expensive lens with a black pen. Perhaps it's a matter of just waiting to see what options C1 and Leica add when the new firmware is released. Most of my work these days is colour so IR filters are an important item for me (not that I have any yet.) I was editing down some old images for my WPP masterclass portfolio today and got really excited seeing old BW images shot on my anchient M3 and scratched up first gen summicron 50. I love the look of film and analogue grain but I'd be mental to think I didn't have to face similar problems and limitations with analogue capture. ALL flat neg/positive scans require corrections and editing to get them looking their best. Digi should be no different. I just want to make things as easy and cost effective as I can!

Tim

One from my last book. M3.
 

Attachments

  • 2005-98-21.jpg
    2005-98-21.jpg
    31.9 KB · Views: 0
TJV,
I have not coded my Zeiss 21 (I don't know how) so what you see in my images is what you'll get with a minimum of fuss. I also have not had an issue with cyan fringing however this I suspect is because I have not yet used IR cut filters.
 
I'm going to try downloading the new Adobe Lightroom app and CS3 again and take a look at all its correction options. After talking to a few people in the know today it seems that this may be the answer to a lot of peoples RAW conversion prairs regarding the M8 and uncoded lenses with IR filters.
I'm really foaming at the mouth over the Zeiss 21. I think the price of the Leica 21 is way over the top, especially seeing as I'm more of a mid focal length shooter 90% of the time.
Also, Sailor Ted, although your pictures are good examples of the 21 lenses FOV, I find your processing technique quite distracting. I know you're doing it on purpose, but when I'm seeing highlights and shadows clipped like in the above, I can't evaluate any real characteristics of the lens or camera used. Perhaps you can reprocess one of your favourite images with a more straight down the middle interpretation? That would be appreciated. Also, another question for you, when looking through the M8 viewfinder, how much does the lens block your vision? Idealy I'd like to use such a lens without an external viewfinder. When the hood is attached, how much more does that block, compared to say the 50mm Summicron?

Cheers,
Tim
 
TJV said:
Perhaps you can reprocess one of your favourite images with a more straight down the middle interpretation? That would be appreciated. Also, another question for you, when looking through the M8 viewfinder, how much does the lens block your vision?
Click to expand...

Sure Tim I'll re-due one and post it later tonight (provided it's still on my laptops hard drive). As to the FOV being blocked, you can see the ultra wide lens shade "just" at the bottom of the finder attachment however it does not impede it's FOV- so zero percent.
 
TJV said:
After talking to a few people in the know today it seems that this may be the answer to a lot of peoples RAW conversion prairs regarding the M8 and uncoded lenses with IR filters.
Click to expand...

What you'll want to look close at, concerning vignette/color correction via Adobe, is Automator. It is a photoshop tool that, with enough patience, I believe will negate the hassle of correcting a non-coded lens.

-grant
 
georgl said:
When you really need the best quality available and you use the 21mm focal length quite often you should go with the Leica21Asph.
I've compared it with the other WA around, it is a huge step from the old non-aspherical version!
It is the most expensive but also the best (image quality and build quality) 21mm-lens ever made.
I'm always wondering why people expect that a three times cheaper lens has the same quality, if you want the same quality from Zeiss you have to take real Zeiss like the 2,8/15. Quality was/is NEVER cheap (and never will be)!
You've spent so much money to get the M8, you shouldn't make compromises with the lenses (especially because <ou can use them for decades).

But when you only want to shoot some pictures with 21mm Leica/Zeiss is maybe too much, the Cosinas (labeled as Voigtländer or Zeiss) are nice lenses - especially for more exotic types of lenses you rarely use.
Click to expand...

Sorry, Georgl but this is guff based on snobbery and prejudice rather than real experience. The reason why people expect the ZM 21 to match the 21 Elamarit ASPH is that every credible reviewer who has compared the two lenses has concluded that they are of equivalent performance,there being no practical difference worthy of concern. The (probably) even cheaper 21 f4.5 appears to be ever so slightly better optically than either....

I own ZM and current model Leica lenses and can confirm that the ZM lenses are every bit as good, arguably sacrificing wide open centre performance a touch for unbelieveable edge resolution. If your argument held true the best things would always be the most expensive, which suggests that business efficiency, better/worse production techniques and other considerations do not exist. You might not like the idea that the ZMs cost far less and are essentially as good but if Putz can get his head roud it so should you!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

A
Voigtlander Nokton 21mm f/1.4 Asph Review
Replies
6
Views
1K
WJJ3
WJJ3
A
Zeiss 21/25mm 2.8 ZM vs. Leica 21/24mm 1.4 Lux
Replies
9
Views
2K
Roger Hicks
R
R
full frame digital leica: edge tinting with super wides
Replies
8
Views
2K
Jim Evidon
Jim Evidon
froyd
ZM silver paint body vs Leica M chrome
Replies
13
Views
2K
dabick42
D
T
ZM 21/4.5 - Question for Tom A
2
Replies
20
Views
3K
axiom
axiom
Back
Top Bottom