21/4 or 25/4 for my kit?

[Mr. Inky]

Hello,

I currently have an R2A with the 15/4.5 and 35/1.7. I'm looking for something in between the two, and am considering the 21 or the [older] 25. Right now, I'm leaning towards the 21 because I do like wide and it is rangefinder coupled for those instances where I might need precise focusing.

Any thoughts on this? Any input would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks.

 

[fishtek]

I will (sooner or later) acquire the 21/4 for the same reasons. The 25 is just too close to the 35 for me, and the RF coupling is important (to me), too.

Regards!
Don

 

[sockeyed]

I'd vote for the 25/4. I had the 21, but I found that the wide-angle effect was too much for my taste. The 25 is stunning in that it covers a wide FOV without appearing at all dramatic.

I also love the click-stop focusing. The lack of RF coupling is not a problem at all for me.

Here is an example of what it's capable of:

More examples HERE

 

[oftheherd]

Sockeyed - if that is full frame that is indeed impressive. I would have assumed that rf would not give as much distortion as SLR and it appears so.

I don't have 35mm rf interchangable lens cameras. My RF is lenses are equivalent to 28mm and 25mm in 35 cameras. It is quite noticible.

However, how to choose between 21 and 25 in rf? In SLRdom, 24mm is not close to 35mm. And althought not that much, in mm, I think 21 and 24 would be distunguishable. Since I like wide myself, if I had the choice, I would probably be inclined towards the 21. Or at least I would have been. Looking at Sockeyed's photo, I would sure like to compare them before purchasing.

Tough choice.

 

[sockeyed]

I'm sorry that I don't have very many 21/4 samples to show you. I hope someone else can post some. It's a good lens for indoor work.

Here's one or two:

 

[oscroft]

In SLRdom, 24mm is not close to 35mm. And althought not that much, in mm, I think 21 and 24 would be distunguishable.

I agree (though I don't think SLR/RF makes any difference). I've got 35 and 25 in CV RF and they are not close, and I've got 35 and 24 in SLR and they're not close either. I also have 21 and 25 in CV RF, and 21 and 24 in SLR, and they are indeed very distinguishable - they are really very different.

 

[mtbbrian]

If It were me, with the other two lenes you have, I'd go with the 25.
Having that provides a good range inbetween the other two lenes you have.
I have the 25 and I LOVE IT!
Brian

 

[mike_j]

I have used 21 and 25 and for general purposes decided to buy the 25 snapshot. It's a great lens and focussing really is no problem, much easier than bothering with the rangefinder. I use it on an M6 and find I can live with the 28mm framelines so don't generally use the add on viewfinder though it is very good.

Of course the 21 gives more extreme wide angle if that's what you are after. Both are excellent lenses.

 

[35mmdelux]

i prefer the 21mm coupled lens. As a 35mm lens shooter I didn't find the 25mm all that wide. Presently my WA bullpen includes 21mmVC, and Leicas 28mmV4 & 35mmV4 (semi wide).

The 21mm is renown for people shots and I plan to use it more for sweeping landscapes. It also reminds me of my Xpan with great breath of view.

 

[BillBingham2]

Inky,

My vote is for the 25. I have one and LOVE IT! It goes around on a Bessa L and I have a 15/40/105 kit that is for my M6. There is a difference in lens designs, not just SLR vs RF, even from the same company.

I grew up with a 24/2.8 Nikkor (SLR) as my wide angle lens. Never liked it for people pictures much but I worked through it. It made footballs (american) out of peoples heads way too easily. When I got the 25/4, it was basically free as part of a larger purchase used. The more and more I worked with the 25/4, the more I loved it. It DOES NOT make heads into footballs as much as my Nikkor 24 does. It's a bit slow, but it really small.

Coupled vs not has not been a big deal to me. I thought it would be at first, but two pictures over four years have been out of focus. It's slow speed and big DOF make it easy. If you are really have to have it coupled, buy a new one and get a finder. It will cost more, but you may feel better. BUT, I do not know what or how you shoot. You might want to shoot up close wide open all the time, then get the coupling just to be sure 100%.

I'm selling a 21 right now because it has not see light go through it in several years.

B2 (;->

 

[Mr. Inky]

Thanks everyone for your thoughtful responses and sample photos. I guess another question I have is do you think the 21 is too close to the 15? On paper/specs, I always thought that the difference between the two would fairly large but, in practice, is there a large difference? I'm new to rangefinders and up until recently my only lens was the 15. While it is a fantastic lens, I was looking for something just a bit more "forgiving" in terms of perspective distortion, need for foreground composition, etc.. While I love the 35/1.7 as well, I don't consider it wide at all - seems like a "normal" perspective to me. So now, I'm looking for something in between the normal 35 and the superwide 15

Please feel free to view my Pbase gallery to get an idea of how I've used my lenses to date:

http://www.pbase.com/brandbeaver/voigtlander_bessa_r2a

The main gallery is here (digital stuff):

http://www.pbase.com/brandbeaver/root

Thanks!

Duc

 

[GeneW]

I've owned 'em both. Had the 21, found it a bit too wide, had the 25, found I wasn't using it enough, got another 21. Second time around I appreciate it more. Here are a couple of 21mm shots from a recent roll of Superia 400, using a Bessa L.

Gene

 

[35mmdelux]

anything beyond 28mm you'll get some distortion. For people shots make sure they are away from the edge of the frame and try to keep the camera vertical as much as possible for anything architectural.

I use my 28mm alot. As for the 21mm I accept the distortion as par game. Best - Paul