boomguy57
Well-known
I am wondering if the jump is worth it...
I have a 21mm CV Color-Skopar now, and am considering swapping it for the 15mm CV. 21 seems pretty wide to me, and I don't use it that much, but maybe it's worth the little extra width when I do use it? Would anyone recommend this, or has anyone done it and have some feedback to share?
This is not really about the CV 15mm Heliar in particular, but that would be my 15mm of choice since it's more affordable than the Zeiss. I'm just wondering about the focal length difference, and if it's worth selling one to get the other.
I principally use 21-35-50-90 as my setup, with 35-50 getting 80% or more of the workload. But there are times I want to go wide either to challenge myself or to get more in, especially when traveling.
Any help is appreciated!
I have a 21mm CV Color-Skopar now, and am considering swapping it for the 15mm CV. 21 seems pretty wide to me, and I don't use it that much, but maybe it's worth the little extra width when I do use it? Would anyone recommend this, or has anyone done it and have some feedback to share?
This is not really about the CV 15mm Heliar in particular, but that would be my 15mm of choice since it's more affordable than the Zeiss. I'm just wondering about the focal length difference, and if it's worth selling one to get the other.
I principally use 21-35-50-90 as my setup, with 35-50 getting 80% or more of the workload. But there are times I want to go wide either to challenge myself or to get more in, especially when traveling.
Any help is appreciated!
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
It is a pretty big jump from 21 to 15. I have both the CV 15, 21 Biogon and the 21 Skopar. After years as a "mainly 50" guy I have only recently begun using wider angle lenses routinely. I use the 21s more often. But the 15 gives a really different perspective than most -- it really pulls in more than my eyes usually see in the casual sweep of a scene. I guess the issue is whether you would use this capability often enough to justify the switch.
Ben
Ben
sleepyhead
Well-known
I'm also basically a 21-35-50-90 guy, with the 35 and 50 getting the most use, followed by the 90, and very rarely, the 21mm.
I own a CV 15mm heliar, and I pretty much NEVER use it. It's just too wide for me. I've kept it for the past few years for those really rare shots (interiors of homes, mainly), when I'm in a tight space with no space to move further back, or large groups of people indoors (like posing in front of the Christmas tree).
But I'm thinking of selling the 15mm, 'cause I use it so little.
Other people seem to love the focal length, however. If you can afford it, perhaps own both 15 and 21 for a while and then sell the one you use least?
I own a CV 15mm heliar, and I pretty much NEVER use it. It's just too wide for me. I've kept it for the past few years for those really rare shots (interiors of homes, mainly), when I'm in a tight space with no space to move further back, or large groups of people indoors (like posing in front of the Christmas tree).
But I'm thinking of selling the 15mm, 'cause I use it so little.
Other people seem to love the focal length, however. If you can afford it, perhaps own both 15 and 21 for a while and then sell the one you use least?
grainhound
Well-known
I have and use both focal lengths. I would not want to abandon one for the other, as for me there's quite a difference - more than a little extra width. If I could only have one it would be the 21, which is more useful on more occasions, but I'd miss the 15.
You should find a way to check out the two focal lengths through a camera viewfinder, whether rangefinder or SLR. Then you'd have a better idea as to what works for you. Incidentally, I picked up my used old style C/V 15 with viewfinder and M mount adapter for $300 from a guy who had bought a Leica WATE (16-18-21). That was a few years ago, and I don't know how available they are now.
The old style comes with a viewfinder, but doesn't usually include the M mount adapter, and is the same optical formula as the new one. Although it isn't rangefinder coupled, a cursory glance at the distance scale shows you don't need it unless you're at f4.5 and minimum focus, which for me & a 15mm lens is unlikely.
My 21 is the f4.5 Biogon, which I use much more than the 15. The Biogon is a better lens, and costs more, but I use it more because of the focal length. Both lenses are compact, so I don't mind carrying both.
Check out the flickr M mount and Heliar 15/4.5 groups for photos, but watch out for cropped frame photos, as there are a lot of them.
You should find a way to check out the two focal lengths through a camera viewfinder, whether rangefinder or SLR. Then you'd have a better idea as to what works for you. Incidentally, I picked up my used old style C/V 15 with viewfinder and M mount adapter for $300 from a guy who had bought a Leica WATE (16-18-21). That was a few years ago, and I don't know how available they are now.
The old style comes with a viewfinder, but doesn't usually include the M mount adapter, and is the same optical formula as the new one. Although it isn't rangefinder coupled, a cursory glance at the distance scale shows you don't need it unless you're at f4.5 and minimum focus, which for me & a 15mm lens is unlikely.
My 21 is the f4.5 Biogon, which I use much more than the 15. The Biogon is a better lens, and costs more, but I use it more because of the focal length. Both lenses are compact, so I don't mind carrying both.
Check out the flickr M mount and Heliar 15/4.5 groups for photos, but watch out for cropped frame photos, as there are a lot of them.
back alley
IMAGES
if you are going to have one then i would stay with the 21.
it's much more versatile than the 15...which is a great little lens.
it's much more versatile than the 15...which is a great little lens.
robbeiflex
Well-known
I had the CV 21mm for while, which I successfully used for some nice interior shots. However, otherwise I just wasn't happy with my results with it so I eventually sold it and over time bought a 28mm and a 15mm. When I want wide angle, which is fairly often, I grab the 28mm. When I want CrAzY-wIdE I go for the 15mm. Admittedly I only use it a few times a year, but the CV 15mm Super Wide Heliar is truly a magical lens. You just have to try it and see if it is for you.
Cheers,
Rob
Cheers,
Rob
BCMielke
Member
I agree with back alley. I didn't see what camera you were putting it on, but I will assume it is FF and not crop. The 15mm is a VERY fun lens, but if you had to trade in the 21 to get it I wouldn't do it.
GaryLH
Veteran
Going from 35 to 21 is already a huge jump by itself. 21 to 15 is a huge jump as well. If we are talking ff that is... have u considered adding a 24/25 to your arsenal?
Assuming we are talkin ff, the 15 is nice to have in your bag for special situations. I am a wide angle shooter, my main lenses are from 21 to 50 for ff rf. it is really rare that I use a 15. On the other hand I use the 15 a lot on the Ricoh gxr m module due to 1.5 crop factor.
Gary
Assuming we are talkin ff, the 15 is nice to have in your bag for special situations. I am a wide angle shooter, my main lenses are from 21 to 50 for ff rf. it is really rare that I use a 15. On the other hand I use the 15 a lot on the Ricoh gxr m module due to 1.5 crop factor.
Gary
Tony Whitney
Well-known
21 or 15?
21 or 15?
I mostly use the CV 15 on my GXR and the CV 21 on my M6, thus covering the "low twenties" focal length with both film and digital bodies. Works for me! Keep both if you can.
21 or 15?
I mostly use the CV 15 on my GXR and the CV 21 on my M6, thus covering the "low twenties" focal length with both film and digital bodies. Works for me! Keep both if you can.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
I have both and get a LOT more use out of 21.
This is almost completely irrelevant to the way it might be for you.
Cheers,
R.
This is almost completely irrelevant to the way it might be for you.
Cheers,
R.
Sejanus.Aelianus
Veteran
As others have said, it's all personal taste. I actually have three 15mm type lenses: the 15mm Heliar, which now lives permanently on a Voigtlander L; a 14mm Samyang that gets frequent use on my 5D and a Sigma 10-20mm that is pretty much the permanent lens on my 40D. You might gather from this that I rather like the focal length...
boomguy57
Well-known
Thanks, y'all. I didn't mention this in the initial post, but I'm shooting film, on an M-body. So definitely FF.
I have not considered 24/25 at all, since I really can't get along with 28mm. I find that it's too wide to use everyday like my 35, but when I want to go wide, I really don't find 28 wide enough, which leads me to the 21.
So far I have liked the 21mm, but people rave about the 15 so much that I wonder if it's worth it. The consensus seems to be that it's a great little lens, but not if I have to give up the 21 to get it.
Does anyone here use the external finder for the 15mm? I use the finder on my 21, and I'm not sure how I'd use the lens without it!
I have not considered 24/25 at all, since I really can't get along with 28mm. I find that it's too wide to use everyday like my 35, but when I want to go wide, I really don't find 28 wide enough, which leads me to the 21.
So far I have liked the 21mm, but people rave about the 15 so much that I wonder if it's worth it. The consensus seems to be that it's a great little lens, but not if I have to give up the 21 to get it.
Does anyone here use the external finder for the 15mm? I use the finder on my 21, and I'm not sure how I'd use the lens without it!
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Me thinks 15 might Bore You after awhile...21 more solid in longevity
though either would probably be Easy to sell
though either would probably be Easy to sell
daveleo
what?
Trevor,
Please check your PM inbox.
Please check your PM inbox.
bigeye
Well-known
I'd agree. The 21 is easier to use, in a wider circumstances.
You often measure distance from subjects in inches with the 15 to get the composition right; you basically scratch the lens with the subject. As with the 21, you really need to watch for distractions in the corners. In other words, it's harder and perhaps more limited in use. So, if I had to choose one, I'd have the less radical 21. I'd add a 15 later, when I could (they really are a bargain).
I have both the plastic and metal finder. The advantages of the metal are looks, build quality and it clears the knobs on the IIIf (why I have it). The plastic one has a bit less distortion (both are way worse than the lens, a la SWC). On an M, I'd actually prefer the plastic.
Use the 15 for awhile and a 50 seems like a 135...
-Charlie
Sejanus.Aelianus
Veteran
I use the plastic one. Horrible fish-eye distortion but, once you realise that won't be on the negative, it's OK.
boomguy57
Well-known
Thanks for all the feedback!
It sounds like the 21 is the better of the two, long-term. 15 is probably far too wide for me, as I suspected.
It sounds like the 21 is the better of the two, long-term. 15 is probably far too wide for me, as I suspected.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
kanzlr
Hexaneur
The 15mm gives you a better opportunity to emphasize the foreground. Thats where lenses this wide excel. It is not really meant for just interior shots or to get more stuff in the frame:
Auf dem Weg nach Hvoll von kanzlr auf Flickr
Auf dem Weg nach Hvoll von kanzlr auf Flickr