21mm color-skopar - M or LTM?

[Overconfidence]

From the big NYC retailers, the LTM version of this lens is about $30 cheaper than the M version and it includes the viewfinder - even factoring in the $60 for an LTM-to-M adapter, it's way cheaper to go for the LTM version since you'll end up spending $150 on an external viewfinder, assuming you're using it on a .72 rangefinder like an M6.

Is there something I'm missing? Is it that bad to use an LTM lens on an M-mount camera?

 

[capitalK]

Yeah, as I understand it's cheaper to buy for the R4A and R4M when you need the M-mount but not the viewfinder.

 

[Nikon Bob]

No you are not missing anything, an LTM lens with adapter works just fine on an M body. I don't think there is a difference optically between the two versions of the CV 21/4 but I am sure if there is someone will pipe up. I use the LTM version on an M4 with the finder, no troubles. As a bonus it works well on my LTM bodies also. I like to keep my options open and am all for versatility.

Bob

 

[BillBingham2]

I think the LTM has bumps in the focusing like the 25mm did. Those bumps allow you to quickly adjust focus while guessing as you bring the lens to your eye. I found them worth their weight in gold when I was using my old 25 on a Bessa L. Only had a few that were out of focus.

The LTM came with a finder, check to make sure. Important on an L, no so on a 4A/M.

The M has a newer design focusing mechanism and outer appearance is more Leica-ish.

Optically, no difference.

B2 (;->

 

[ferider]

I've used both and they produced similar results.

The LTM version is coupled and has no bumps in the focus, much like 28 and 35 color skopar.

The M version is better built; it brings up 35mm framelines. Feels more similar to a 35 Summicron.

Roland.

 

[dexdog]

according to the cameraquest website, the LTM version is coupled. Perhaps you were thinking of the old 25/4 color skopar in LTM, which was not rangefinder-coupled

 

[raid]

Is there a difference between the coupled and the uncoupled 25/4 with respect to optics?

 

[drewbarb]

You're not missing anything- go for the LTM version, no contest. It's cheaper, comes with a very nice finder, and will work on any LTM camera- as well as M cameras, with an adapter.

The glass in the LTM and M versions of both the 21mm and 25mm lenses is indeed the same. Only the mounts, bodies, and perhaps build quality are different. The focusing click-stops (which are very handy, by the way) only appeared in the 25mm LTM lens. Both versions of the 21mm are fully RF coupled.

 

[Palaeoboy]

Well I wouldnt say no contest as I prefer the M mount version, true its optically the same but the build quality of the M mount version is worth the bit extra in my opinion. With the winged aperture ring and conventional tab, its also nicer to use. If you are using both M and LTM cameras then by all means go for the screw mount version but if your just using it on an M I think its worth buying a finder separately and getting the M mount lens.

 

[Bob Michaels]

From the big NYC retailers, the LTM version of this lens is about $30 cheaper than the M version and it includes the viewfinder - even factoring in the $60 for an LTM-to-M adapter, it's way cheaper to go for the LTM version since you'll end up spending $150 on an external viewfinder, assuming you're using it on a .72 rangefinder like an M6.

Is there something I'm missing? Is it that bad to use an LTM lens on an M-mount camera?

Nothing wrong with using a LTM lens with adapter on a M mount camera. They work the same. Frequently you can save a lot of money. Especially on a lens that does not require bringing up the framelines. You can use one of the el cheapo ($12 or so) Oriental LTM / M adapters available on E-Bay since you do not care what framelines it brings up.

I have shot quite a bit with the LTM CV 25mm lens that is not RF coupled. I have also shot a lot with the ContaxG 21mm Biogon (an incredible lens). I use zone focusing with both. Personally, I prefer the focus click stops at 1 meter, 1.5 meter and 3 meter over the RF coupling. They are just more productive since you always zone focus these lenses anyway because of the huge DOF.

 

[rogue_designer]

I prefer the flexibility of getting an LTM lens, and using an M adapter. Why limit yourself to one mount, when you can have two options for less money. I'm frankly a little annoyed that CV seems to be only making M mounts on new lenses.

Optically they are the same. Some reports of increased build quality in the M version, but the LTM version is still put together quite well.

 

[ruby.monkey]

I think the LTM has bumps in the focusing like the 25mm did. Those bumps allow you to quickly adjust focus while guessing as you bring the lens to your eye. I found them worth their weight in gold when I was using my old 25 on a Bessa L. Only had a few that were out of focus.

B2 (;->

No bumps, but it does have the same focussing post as the other wide LTM lenses.

 

[Prosaic]

The 21P example I tested improves upon the primary weakness of the 21 Skopar while still retaining its other strengths. It doesn´t include the 21mm accessory finder (...) but, overall, this new lens does indeed have the best price to performance ration of any 21mm rangefinder lenses I´ve tested.

You will find reviews of both lenses on reid reviews