21mm with a leica m | which is the best choice?!

[magicman]

Hello,

I like to photograph with a 21mm lens on my leica m, but I´m a little confused about the statements I can read anywhere.

1. Leica Elmarit 21/2.8 asph.
2. Leica Elmartt 21/2.8
3. Carl Zeiss ZM 21/2.8

I think number 1 would exceed my budget, so 2, 3 is the right one.

I´ve a possibility to get 2 for 820€ in perfect condition, but I´ve read that the 1,3 is much better!!!

So,
what would you suggest - should I buy the pre-asph. Elmarit or is the Carl Zeiss lens really worth the moreprice?!

Maybe, some Photos (no M8 please) take with the pre-asph. Elmarit would be nice.

Best regards
Mario

 

[sebastel]

this has ben asked and discussed numerous times.
quite soon, people are coming to recommend the c-biogon 4.5, or the super angulon 3.4, but since your mind is set on a 2.8 lens, these recommendations won't match your question.

i can only comment on the pre-asph elmarit. the one i used made me quite happy.

on the other hand, i now enjoy the 25mm biogon a lot, and if the 21mm biogon is a bit like that, it will offer everything you need, too.

honestly: i believe both will do well. just get one.

cheers
sebastian

 

[sepiareverb]

I like my ZM 21/2.8 quite fine.

 

[Doug]

I share the interest in the faster breed of 21mm lenses... More options in low light of course, and the possibility of limiting depth of field for compositional reasons. Before the 21mm Biogon-ZM came along, the economical solution for me was the 21mm Biogon-G with a G box to put it on. Since then I found a good deal on a used 21 Elmarit ASPH... I've been very pleased with both lenses. I agree with Sebastian that you'll very likely be happy with any of the choices you mention.

 

[horosu]

I would use 21 mm for travel, mostly, which is why I would like a lightweight, compact lens: the 21/4.5 Zeiss . I tried one and it is really tiny. I will get one one day.

 

[sepiareverb]

If another body is an option don't rule out the G21 on a G2- a fantastic package- that combo is the only thing I regret about getting rid of all my Contax kit.

 

[Andrew3511]

Super Angulon f3.4 is a good little lens if you can find one, just got mine after looking for a while and I'm very pleased with it




(this one definitely wide open as it was pretty dark!)

 

[35mmdelux]

depends how and what you shoot.

 

[Rob-F]

The 21/3.4 Super-Angulon is excellent for architectural shots, owning to its low distortion. Its weaknesses are light falloff and mediocre performance outside the center zone until f/8. The light falloff is very apparent in shots that include an expanse of uniform sky. It will not be noticed in shots that include varied tones and textures. However, I use my 21 ASPH Elmarit more than I use my SA.

Mario: In your situation I would be tempted toward the Zeiss ZM. I don't have one, but everyone says it's excellent; while the pre-ASPH Elmarit is merely good enough. So I think I would get the Zeiss so as to be done with it, and not feel like I needed to upgrade later.

 

[Ororaro]

The super angulon is a legendary lens with magical performance. I loooove mine!

But within your choices, I'd go with the ZM because I'm curious.

 

[meven]

The super angulon is a legendary lens with magical performance. I loooove mine!

But within your choices, I'd go with the ZM because I'm curious.

Same here I love my Super-Angulon but if I had to choose between the three I would go for the ZM.

 

[Tom A]

I would go for the ZM 21f2.8 if you need that speed, otherwise the ZM 21f4.5.
The Asph 21f2.8 is very good, but it is also large/expensive and, as most Aspherical lenses a bit flare prone.

The Elmarit 21f2.8 was never a favourite of mine. It was a rather lacklustre lens, performance wise.

The ZM 21f2.8 is very close to the Asph 21 Elmarit. It might lack the absolute "edge" at f2.8, but I find it more pleasant to use. The tonality and contrast is better then the Asph 21.

The 21f3.4 Super Angulon is a sentimental favourite of mine. I have had once since it came out in the 60's. It has a very good center sharpness, but huge edge fall off - but it has a signature of its own and I still use mine, even though I have plentu of other 21's. If you are using M6/MP/M8 it will confuse the meter as the rear element sticks out substantially.

If you dont need the absolute speed of the 21f2.8 - I would recommend the 21f4.5 ZM. It is probably the best 21 I have ever used in 40+ years. The speed can be a problem in dark interiors, but stay off strong coffee and train yourself to hold it steady!

When it comes to lenses these days, I always use Flickr as a checking source. Type in the tag for the lens, example "Leica Elmarit 21mm f2.8 ASPH" etc and lota of samples pop up!

 

[DwF]

21mm Elmarit (pre-asph)

21mm Elmarit (pre-asph)

I respond here because I think that the pre-aspheric version of the 21mm Elmarit gets overlooked or worse it gets a bad rap! I find it to be a fine lens and although 21 is not my regular choice of focal length, the plain-jane 21 Elmarit handles very nicely on the Leica (or the R D1).

I recall reading some fine reviews of this lens early on after it's release. Given the size of glass needed to produce one of these, it made sense that Leica re-design the lens with aspheric surface. I wonder whether a side to side comparison might reveal some positive attributes lost in the improved version like we see in other focal lengths. I do understand that as focal length gets wider, there is more reason to go aspheric.

Here is an mage that I think shows close in, the 21mm Emarit lens handles a scene in tight quarters very well. It would be fun to see more from other lenses discussed here.

http://www.pbase.com/bitonal/image/74173314

David

 

[gohaj]

Zeiss ZM 21mm f/2.8

Zeiss ZM 21mm f/2.8

i have the same question for myself recently. i made my choice and get a Zeiss ZM 21mm f/2.8

 

[tajart]

21s

21s

anyone have any thoughts on the older sa 21/4, and, is it too deep to use in the newer leica bodies?

 

[Tom A]

The first version of the Super Angulon, the f4 LTM was a good lens, at its time.Wide open it is less than spectacular and it was also up against the best 21 of its time, the Biogon 21f4.5 for the Contax!
It you want a small, compact 21, the best choice is the 21f4 P (M-mount) or LTM Color Skopar from Cosina. Better than the 21f4 S-A by a major step and considerably cheaper too.
One of the endearing qualities of the 21f4 S-A is the fact that it can use 39mm filters (as can the Color Skopar 21's) and most of use have a stack of these around. The 21f4 S-A really does not perform very well until you hit f8-f11 and diffraction is visible at f16. It is now a nearly 50 year old lens and beware of fungus, internal fog and separation of elements on it. The hood is also very difficult to find and it needs it as it will flare with bright light sources in the image or at the edge of the image.
For a high speed 21, you can also consider the 21f2.8 Kobalux. Not a bad performer (similar to the pre-asph Elmarit), but it is a big hunk of a lens!

 

[James (DC)]

I agree with Tom about the Kobalux 21/2.8. I use it quite a bit and like the results--especially in black and white and stopped down a bit. It definitely flares a bit, and putting on a full-sized hood makes the lens almost as large as a Leica M and blocks the rangefinder window substantially. The matching viewfinder, however is huge. It is a very nice optic, but it is the size of a small lens. It's a great lens for zone focusing while stopped down to f8 in fairly bright light. I wish that I had the cash right now to trade it in and get the 21/4.5 ZM. I had the CV 21/4 and was not impressed with it after a couple of years.

 

[magicman]

Thank you guys for your advice but I´m not sure anymore.

Hmm, I prefer the Elmarit pre-asph. because of the lower price.
Maybe it would be a great lens to start in the 21mm-area, and upgrade the lens if I really like this length later.

One question about the 21mm-finder.
I´ve a 0.72 leica m.
Recommend you to buy the 21mm-finder, or is it possible to use the real-frame of the viewfinder of the leica outside the 28mm frame?

Best regards
Mario

 

[Bill Blackwell]

There is no way you'll get away with using a 21mm M-mount lens without an accessory finder.

I would buy a CV 21mm finder. They're inexpensive (~$125) and, IMHO, better than any of the Leica branded alternatives.

Look here for another recent discussion on the various 21mm lens choices:

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=59381

 

[sebastel]

There is no way you'll get away with using a 21mm M-mount lens without an accessory finder.

i dare to have a different opinion. i always used my melmarit-m 21mm without additional viewfinder, without any problems. of course i could not predict _precisely_ what would be inside the FOV, but precision in this regard is not the strength of a rangefinder camera in general.

so - from my point of view, the necessity of an external viewfinder for 21mm depends.

cheers,
s.