Impressions of the Zeiss 21mm f/2.8 Biogon ZM lens

[Richard G]

hteasley had some lovely shots in the Gallery. Can't find those now. An Advanced Search in the Gallery will find one page of photos if you search for Lens Type ZM Biogon 21 2.8.

 

[uhoh7]

I did lots of research for a great 21. It came down to two. The Zm 21/2.8 and SEM 21/3.4.

I did get the SEM, but the ZM looked killer in all the samples and people raved about it 🙂

 

[krötenblender]

Thank you for all the good input. Sadly, the gallery search does not work for me, don't know, why. However, I found some other sources for examples and liked them pretty much.

So I just bought the 21mm/f2,8 and now wait for it to arrive. Now I need a finder for it (hate the evf of the M240), and then I will probably update this thread with a few examples... Stay tuned.

 

[D&A]

Very much agree. The ZM 21 f2.8 is a killer lens in my opinion and a best buy in fast 21mm lenses but the Leica SEM does have the edge optically. I have no experience with the VC 21mm f1.8 and putting aside size, images I've seen look extremely good.

Dave (D&A)

 

[ferider]

Now I need a finder for it (hate the evf of the M240)

Me too - in most cases. I use a different 21, but with the Zeiss finder which I can warmly recommend on the 240.

Roland.

 

[krötenblender]

Me too - in most cases.

Maybe I would like it better, if it says "Leica" on the front instead of "Olympus"... 😀

I use a different 21, but with the Zeiss finder which I can warmly recommend on the 240.

I'm currently in love with the look of the old Contax 21 viewfinder. If they are of good quality, I would buy one of those. Anyone has experience with them?

 

[pechelman]

the contax 21 is a good finder. It isnt as bright as one of the metal voigtlander ones I had or as bright as the leica frankenfinder, but for normal shooting in daylight, it really doesnt make any difference. I really do like the crosshair in the center and find it quite useful. The one thing you may or may not like, or may not care about at all, is that the contax has a black frame with nothing visible beyond. So if you like framelines you might not like this one.

I use mine on a m24X with a converted contax g 21mm biogon. I'd add that one to your list if you're able to find one or willing to convert it. It's just about the smallest, lightest, sharpest, distortion free 21mm/2.8 out there. No issues with fringing or color shifts that I've seen. Also works fine for regular metering.

 

[uhoh7]

The Zeiss ZI 21 finder is expensive even used, for a reason. It's way better than anything else. 🙂

Very, very bright and very easy on the eye.

It's bigger than the others, but very tough. Much brighter than the OVF!


image by unoh7, on Flickr

 

[krötenblender]

Thanks for the hints. IMHO the Zeiss is simply too expensive, even used.

Here and elsewhere I read about the metal Voigtländer finder. How do I know, which is the metal one? All I see is a black finder online and I can not recognize the material, it is made of. What is the difference?

 

[pechelman]

the metal one is tiny and has a tiny round body

the plastic one is more rectangularly shaped and bulbous

cameraquest.com has more info on both

 

[ferider]

Thanks for the hints. IMHO the Zeiss is simply too expensive, even used.

I got mine in great used shape for 140 bucks, here on RFF. Worth waiting for ...

(I normally hate posts like this from other people 🙂 )

 

[MCTuomey]

if it were me with an M9 or M240, i would wait and save for the SEM 21/3.4, paired with the VC external finder to help fund the SEM. the ZM 21/2.8 is great. the SEM 21/3.4 is spectacular.

 

[krötenblender]

if it were me with an M9 or M240, i would wait and save for the SEM 21/3.4, paired with the VC external finder to help fund the SEM. the ZM 21/2.8 is great. the SEM 21/3.4 is spectacular.

For 21mm great is more than enough for me. It will be one of my less used focal lengths, and it does not make sense to invest so much money in it.

For my 35mm I did not care about the price, because running a statistics over my LR catalog shows, that I made two thirds of all pictures with that lens since I have it. But 21mm will be special purpose. A currently greatly anticipated, though.

Also, for my by far best pictures, I would be proud, if I could call them great, spectacular is a level, I did not reach, yet. So what would be the point... 😀 - If it comes to that, it will be my 35mm...

 

[krötenblender]

the metal one is tiny and has a tiny round body

the plastic one is more rectangularly shaped and bulbous

cameraquest.com has more info on both

Great hint, thank you! The metal Voigtländer looks very promising.

About the Zeiss finder, I didn't know about it having no frameline, but a black solid frame. This is indeed a showstopper for me. Always good to find useful infos here on RFF.

 

[pechelman]

Great hint, thank you! The metal Voigtländer looks very promising.

About the Zeiss finder, I didn't know about it having no frameline, but a black solid frame. This is indeed a showstopper for me. Always good to find useful infos here on RFF.

you're quite welcome

and just to make sure we're not misunderstanding one another

The new zeiss finders (very large black rectangular ones) do indeed have framelines. It's the old Contax 21mm viewfinder (smaller and round) that just has the black frame with the central crosshair. Can be confusing since the old Contax G 21mm lens was also made by Zeiss.

 

[MCTuomey]

Great hint, thank you! The metal Voigtländer looks very promising.

About the Zeiss finder, I didn't know about it having no frameline, but a black solid frame. This is indeed a showstopper for me. Always good to find useful infos here on RFF.

The metal 21/24 VF I owned had an annoying tendency to slip out of the hot shoe on my M9, once even becoming a projectile VF (not good). Not sure whether this is an isolated occurrence. The plastic version, though large, fits well and firmly in the hot shoe.

 

[MCTuomey]

For 21mm great is more than enough for me. It will be one of my less used focal lengths, and it does not make sense to invest so much money in it.

Makes perfect sense to me. The SEM, used, is about 2x the price of the ZM.

 

[Jan Pedersen]

For 21mm great is more than enough for me. It will be one of my less used focal lengths, and it does not make sense to invest so much money in it.

If great is good enough, please have a look at the CV21 1.8 Ultron. It is great in my humble opinion.

 

[uhoh7]

Great hint, thank you! The metal Voigtländer looks very promising.

About the Zeiss finder, I didn't know about it having no frameline, but a black solid frame. This is indeed a showstopper for me. Always good to find useful infos here on RFF.

ZI 21 has a very nice white frame line, better than any in the OVF of any M. I think I paid around 140ish. Even has a rubber pad so has to not scratch glasses. Ergos are great, you loose almost no side vision. It's brighter than your own eyes, kid not 🙂

 

[krötenblender]

If great is good enough, please have a look at the CV21 1.8 Ultron. It is great in my humble opinion.

Too late, I already bought the Zeiss the day before yesterday...

However, I did not ever consider the CV because I'm used to focus-tabs or at least focus-knobs and I don't feel comfortable without. It makes me really slow. A lens without is a no-go for me.