awilder
Alan Wilder
In this market of 21's like the CV 21/4, ZI 21/4.5 and 2.8, does the SA 21/3.4 M still appeal to some given it's non TTL metering? I only ask because a friend of mine wanted me to sell his chrome version of the 21/3.4 on this forum but was looking for around $900. Glass is mint and it comes with the hood, rear cap and very nice Leitz UVa filter. Barrel cosmetics would rate good/great due to some bright marks to the chrome, i.e. a very nice user. Is this realistic given the other options for a 21? Thanks for any input.
Last edited:
Platinum RF
Well-known
not sure about the price always depnd on market. Collectors like it. VC21/4 and Zeiss 21/2.8 easyly beat up 21/3.4 in optical performance.
maddoc
... likes film again.
There was at least one thread recently here at RFF, where some members expressed their desire owning this lens. From my experience with the Super-Angulon-M 21/3.4, it should appeal to somebody who likes photos taken with the 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH, 40mm Summicron-C, Noctilux. Very sharp stopped down, very low distortion, and very resistant to flare. Unfortunately for some, it shows quite some vignetting wide open.
Last year I payed 900 USD for mine in silver chrome, optical in user condition but excellent glass. Included was the pouch, and the Leitz 21-24-28 zoom VF. later, I bought the original hood via Ebay (quite expensive !), and two filter for BW here at RFF.
Last year I payed 900 USD for mine in silver chrome, optical in user condition but excellent glass. Included was the pouch, and the Leitz 21-24-28 zoom VF. later, I bought the original hood via Ebay (quite expensive !), and two filter for BW here at RFF.
maddoc
... likes film again.
David Murphy
Veteran
Yes it's desirable and the price reflects this. I own and like modern products like the CV lenses, but vintage Leica lenses combine good-enough optical quality with build-quality that is no longer seen today and this is an appealing combination.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
depends on the crowd... at RFF we mostly want tack sharp ASPH lenses, or as close as we can afford. Many old Leica hacks still desire the 21mm/3.4 SA. The SA has its signature AND its highly compact form factor -- combined this makes it a desirable lens.
deepwhite
Well-known
http://www.flickr.com/groups/792707@N24/
The above is the link to the SA21/3.4 flickr group. Only four members, but enough to show you the performance of the lens from B/W film to digital (R-D1s).
There are many more great shots on flickr. Just enter "super angulon 21 3.4" and search. From what I've seen, they pretty much show you what you'll get from this lens. If you like the signature in those pics, I say get yourself one.
The above is the link to the SA21/3.4 flickr group. Only four members, but enough to show you the performance of the lens from B/W film to digital (R-D1s).
There are many more great shots on flickr. Just enter "super angulon 21 3.4" and search. From what I've seen, they pretty much show you what you'll get from this lens. If you like the signature in those pics, I say get yourself one.
Paul C. Perkins MD
Perk11350
35mmdelux nailed it. Those of us who don't shoot USAF resolution targets frequently find older glass perfectly adequate to our needs. It isn't always about the raw stats. Sometimes it is the lens itself and, in my instance, how much fun it was to use. A 21mm F:3.4 Super Angulon was the first lens wider than 28 I ever got to use on a borrowed M2 back in 1967. I got some great shots I couldn't otherwise have taken. Maye this is nostalgia. I'm good with it
cam
the need for speed
it depends what you're looking for in a lens. i happen to adore the SA and had to keep myself away from the store here that was selling it for more than twice the price (granted, it was a collector specimen). it was teeny and quirky and as sharp as i could ever want, not to mention the sometimes strong vignetting on the R-D1 and the fun i had with the metering...
i personally love lenses with a signature and this one has it in sp*des (why is this considered a bad word?). for those that want the glass to take a back-seat to the image rather than enhance (or, in some cases, detract), this is not the lens.
hell, if you don't want it -- i would love it at this price
i personally love lenses with a signature and this one has it in sp*des (why is this considered a bad word?). for those that want the glass to take a back-seat to the image rather than enhance (or, in some cases, detract), this is not the lens.
hell, if you don't want it -- i would love it at this price
deepwhite
Well-known
With my own experience with the SA21/3.4 and the other lenses I've owned or tried scientifically, there's something that only an SA21/3.4 does. But whether you like it or not is something else.
More FYI: I belong to the "there's gotta be something wrong with ASPH" camp. I prefer a pre-A Summicron 35/2 over an ASPH. I never consider a Zeiss. And I love the SA21/3.4. That's something I think you should take into consideration.
More FYI: I belong to the "there's gotta be something wrong with ASPH" camp. I prefer a pre-A Summicron 35/2 over an ASPH. I never consider a Zeiss. And I love the SA21/3.4. That's something I think you should take into consideration.
tomasis
Well-known
ehh screw those guys who love shooting walls
SA is such nice lens and I had chance to compare with CV 25mm. It was no match of course. I didn't compared them at sharpness but anything else.
CV suffers a lot of distortion, build quality is not good, a lot of wobble there. Sa has nothing of it and is a pleasure to use. Important most of all is the signature of SA. I like it a lot and this has some of microcontrast. It is something.
SA is such nice lens and I had chance to compare with CV 25mm. It was no match of course. I didn't compared them at sharpness but anything else.
CV suffers a lot of distortion, build quality is not good, a lot of wobble there. Sa has nothing of it and is a pleasure to use. Important most of all is the signature of SA. I like it a lot and this has some of microcontrast. It is something.
Platinum RF
Well-known
I own CV21/4, , Leica 21 ASPH, Zeiss 21/8, SA21/3.4. If you look at the SA's aperture blades, only 4, give you an odd shape of diamond, the CV21 is a perfect round. the SA does not have the sparkling of color. 3.4 is just joke. If you want to best buck on best optical quality, Zeiss is the first choice, if you want small package CV is the first selection. SA is good fro these people who like dark corner and try to use it for artistic creation.
deepwhite
Well-known
ehh screw those guys who love shooting walls
Sorry sir. I don't know what's wrong with me.... :bang:
tomasis
Well-known
Sorry sir. I don't know what's wrong with me.... :bang:
hehe thats is very different. Very pretty wall
I think SA can do amazing things even to walls. I think it is due for relatively high microcontrast for old lens. Year 1960 design, amazing huh?tomasis
Well-known
deepwhite
Well-known
Seriously, I think all the replies here are valid, as one can see very clearly that who would love a SA21/3.4 and who would not.
Krosya
Konicaze
Well, I dont have SA 21/3.4, never had one. So - no first hand experience here. However, while it may not be the best 21 out there, I have seen some people do amazing thing with it. Ned (a former member here) had some great examples here, as well as several others.
As far as price - I have seen them go for about $700-800 in good condition WITH VF on ebay lately. But that of course varies. - I kinda keep my eye on 21mm it's my new challenge FL. I love what others do with it, so I try to master one too.
Oh, and as far as comment on CV lens above - wobble and stuff - could be sample variation - I have a CV 21/4 and it has no such wobbles. Very good quality lens. Maybe not to leica standard, but I'm not planning to hammer nails with it either.......
As far as price - I have seen them go for about $700-800 in good condition WITH VF on ebay lately. But that of course varies. - I kinda keep my eye on 21mm it's my new challenge FL. I love what others do with it, so I try to master one too.
Oh, and as far as comment on CV lens above - wobble and stuff - could be sample variation - I have a CV 21/4 and it has no such wobbles. Very good quality lens. Maybe not to leica standard, but I'm not planning to hammer nails with it either.......
vieri
Leica Ambassador
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
Apparently not as desirable as it used to be, like before digital. Since the RD-1 I noticed prices dropped by about 30%. The pre asph 21mm has seen a price increase I guess because it can meter with digital. 21mm, 28mm and 50mm are my M8 kit so I happened to notice.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
The SA 21/3.4 was my wide angle of choice since it came out in the early 60's. The modern lenses are most likely sharper in the edges, but the center image of a SA is something else! It has a true "signature" and you can spot the negs done with it on the light table. Performance wise, even in the 60's, the Zeiss Biogon 21f4.5 was straighter and possibly sharper and todays Leica 21's, Zeiss 21's and the CV 21's are better, but I still keep my SA.
Ergonomics are not brilliant, better than the 21f4.5 Biogon from 1957, but not by much - but you can at least see the f-stop numbers on the ring.
I have a substantial collection of 21's, Zeiss 21/2.8 and 4.5 (both old and new), CV 21's and even the Ricoh 21f3.5 LTM and use these frequently, but now and then the SA goes on a M2 and nostalgia raises its ugly head! With Tri X it is a time warp!
My current 21f3.4 is one of the last ones made (1979) and it looks like it has been used as an offensive weapon, with scratched barrel (but perfect glass). One thing to watch out for is the fact that airplane and helicopter rides can vibrate the three screws holding the lens element pack loose and cause a "floopyZ" feel to the whole lens. Easy fix with Loctite or naail polish though.
To put it in perspective, I had the 21f2.8 Elmarit and the 21/2.8 Asph Elmarit as well as the 21/3.4 and got rid of the Elmarits!
Now, I hope to have a chance to try out the new Summilux 21f1.4 at Photokina - but even if I would consider it - the 21f3.4 would stay!!
Ergonomics are not brilliant, better than the 21f4.5 Biogon from 1957, but not by much - but you can at least see the f-stop numbers on the ring.
I have a substantial collection of 21's, Zeiss 21/2.8 and 4.5 (both old and new), CV 21's and even the Ricoh 21f3.5 LTM and use these frequently, but now and then the SA goes on a M2 and nostalgia raises its ugly head! With Tri X it is a time warp!
My current 21f3.4 is one of the last ones made (1979) and it looks like it has been used as an offensive weapon, with scratched barrel (but perfect glass). One thing to watch out for is the fact that airplane and helicopter rides can vibrate the three screws holding the lens element pack loose and cause a "floopyZ" feel to the whole lens. Easy fix with Loctite or naail polish though.
To put it in perspective, I had the 21f2.8 Elmarit and the 21/2.8 Asph Elmarit as well as the 21/3.4 and got rid of the Elmarits!
Now, I hope to have a chance to try out the new Summilux 21f1.4 at Photokina - but even if I would consider it - the 21f3.4 would stay!!