Is the 21mm f1.4 Leica lens the "next lens to have"?

Dear Vick,

I had a loaner for several months. Stunning lens, brilliant performance, but I don't need a fast 21 that much: f/2.8 is enough for me. If I didn't already have a 21/2.8 I might consider it, but as my shooting style doesn't involve differential focus and ultrawides, there are several lenses ahead of it if I had the money: WATE, Noctilux, maybe the new 35 Summilux... If you DO like differential focus and a 21, there's no choice.

Cheers,

R.
 
I tried the 21f1.4 and it is truly an amazing lens, as it should be for the price. Optical quality is stunning! Surprisingly enough, it is more comfortable on the camera than the 21f2.8 Asph!
I still lust after one, but I also keep thinking - when would I use a 21 @ f1.4? I did shoot some Tech Pan and Fuji Minicopy II with one - and the lens has a 'cinematic" effect. Even at f1.4 it is sharp, though it has distinct fall off.
If you need the extra stops - there is nothing like it, and then it is worth it. It is one of Leica's "tour de force" lenses in my estimation.
Obviously, I am still trying to rationalize getting one!
 
i'm guessing jeanloup sieff would have really liked it. lee friedlander might also like it. yeah, i could imagine wanting to get the 21 summilux asph.
 
To me a rangefinder lens is a trade off between small and fast. I like fast lenses but the really fast lenses like the 21/1.4 or the Notilux or just too huge for a RF body. Nikon (and Canon) make great lenses and if I want a 21/1.4 it will be for the SLR.
 
The one thing that bothers me about both 1.4 wides is the focus throw compared to their 2.8 Elmarit counterparts. Tab focussing and a shorter throw make the Elmarits my choice for street work, not to mention their smaller profile.
 
Tom A said:
I tried the 21f1.4 and it is truly an amazing lens, as it should be for the price. Optical quality is stunning! Surprisingly enough, it is more comfortable on the camera than the 21f2.8 Asph!... If you need the extra stops - there is nothing like it, and then it is worth it. It is one of Leica's "tour de force" lenses in my estimation. Obviously, I am still trying to rationalize getting one!
Click to expand...

This was precisely my experience. When I tried this lens (had it for one full day) I immediately fell in love with it. But hard as I try, I cannot justify the substantial cost differential compared to the 21 Elmarit, which has been a favorite of mine for many years.
 
aizan said:
i'm guessing jeanloup sieff would have really liked it. lee friedlander might also like it. yeah, i could imagine wanting to get the 21 summilux asph.
Click to expand...

I suspect that Jean Loup Sieff would have tried it and decide to keep the Super-Angulon 21! He worked with the depth of field a lot - and rarely used lenses wide open. Lee Friedlander on the other hand probably already has one!
 
I just got back from a trip using a 21 (CV) on the M8 extensively. I'd love a faster 21, but don't know if I'd want to give much up with the small size of the CV. I'd like 2.8, for occasional low light and indoors (I put my 28/2.8 on at these times), but don't know if I could ever justify the size and $$ for 21/1.4.
 
I've had the 21 Summilux for about 8 months - at about 10% off list, and before list went up 10% :)

I love the lens and am glad I decide on it over a M9 - though I do regret being well behind on my darkroom printing.

Of all the 21mm's I've owned over the years, it's the most difficult to master - because the narrow depth of field entices you to get in close to subjects.
The closer you get the better the separation effect, but the worse the parallax problems.
If your not in a Jeanloup Seiff mood looking for the effect, near in geometric drawing also becomes increasingly prone to exaggeration unless the subject is exactly square on and the camera is not tilted.

The Frankenfinder helps with parallax and level - but the size penalty is more overwhelming than the size of the lens itself.
If there ever comes to pass a live view full frame EVF leica body, then this lens will become a doddle to use. I can't imagine how large a SLR lens of the speed would be.

Filters are also an issue - nobody stock series 8 filters ( ND0.9 and Orange are on my wish list ).
I got the E82 adapter, but it's very ungainly and un-Leica like in use - the camera has to sit on it's back.

Donald.

RFF_SAC_1.jpg


M6_21luxFrankenfinder.jpg
 
Do you mean "next lens to have" or next lens to use ?
When $ is not a concern, I believe all the Summilux are good to have.
I never use a 21 lux because I don't really need such fast lens in this focal length. The Faster, the bigger. I'm satisfied with a much smaller C-Biogon 21 f4.5
 
Last edited:
I have both the Elmarit and the Summilux. The Elmarit was the one I had first, but I found I was missing the speed of the 1.4 for low-light work. I'd really enjoyed using the Canon 24/1.4 back in my SLR days, so I decided to spring for it and get the Summilux. I like having both, but if I had to choose one, I'm not sure which I'd pick, they both have their uses. The light falloff on the Summilux wide open is really quite nice and the speed is just amazing. At the same time, the Elmarit is a lot smaller, not to mention 2/3 the price.

The biggest drawback IMO is what Donald said, filters are a total pain to find. I asked around at some local camera shops and was told by one guy that he hadn't seen a Series VIII filter in 30 years or thereabouts :). I had to do a custom order from B+W which took 6-8 weeks or so.

-jbl
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom