Leica 21mm. Grey vs. USA warranty

[driggett]

Hi,
I would like to get a Leica 21mm lens for my R-D1. I can get one for $1897.98 grey market out of New York or can pay $2695 from B&H. Is the USA warranty really worth $800? If I buy grey market will Leica USA still repair it or do I have to send it to Germany?

Thanks,
Chris

 

[MP Guy]

Accphoto has them listed for 1550.00 I have purchased most of my leica stuff from Anthony and never had a problem.

 

[Huck Finn]

My general rule of thumb is that it's worth it for a camera body, but not for a lens. Not much can go wrong with a lens. My understanding is that Leica-USA won't touch it, but check with B&H. They normally provide a store warranty for grey market items & even have an option to extend it. Best of luck.

 

[rover]

Accphoto has them listed for 1550.00 I have purchased most of my leica stuff from Anthony and never had a problem.

Jorge, how do you get Accphoto to actually respond to you? I have sent emails on a couple occations without response.

 

[peter_n]

Agree with Huck, USA warranty is probably not worth paying for a lens. Sending it to Solms is better anyway... 😉 But also as Jorge points out you can get a gray 21 lens out of HK for $1550 (rover check out the new M6TTLs at $1575). You should also contact Dr. Joseph Yao at joseph(AT)yao(DOT)com. He's a collector and international dealer with a tremendous reputation.

You could also look for an Avenon/Bower/Kobalux/Pasoptik 21mm/f2.8 - around $350-400. In the British Journal of Photography [November 6, 1996]: "at least the equal of the 21/4.5 Biogon which is sometimes found converted for the Leica, and is considerably better than either of the [Leica] Super Angulons (f/4 and f/3.4)". Not bad for a lens that is less than a 1/4 of the price of the cheapest gray market Leica... 😉

 

[Huck Finn]

Chris, I just re-read your post & now realize that you a talking about "grey market out of New York" instead of B&H. Sorry. On my first quick read I was in a rush & thought B&H WAS the NYC grey market dealer.

There are some NYC dealers I would not go near - no matter how good the deal. If it seems too good to be true, it probably is. There are some who just plain misrepresent their products, e.g. represent as grey when it's really used, refurbished, demo, etc. In other instances, they play bait & switch AFTER they have your money & you have to fight to get your money back. Or they tell you it's not in stock - again AFTER they have your money & again you have to fight like hell to get your money back or wait forever to get what you ordered. Furthermore, returns & service can be a nightmare. Get the picture?

B&H and Adorama are highly reputable. Many other small dealers are highly reputable as well - places like Tamarkin, Kurland, & Photo Village can't be beat. Somewhere on the internet there's a site that publishes customer feedback. I'll see if I can remember it & post it. Of course if this dealer sells on ebay, you can check their feedback there as well.

If money is an issue, there are options other than Leica, as Peter points out. In additions to the various issues of the Kobalux that Peter mentions & which, although superb, can be hard to find, Zeiss will be offering a 21/2.8 Biogon in M-mount in a few months (May/June). Judging by the data published on the Zeiss Ikon website it is the equal of the Elmarit for about half the price ($1300).

Good luck.

 

[rover]

(rover check out the new M6TTLs at $1575). You should also contact Dr. Joseph Yao at joseph(AT)yao(DOT)com. He's a collector and international dealer with a tremendous reputation.

I will send Dr Yao an email today. As for Accphoto, I would love to inquire about the M6TTLs they list, but nobody there replies to emails. I think dealing with them may be like chasing a ghost.

 

[Sean Reid]

A greymarket Leica 21 from the far east (through a reputable dealer or person) for $1550 is certainly worth considering. That is a great lens and I think one rarely regrets going with Leica for a lens (once the pain of the $$ is over). I'm going to contact Zeiss and see if I can get some examples of their new lenses to test on the R-D1, including their 21.

David K sent me a couple of full size JPEGs of the Kobalux on the R-D1 and the vignetting seems pretty mild but his copy of that lens looks a bit soft to me, especially next to a file made with the Leica 21. I don't know if that's general to the lens or specific to that copy. I've often heard people wonder if lens differences would be apparent on the R-D1 (as opposed to film). In fact, they may be more apparent because whatever weaknesses they might have are being magnified 1.5X by the sensor mag.

The Zeiss 21 is certainly worth testing.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[driggett]

Thanks for all the replies. I will check out the HK connection. I tried my local camera store first but they had already increased the price to $3000 because of the exchange rate. If I buy out of B&H (USA warranty) then the cost saving would allow me to get the variable viewfinder and the polarizer for free considering the extra $300 dollars for the devaluation of the dollar and the 8.25% tax. I always try to buy local but this would save me 15%!
Thanks,
Chris

 

[peter_n]

<snippety snip 😉>There are some NYC dealers I would not go near - no matter how good the deal.</snippety snip>

He may have been talking about deltainternational.com, Huck. Very reputable gray-market dealer operating out of NYC.

David K sent me a couple of full size JPEGs of the Kobalux on the R-D1 and the vignetting seems pretty mild but his copy of that lens looks a bit soft to me, especially next to a file made with the Leica 21. I don't know if that's general to the lens or specific to that copy.

Very interesting Sean. I wonder which version of the lens David has. There were three versions and I believe the second version is the one that got all the praise but I wouldn't be surprised if any 3rd party lens was softer than a Leica ASPH! 🙂

 

[David Kieltyka]

In mild defense of the Kobalux the examples I e-mailed to Sean were shot at f/11 for maximum DOF as I was often zone/hyperfocal focusing that day. I find the lens performs best in the f/5.6–8 range on film...I'm still experimenting with it on the R-D1. My copy is from the third generation.

The Kobalux, while a good lens, is no Zeiss Biogon (1950s version) or Leitz Super Angulon. In this respect I would take issue with the British Journal of Photography review mentioned below. The latter two lenses may not resolve as many lp/mm as the Kobalux at optimum aperture but they make lovely images. Rich color, crisp detail. On film at least...due to their symmetrical designs both may be unsuitable for digital. The Kobalux in comparison has a harder character, higher in contrast but weaker in color.

I'm looking forward to giving the new M mount 21mm Biogon a spin. I'm also hoping to try out the old f/4.5 version via an adapter made from a Kiev mount. (Some folks in the Leica forum on photo.net are working on the adapter project.)

-Dave-

 

[Sean Reid]

Hi Dave,

Thanks for sending those. If you get a chance to send me some made at F/8 (on a tripod so as to be fair to the lens) I'd love to see them.

Cheers,

Sean

 

[Huck Finn]

Sean, I'm delighted to hear this! Ever since you did such a great job with your lens reviews on the RD-1, I was hoping that you might tackle the Zeiss lenses. I doubt that you'll be able to get the 21 Biogon until late spring, but the other four (25/28/35/50) should be available. Hopefully Hasselblad will jump at the opportunity for some free publicity.

Cheers to you 😉
Huck

 

[Sean Reid]

Thanks Huck. (I can't begin to tell you how fun it was to write that just now. I'm reading "The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn" to my daughter these days and writing "Thanks Huck" makes me immediately picture Jim's smilling face on a raft - on a warm summers night - on the mighty Mississippi...)

Yes, when things slow down a bit I'll talk to their PR firm and see what's up. I'm glad that you liked the other piece. It had such a specific focus that I imagine the audience was pretty small.

Cheers,

SEan

 

[Jim Watts]

If you get a chance to send me some made at F/8 (on a tripod so as to be fair to the lens) I'd love to see them.

Hi All,
Maybe f5.6 would be a better choice. I haven't done any controlled tests but my impression is that diffraction effects are greater with the R-D1's sensor than the same lenses with film. I think I am seeing better sharpness at f5.6 (less at f11) with my 35mm f2 Summicron and 25mm f4 VC than when used on my M4 with film. I havent shot enough with my other lenses to have a feel for how these are performing. I have seen a comparison on one of the review sites where a high quality zoom's (Canon L I think) shots of a resolution chart on a digital SLR body clearly gave a wortst performance at f11 than at f5.6.

Also is the Kobalux, Bower, Avenon, Pasoptik exactly the same lens? With the same level of quality control? The lens I have seen around at U.K. Camera Fairs is the Pasoptik which I have considered in the past for my M4 but did not know enough about. With the R-D1 its even more attractive as I feel the need on this for something a little wider and faster than the VC 25mm.

 

[peter_n]

Jim AFAIK Kobalux, Bower, Avenon, Pasoptik are all made by Y.K. Optical of Yokohama. I believe that Kobalux is Y.K.'s own brand, and they OEM'd the lens under the names of Avenon, Bower, and Pasoptik. Links to web pages about this lens below:

Kobalux M-Series 21mm f/2.8

Kobalux 21/2.8

Kobalux lenses for Leica

 

[Jim Watts]

Peter,
Thanks for the info and useful links. Results on the danteslla site for Series 3 look pretty good to me and I note the reports of other who regard this lens highly. I can't remember what the going rate was in the U.K. when I last saw a secondhand one but I think they were about £750 new in 2002. Even if its not as low as the $350 - 400 S/H in the states they must be a lot lower than a good S/H Leica 21mm Asp. which are over $2,500 here.

Do you know how you tell the differences between each series? Is the series 3 substancially better than the previous run?

 

[David Kieltyka]

Here's another sample from the Kobalux 21mm, taken this afternoon. We're in the midst of a mid-winter thaw...nice day today. This time I put the R-D1 on a tripod and took a series of photos at different apertures of the same subject...from my driveway looking out across the street. Not exciting subject matter but plenty of fine detail for the camera & lens to deal with.

First a scaled-down version of the full scene, at f/11. I optimized this image via Levels, Curves, Saturation & USM:

http://home.twmi.rr.com/davesden/Graphics/21Kobalux_f11.jpg

The following images consist of unprocessed full-res crops. That is, unprocessed other than RAW conversion via Epson's plug-in and then JPEG conversion via Photoshop.

First we have crops from the center of the scene, also the point of focus, at f/5.6 thru f/16:

http://home.twmi.rr.com/davesden/Graphics/21Kobalux_compare01.jpg

Now crops from the right edge at the same apertures:

http://home.twmi.rr.com/davesden/Graphics/21Kobalux_compare02.jpg

Finally crops from a point left of center:

http://home.twmi.rr.com/davesden/Graphics/21Kobalux_compare03.jpg

The second & third comparisons mainly show the effects of varying DOF. I find the first comparison interesting in that it reveals little difference in the lens' center performance at the different apertures. The most noticeable change is between f/5.6 and f/8. Despite my comment earlier in this thread it appears f/11 is in fact the optimal aperture, at least for this scene.

-Dave-

 

[peter_n]

Do you know how you tell the differences between each series? Is the series 3 substancially better than the previous run?

I think (but I can't be sure) that the 3rd series of the lens has more aperture diaphragm blades than the 2nd, and that the 3rd series has a nearer closest focus distance - maybe 0.7M to 0.9M - over the 2nd.

I'm afraid I have no idea whether one version of the lens was substantially better than another. I do know that these lenses were made in small numbers, and that production ceased in 2002.

 

[Jim Watts]

Here's The most noticeable change is between f/5.6 and f/8. Despite my comment earlier in this thread it appears f/11 is in fact the optimal aperture, at least for this scene.

-Dave-

Dave,

I agree f/11 seems optimal from your samples, so I guess I was wrong about greater diffraction effects with the R-D1 sensor, at least with this lens. There seems only a very little further loss of sharpness at the edges at f/16. I will have to try more controled tests with my own lenses.

Any chance of a couple of samples (plus your general impressions) of this lens at f/2.8 & f/4. I would probably be using these apertures quite a bit. The f/2.8 shot (via film) on the link Peter sent looked pretty good.