Leics Super-Angulon 21mm 3.4 with M-9?

[ornate_wrasse]

I've been doing a lot of research on using my Super-Angulon with my M-9.

Everything I've been reading seems to indicate that, while it won't meter (meaning I'd have to use an external meter), it will mount on the camera without damaging it. I've also read that later versions of this lens don't poke back as much and are therefore less likely to damage the camera's metering mechanism. I know what I've read on the Internet but I'd like to know for sure from knowledgeable folks here on RFF.

Is it safe to mount my Leica Super-Angulon 21mm f3.4 lens on my M-9 without it resulting in damage to the camera? The serial number of my Leica Super-Angulon f3.4 lens is 2055817. I have an external meter and don't mind using it to get the proper exposure.

Previously, I've only used this lens on my M-3 but I'd love to be able to use it on my M-9.

Thank you.

Ellen

 

[JMQ]

I am speaking from from experience about using the SA21/3.4 on the M9.

1. yes it will mount on the M9 without damaging your M9
2. you can meter, under-expose by 2 or 3 stops. It works most of the time. An external meter is probably best
3. You get the banding on the side, which is very annoying. I read that it can be corrected but I have not tried
4. You do get very dramatic results with the SA. The center sharpness is just incredible
5. In the end, I traded the SA for the SEM 21. My heart still pounds when I see an SA on the classifieds.

 

[ornate_wrasse]

You get the banding on the side, which is very annoying. I read that it can be corrected but I have not tried

Thanks for your input.

Can you explain more about the banding on the side? Are images still usable?

Ellen

 

[JMQ]

Ellen,

There is a band of purplish color on the left side of image, and slightly less so on the right. Usable? yes, especially if you have a darker left side or can crop the sides. In then end, it was too much of a hassle for me. Search the earlier threads here, I recall lots of discussion. Better, if you can, try it out for yourself before purchase.

 

[ornate_wrasse]

try it out for yourself before purchase.

Thanks for the information on the banding. It was very helpful.

I already own the lens, so no need to try it out before purchase 🙂

I'm headed tomorrow to Eastern Oregon where having a wide lens such as the S-A should work very well. I'll mount it on my M-9 and we'll see what happens!

Thanks.

Ellen

 

[x-ray]

The design of the SA f3.4 never changed during production. I think what you're referring to about not going back as far and damaging the meter is the bayonette mount was changed slightly so it would mount on the CL and M5 and would keep the meter arm retracted. With earlier lenses the arm would swing out when the camera was cocked and damage the meter arm. Other than that they're physically and optically the same.

I owned a chrome version in the 60's into the 70's. I later replaced it with a Elmarit non asph and always regretted selling my SA. A few months ago I finally purchased another SA in black. This one I'll keep.

At the time I had my M9 I didn't have a SA so I have no comment on how it works.

 

[Monochrom]

Hi,

A couple years ago i was about to buy myself that lens, so i tested on my M9, results were horrible.

JMQ has stated it clearly.

I´ve used the VC 21/4 which works better on the M9 and it´s cheaper, also works wonderfully on film.

I think the newer larger 21/1.8 works perfectly on the M9.

🙂

 

[JHutchins]

The banding is more commonly known as "Italian Flag Syndrome" and googling that will tell you all you need to know. But to save the trouble....

There's a pretty strong magenta cast to the leftmost quarter or so of the frame (a bit wider in the corners) and a much weaker cast (with a bit of green tinge) to the right.

It is pretty easily fixed using cornerfix or an Adobe plugin called "DNG Flat Field" available here:

http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/lightroomplugins/

Both work the same way -- you take a control shot of a white textureless surface (I used the cockpit coaming of my boat -- white fiberglass. Maybe not the ideal choice, but it worked just fine) and that is used to create a correction file.

I've used both cornerfix and DNG flat field and both work fine. I like flat field better because it allows you to choose to correct color only or color + vignetting. Cornerfix does both and I don't know of a way to get to to correct only color. The vignetting is part of the character of the SA so I'm not always eager to throw it away -- it also brightens the corners and so can increase noise in the corners.

This is not something unique to the SA -- any non-retrofocus lens of sufficiently wide angle will likely do the same.