katcons
Established
Hello, everyone.
I would like to ask for reviews of the 25/4P color-skopar lens (M mount). I just got a Bessa R4M, and I'm very excited to purchase my first M mount lens.
However, I am currently torn with the 21mm and the 25mm. I have the J12 which will be a mainstay on my Leica IIIf, and I'm looking for a nice wide to compliment this setup.
Any comments would be helpful. Salamat!
However, I am currently torn with the 21mm and the 25mm. I have the J12 which will be a mainstay on my Leica IIIf, and I'm looking for a nice wide to compliment this setup.
Any comments would be helpful. Salamat!
sleepyhead
Well-known
If possible look at many photos taken with a 24/25mm and a 21mm (on Flickr for example), to decide which "look" you prefer. There is a large difference in my opinion
I personally fnd the 25mm focal length a lot more useful as a general wide angle for those times when 35mm is not wide enough, and 21mm is more of a specialty lens for me. I often end up cropping pictures taken with a 21mm lens alittle (not ideal for a tiny 35mm film frame...)
Regarding the 25mm Skopar itself - it is tiny (sweet) and handles well. Optically it does what it's supposed to do, and it's sharp. It's a bit slow, but then it's the small size you get in return. I owned it and the 25mm Biogon by Zeiss, but found the later too large for my pursposes.
Now I own neither the Zeiss nor the Skopar (having streamlined my rangefinder kit to 21, 35, 50, and 75mm lenses, with 35/50 accounting for 90% of my pictures, hence the 21mm as a specialty lens), but if I were to buy a Skopar again, it'd the newer version with coupled focusing, as opposed to guess focusing. The coupling is useful for subjects under about 1.5 meters in distance.
Enjoy!
I personally fnd the 25mm focal length a lot more useful as a general wide angle for those times when 35mm is not wide enough, and 21mm is more of a specialty lens for me. I often end up cropping pictures taken with a 21mm lens alittle (not ideal for a tiny 35mm film frame...)
Regarding the 25mm Skopar itself - it is tiny (sweet) and handles well. Optically it does what it's supposed to do, and it's sharp. It's a bit slow, but then it's the small size you get in return. I owned it and the 25mm Biogon by Zeiss, but found the later too large for my pursposes.
Now I own neither the Zeiss nor the Skopar (having streamlined my rangefinder kit to 21, 35, 50, and 75mm lenses, with 35/50 accounting for 90% of my pictures, hence the 21mm as a specialty lens), but if I were to buy a Skopar again, it'd the newer version with coupled focusing, as opposed to guess focusing. The coupling is useful for subjects under about 1.5 meters in distance.
Enjoy!
Last edited:
back alley
IMAGES
a 25 is much easier to use well than a 21, for most people.
i tend to think of a 25 as a 28 with an edge to it.
i tend to think of a 25 as a 28 with an edge to it.
watchyourbackgrounds
Member
I have the screwmount version, all scale focus, and if I could't replace it, I wouldn't sell it for $2,000. I have plenty of lenses, several bodies, including M4-P and Zeiss Ikon...and my Bessa L with this lens gets the most use. It's so easy to scale focu--oh, you're getting the RF one. Well, get it. A great lens, plenty sharp, and easy to handhold even at 1/30. I shoot iso 400. If I want f2, I shoot 800. It's fast enough. Wonderful lens. My main lens for the past 4 years, I keep going back to it. I'm a lousy shooter, but I like this lens.
Turtle
Veteran
go 25 for sure. much more generalist application and much easier to take frames that don't 'scream extreme.' I admit to being from the school of thinking that images should not look forced. I like 21mm a lot, but it is not for everything.
Leigh Youdale
Well-known
Another vote for the 25mm. I use it a lot for travel and street photography. I found 28mm was too long for many interior shots and 21mm had just too much distortion, especially if you couldn't frame with the camera level in all planes. The 25mm is still acceptable in those situations. I had (still have) the LTM version but recently bought an M version just for the coupled rangefinder. Hardly needs it though. (I also have the 15/4.5, 35/2.5, 40/1.4, 50/2.5, 75/2.5). Hardly ever use the 15 or the 75 and tend to keep the 40 for low light use.
IMO, You can't really lose with any 24/25mm made in recent years. Say, by Voigtlander, Zeiss, and Leica. They are all excellent optically. Your main task will be to choose your comfortable mix of cost, speed, and size. This is a nice focal length for the Bessa R4A or R4M, as the framelines are easy to see.
In fact my 24P Skopar is on my R4A now, as a result of a great experience earlier with the Snapshot Skopar on a Bessa L. And I have a 25 Biogon on an M8, producing amazing crisp detail, a great lens.
21mm can be a lot of creative fun too... I think it's on the verge of being an extreme wide lens, but with care can avoid the cliche look... but more difficult to use well.
In fact my 24P Skopar is on my R4A now, as a result of a great experience earlier with the Snapshot Skopar on a Bessa L. And I have a 25 Biogon on an M8, producing amazing crisp detail, a great lens.
21mm can be a lot of creative fun too... I think it's on the verge of being an extreme wide lens, but with care can avoid the cliche look... but more difficult to use well.
Last edited:
Richard G
Veteran
What sleepyhead said exactly - except don't then sell it.
chrishayton
Well-known
I have the 25/4p (m mount) and love it. Great on my film camera and ideal field of view, It wasnt till this week and I got my m8 that I realised how sharp it is. brilliant lens for the money. Just a shame its a 32 on M8 though feels wider :S
