Summilux 21/1.4 first pics

R

Roger Hicks

Veteran
Local time
11:23 PM
Joined
Apr 15, 2005
Messages
23,920
Three more 'first look' pictures, this time from the 21/1.4. Two are at f/1.4 and the third is at around f/5.6 or even f/8. All taken with M8 (Frances was using the M8.2, which is on the tripod in the pic of her).

Tashi delek,

(Remember that the day I posted this is is Lhasa Uprising Day -- see

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/asia-pacific/7933207.stm)

Roger
 

Attachments

  • L1007742.JPG
    L1007742.JPG
    145.8 KB · Views: 0
  • L1007753.jpg
    L1007753.jpg
    33.4 KB · Views: 0
  • L1007760.JPG
    L1007760.JPG
    56.5 KB · Views: 0
Last edited:
Debusti Paolo said:
Nice pics,how does it balance on your leica body?
Click to expand...

On the neckstrap it tips forwards ferociously, but in the hand it's not really noticeable despite the weight.

Thanks to both of you for the kind comments on the pics. Funnily enough, I don't like selective focus with wide-angles, so I put the middle pic in just to show it can be done.

Cheers,

R.
 
The second one (in the middle) for me, too. Were these taken with your M8.2, so the FOV equals ~ 27mm ? Did you test the lenses with one of your film bodies, too ?

Thanks for sharing !

Cheers,

Gabor
 
Dear Gabor,

Thanks for the kind words. Only M8/M8.2 so far -- film to follow. Original post modified to state this. Equivalents are 21mm = 28mm and 24mm = 32mm.

Cheers,

R.
 
Thanks for posting. I would be interested to know up to what distance you can have the subject at f1.4 and still have significant OOF area behind?
 
yanidel said:
Thanks for posting. I would be interested to know up to what distance you can have the subject at f1.4 and still have significant OOF area behind?
Click to expand...

A vast amount depends on enlargement size, and on whether you are using it on film or on digi (different degrees of enlargement for the same sized final image), and even on the subject matter, but I'd say that for a really marked effect it was no more than a metre or at most two. The lens focuses to 0.7m. Marked d-o-f at 3 metres at f/1.4 is about 2.5 to 4.5 metres. You have however given me an idea for oblique tests at various distances for my web-site review, when I get around to it.

Tashi delek,

Roger
 
Roger, thanks for posting the above photos...but what do the film results look like. As digital crop factor to 27 looks very clean. I have only film Leica's. So for me the comparison between the receent 21 ASPH and the new F1.4 is more about the differences from the 12mm band to the corners of my negatives. I hope your going to get any opportunity to let us see some film examples. All the best...Laurance
 
Dear Laurance,

In due course, naturally -- and there will be full reviews in Shutterbug and on our website. I just thought people might like to see some early shots first.

Cheers,

Roger
 
Summilux 21/1.4 first pics

Hi Rogers,

Nice lens for sure, but I think that my Super-Angulon is good enough for me. (I am maybe not good enough for her...).

You both look like beeing very nice people.

Cheers from Portugal,

Rui
 
Love the second picture. One of those 21/1.4 ASPH has my name on it. Like to see some pix with 100 Ektar and K200.
 
Seeing these and other recent examples, I'm persuaded it's in fact a good thing that the lens is priced so high I could never aspire to own one. Look forward to seeing more and reading the reviews, Roger.
 
I have now returned it to its rightful owner - he did extend the lending period, if I wanted - but to quote a famous NRA member he would have had to wrestle if from my "cold, dead hands".
It is nothing short of spectacular - very sharp at f1.4 - which is were I shot 85% of the shots. Once you stop down to f-4-5.6, just about all 21's perform well.
Do I want one - oh yes!. Do I need one, probably not, but kudo's to Leica for coming up with it and of course, at some time I will break down and get one. Wonder how one can rig one of the lotteries? I dont need the big multi-million $ win - just enough to cover the cost!
 
Roger Hicks said:
On the neckstrap it tips forwards ferociously, but in the hand it's not really noticeable despite the weight.

Thanks to both of you for the kind comments on the pics. Funnily enough, I don't like selective focus with wide-angles, so I put the middle pic in just to show it can be done.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Roger,
Does your selective focus dislike extend to low light shots where wide open is the only option? Or are you only talking about seriously wide - unlike say with a 35/1.4 Summilux? I just wondered, because I know you've always been a great advocate of fast lenses esp. the 35mm just mentioned.


Best wishes,
Tom
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom