thefsb
Established
I figured I might spend some of the Economic Stimulus Act of 2008 on a 21 mm.
Checking the data and photos, it seems the old CV 21 mm is RF coupled and not significantly bigger. I have an R4 and an R and 3 other LSM lenses. I have one LSM to M converter permanently on the R4.
So it seems obvious that the old lens is the better choice for me: works on both my cameras, cheaper, lighter, works with the big hood, and comes with a viewfinder.
Am I missing something on the downside?
-tom
Checking the data and photos, it seems the old CV 21 mm is RF coupled and not significantly bigger. I have an R4 and an R and 3 other LSM lenses. I have one LSM to M converter permanently on the R4.
So it seems obvious that the old lens is the better choice for me: works on both my cameras, cheaper, lighter, works with the big hood, and comes with a viewfinder.
Am I missing something on the downside?
-tom
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
Nope. The old LTM version will also work on more cameras, using adapters to M mount cameras and fitting directly to any screw-mount cameras. Seems like a no-brainer to me.
kshapero
South Florida Man
That would also be my choice if I was in similar situation.
tripod
Well-known
I bought the old version. Cheaper, and comes with the viewfinder. Use it as is on a LTM body, or with an M adaptor on an M mount body. A real no-brainer!
N
Nikon Bob
Guest
What the others said.
Bob
Bob
dazedgonebye
Veteran
I use mine on a fed-2. Nice to have a low-cost second body ready to go with ultra-wide.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
From a performance point of view, either the LTM 21/4 or the P mount works equally well. Only benefit I can see is that the aperture ring on the P is a bit easier to handle with the two "ears" on it.
The hood on the P is also slightly different. With the LTM version -if you use a filter you have to either forgo the hood or chance vignetting by screwing the hood into the filter ring. The P-hood has a slightly larger diameter and you can thread a 39mm filter into it AND keep the hood in the same position. The benefit of the LTM is of course that you get a finder with it.
The hood on the P is also slightly different. With the LTM version -if you use a filter you have to either forgo the hood or chance vignetting by screwing the hood into the filter ring. The P-hood has a slightly larger diameter and you can thread a 39mm filter into it AND keep the hood in the same position. The benefit of the LTM is of course that you get a finder with it.
silverliner
Member
I use my 21P on my R4A. Mostly, I shoot without looking through the camera viewfinder unless I need an accurate framing such as photo of a big group of people. The P21 is rangefinder-coupled that's the real benefit of using one. If you already own an R4 why not the P21, I actually hate using the accessory external viewfinder!!!!
drewbarb
picnic like it's 1999
Just to clarify, both 21's are RF coupled. Maybe silverliner was thinking of the LTM 25 which is not RF coupled, where the M-mount "P" version is coupled.
silverliner
Member
Sorry, I thought the old LTM 21 was a snapshot type.
I have Skopar-C 35/2.5 which takes beautiful pictures
but the tab on P21 is more conveenient to me than the
stick on that 35/2.5C. It is probably my own preference.
I have Skopar-C 35/2.5 which takes beautiful pictures
but the tab on P21 is more conveenient to me than the
stick on that 35/2.5C. It is probably my own preference.
Turtle
Veteran
random comments on the 21P I just bought:
Build is pretty decent. Feels very smooth and clicks are nicely indexed. The 21P might be bigger than the LTM one but it is still tiny. The tab is a must here as it is so small.
Contrast is moderately high but not excessively so. I shoot mono only and have no issues with this (I have no probs with my ZMs either). Centre sharpness is excellent and comparable to the ZMs but falls away more noticeably than the ZMs I own (such as the 28/35). However it is still very good. Its just that the ZMs are insanely good in this regard, esp the 35. Overall I am very pleased with this lens. The extreme corners are noticeably softer, but we are talking the very extreme here and so it is not really an issue.
Compared to the 21 ZMs. Well, I dont have either. Or a 21 asph. However, if the 21 2.8/4.5 are like the 35 biogon in terms of edge performance (the MTFs would suggest that they are roughly the same and all a touch better than the 28 biogon) then they will outperform the tiny skopar and you would be able to see it on prints. Comparing 18" prints from the 35 biogon and the 21 skopar I can see the difference in the corners but it is not that epic. I would love to try a 21 biogon for comparison. If I can produce a 18" print as a section from a neg that would have been about 20" if completely printed and it is looking darned then, well, it is a good lens!
Build is pretty decent. Feels very smooth and clicks are nicely indexed. The 21P might be bigger than the LTM one but it is still tiny. The tab is a must here as it is so small.
Contrast is moderately high but not excessively so. I shoot mono only and have no issues with this (I have no probs with my ZMs either). Centre sharpness is excellent and comparable to the ZMs but falls away more noticeably than the ZMs I own (such as the 28/35). However it is still very good. Its just that the ZMs are insanely good in this regard, esp the 35. Overall I am very pleased with this lens. The extreme corners are noticeably softer, but we are talking the very extreme here and so it is not really an issue.
Compared to the 21 ZMs. Well, I dont have either. Or a 21 asph. However, if the 21 2.8/4.5 are like the 35 biogon in terms of edge performance (the MTFs would suggest that they are roughly the same and all a touch better than the 28 biogon) then they will outperform the tiny skopar and you would be able to see it on prints. Comparing 18" prints from the 35 biogon and the 21 skopar I can see the difference in the corners but it is not that epic. I would love to try a 21 biogon for comparison. If I can produce a 18" print as a section from a neg that would have been about 20" if completely printed and it is looking darned then, well, it is a good lens!
oscroft
Veteran
I have the LTM 21, and it pretty much lives on my R4A. However, it is nice to occasionally be able to use it on other bodies with the ext VF (including screw thread bodies). I find it very hard to use the LH-1 hood though, because it badly obstructs the VF.
hugivza
Well-known
I agree that the hood occludes the in camera viewfinder, but it does not interfere with the rangefinder focussing, and the lens does have a TOC finder which is very bright.