oldoc
oldoc
Never been much of a finder fondler myself, either...
Which 21mm M mount lens?
- Thread starter mgd711
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 53
- Views 4K
Krosya
Konicaze
I wonder if Zeiss finders are made any better - in other words - dont break as much as CV ones?
RichardB
Well-known
The Zeiss 21mm finder is built like a tank and opticaly very nice. It is not offset for a Leica M(i.e it is not centered over the lens axis) as are Leica finders. I am still trying to determine if that is causing a problem with alignment with my M's.-Dick
mgd711
Medium Format Baby!!
I'd also like to know why its Tom's favorite. Obviously its good but I'd like a bit more than that... 🙂
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
It is partly the size, partly that it fits a R4M like the proverbial glove - and mainly because it is one of the best 21's I have ever used. Distorsion free, very sharp and with moderate contrast - easy to print from!
It has been dedicated to a R4M since I got it!
It has been dedicated to a R4M since I got it!
mgd711
Medium Format Baby!!
Well, if its good for you Tom, its got to be bloody fantastic for me.... 🙂 (especially as you said moderate contrast)
Thanks for the input from everybody Biogon 21/4.5 it is.
Mike
Avotius
Some guy
Bah...I have the plastic Cv 21mm finder and it sucks, even with no glasses and my eye crammed up to it I can barely make out the framelines as they fade in and out and I can never see all of them at the same time not to mention it feels flimsy and came with the framelines crooked in the mount.
maddoc
... likes film again.
HenningW
Well-known
I also had the 19 for a while; I'd had the 21/4 Super Angulon but found the 19 Canon a fair bit better. The 21/3.4 Super Angulon bested both by a fair margin. It was my main rangefinder 21 for a long time. I also got the non-ASPH Elmarit but used it less as it didn't perform as well as the SA except for vignetting. When the ASPH came out, I got that and it was outstanding. I tried some other 21's, including the Kobalux 2.8, the Ricoh 3.5 and the CV 21. I still have the CV 21 and use it when I need something small. The 21 Biogon is excellent, but I prefer the Elmarit ASPH for overall look and resolution into the corners. The Biogon is very nice, and I'm tempted to get one for the low distortion, but otherwise it's just too slow. I now use the WATE a lot when there is lots of light, and it has excellent performance except for slightly higher distortion. Most of the time I now use the 21 Summilux.
My preference for B&W on the M6 would be the 21/3.4 SA. It has the wonderful combination of medium contrast, extremely low distortion and very smooth rendering. For colour I prefer the 21 Summilux.
Henning
meven
Well-known
Thanks for the comment!
Yes, taken with the M8 processed in Aperture and converted in B&W with Nik Silver Efex Pro.
The exif data is HERE if you are interested.
HERE are more photos taken on that day with the same kit and processed the same way.
SIlver Efex is an amazing piece of software. I also recommend Nik Viveza for colour.
HenningW
Well-known
I forgot to mention that some of the differences are very slight, and the 21 CV is so good (if centered correctly) that it can compete quite well with the others from f/4. For the money, and to see if you like 21mm, you can't go wrong.
Henning
Henning
Krosya
Konicaze
Karefin
Member
^ Full aperture in those two?
Krosya
Konicaze
Yep - at 2.8 , I'm pretty sure. (and after a bottle or two of wine sampling 🙂 )
Similar threads
