Which Leica 28mm for my M6?

[JohnTz]

I decided I would invest in a 28. I am confused by the various versions. I think I should get the latest Elmarit - M asph. Any advice or suggestions? I am looking for a used excellent/mint example and I want to make the right decision since it seems both are available. Can someone who has had the current and the previous version give their thoughts on the pluses and minuses of the two?

Thanks for your help,
John

 

[venchka]

This question comes up weekly. Use the search feature here and read all about all of the options. Leica, Zeiss, Voigtlander, Konica. Lots of good 28mm lenses around.

 

[Hacker]

Konica is rated very highly, and the Kobalux has some distortion compared to the rest. 28 Elmarit has a higher contrast but very low distortion. I have the Cron and the Elmarit ASPH versions and have not the need to mount the Cron even with the extra stop because I like its weight.

Chasseur d' Images #240 published earlier reports on the Hexar and Leica lenses together. They rate the Hexar 35/2 highly. Four stars for "Note technique" and "Cote d'amour" -- but they rate the Leica Summicron 35/2 Asph higher: five stars on both counts. (Interestingly, they rate the Hexar 28/2.8 higher than the new Elmarit 28/2.8.) See pages 176 and 177.

 

[ampguy]

Try them all

Try them all

I'd go with the Leitz 28/2.8 Elmarit current, but I don't shoot this size to justify it so have the Zeiss Biogon 28/2.8. I am very pleased with it. Have tried the CV 28/1.9 but the size and hood, and the build quality of the ones I specifically owned just didn't impress me at all, though I have seen great photos from the CV 28/1.9 lens.

I don't get flare from my Zeiss 28/2.8 and don't use a hood or filter.

I decided I would invest in a 28. I am confused by the various versions. I think I should get the latest Elmarit - M asph. Any advice or suggestions? I am looking for a used excellent/mint example and I want to make the right decision since it seems both are available. Can someone who has had the current and the previous version give their thoughts on the pluses and minuses of the two?

Thanks for your help,
John

 

[JohnTz]

Thanks for rthe responses guys.

 

[johannielscom]

Get yourself an M-Hexanon 28mm 2.8. It is tack sharp and has an awesome build quality. I'll never part with mine again, I love it dearly. It is welded to my Minolta CLE!

 

[PaulDalex]

Hi Johan
I have a CLE too. Unfortunately the m-hexanon 28 is hard to find especially in Europe. If I buy it in the States, customs would stop it and it might be a hurdle to get it even with hefty duties. I think eventually I will buy a zeiss 25, although I am not a wide angle fan.
Cheers
Paul

 

[SolaresLarrave]

John, what exactly do you want to know? If it's about sharpness... all wide angle lenses are sharper than others. It's in their nature (more DOF). As for contrast... I never bothered to check.

Now, the only thing you may want to consider is size, and whether the hood blocks the VF. My 3rd-version Elmarit has a hood that blocks the VF, but the lens itself is really good, and demonically sharp. Besides, it still can be had for a nice price. Otherwise, you can count on the very fast CV Ultron (f1.9). I handled one, and would like to have one if it wasn't for the fact that I'm a 35mm man. Otherwise, the only consideration when picking a lens of this focal length is price. At least to me.

Have fun shopping! 🙂

 

[Pablito]

John, what exactly do you want to know? If it's about sharpness... all wide angle lenses are sharper than others. It's in their nature (more DOF).

Strongly disagree with this statement. Don't confuse sharpness and DOF. Even the cheapest teles can be tack-sharp, but cheap wide lenses can be pretty bad. Fortunately, the current crop of w/a lenses from CV, Zeiss and Leica are excellent. And, I admit, what I say is more true for the older, off-brand SLR lenses.

 

[dpetrzelka]

The 2,8/28 Biogon

The 2,8/28 Biogon

This does not do the lens justice - but I must say the handling on the Zess 2,8/28 Biogon is wonderful. And its always fun to post more photos....

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Strongly disagree with this statement. Don't confuse sharpness and DOF. Even the cheapest teles can be tack-sharp, but cheap wide lenses can be pretty bad. Fortunately, the current crop of w/a lenses from CV, Zeiss and Leica are excellent. And, I admit, what I say is more true for the older, off-brand SLR lenses.

Please, re-read my post, Pablito. I am not doing what you say but showing that DOF is an effect or manifestation or show of sharpness. Isn't that defined at times as the area of apparent sharpness? And isn't a deep DOF an area of apparent sharpness? And don't wide angle lenses have a larger DOF with concommitant sharpness?

Now, if you waive physics at me... That's fine. I still didn't mix up sharpness and DOF.

 

[sunsworth]

...all wide angle lenses are sharper than others. It's in their nature (more DOF).

No they're not. It's perfectly possible to have a soft 15mm with lots of DOF, and a sharp 50mm with much less DOF.

 

[Rob-F]

In fact, even a sharp 15mm will have less apparent DOF because of a more abrupt transition from sharp to unsharp. The sharp in-focus area will make the OOF background appear less sharp by comparison.

 

[J J Kapsberger]

...And its always fun to post more photos....

Indeed it is. Taken with my Elmarit-M 28/2.8 ASHP:

Wide open; HP5 @ 3200

HP5 @ 800

 

[SolaresLarrave]

No they're not. It's perfectly possible to have a soft 15mm with lots of DOF, and a sharp 50mm with much less DOF.

<screams in horror>Noooooooooooooooooooooooooooo 😱 😱 😱

Down goes one of my firmest beliefs in photograph...

I stand corrected. Today, I learned that sharpness and DOF are not necessarily related, and therefore that one is not consequence of the other.

Thanks! 🙂

 

[SolaresLarrave]

One last question: wide-angles DO have a larger DOF, right? At least, frequently?

TIA!

 

[northpole]

Yes wides do have greater depths of field/ focus - just look at the depth of field bands on a 28mm and 90mm lens to confirm this.

I think the point being made above was that within the depth of focus of any lens, if the lens isn't tack sharp, well, photos won't be tack sharp. The depth of field for an f/2.8 28mm Elmarit will be the same as an f/2.8 28mm Biogon at the same aperture.

Peter

 

[mfogiel]

JohnTz
I've had Elmarit 3rd version, and I did not like it - it vignetted, flared, wasn't terribly sharp and wasn't small either. I switched to the Elmarit ASPH - it is tiny, sharper and a bit more flare resistant, even if it is still quite a lot behind Zeiss glass in this respect. Apparently Elmarit 4th was the sharpest of them all. If you want to stick to Leica glass at all cost, your choice should be between the 4th Elmarit and the latest ASPH or the Summicron. Zeiss Biogon will give you a great lens for less money, and CV lenses are a valid alternative and cheaper still.

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Hmm... I have a third-version Elmarit and find it very efficient. So far, never has it flared and much less go soft. I guess it's the luck of the draw.

Thanks for the clarifications on sharpness and DOF! 🙂