Vickko
Veteran
Anyone got comments, on the performance of the 18mm f4 Distagon lens?
I'm reading that it is stellar, and has many design points that make it superior to the Leica 18mm offering.
What was your solution for 6-bit coding? Milich machined adapter?
And how about the Cosina 12mm and 15mm lenses? Any good?
Vick
I'm reading that it is stellar, and has many design points that make it superior to the Leica 18mm offering.
What was your solution for 6-bit coding? Milich machined adapter?
And how about the Cosina 12mm and 15mm lenses? Any good?
Vick
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Well, I use mine (my wife's, actually) on both M8 and M9. It's excellent. Likewise the 15mm. Both uncoded, though of course I can enter it on the M9 manually. I borrowed the 12, many years ago, before digital days, but found that it was something I never thought I'd see: a lens that was too wide for me. Another first-class lens.
As a matter of interest -- I'm not arguing, just interested -- what are these 'many design points'?
Cheers,
R.
As a matter of interest -- I'm not arguing, just interested -- what are these 'many design points'?
Cheers,
R.
D&A
Well-known
As Roger pointed out, the Zeiss Zm 18mm is superb on M8 and M9 and gives the Leica 18mm a run it's money. In fact the reason I picked it over the Leica was distortion (especially the impossible to correct moustache distrotion,) which has been often seen in samples of the Leica 18mm...if you do the sort of photography where this might be an issue.
As for coding, on the M8, where red edge issue is rarely (or less often) a problem with wide angle lenses in general, many code it as a WATE, if you have a Zeiss 18mm that brings up the same framelines as a WATE. Apparently in the U.S. (and possibly elsewhere), the Zeiss 18mm was imported with mounts that brought up one of two possible frameline combinations.
On the M9, coding the Zeiss 18mm as a Leica 21mm f2.8 (pre asph) virtually eliminates the red edge problem. For some reason this particualar coding seems to work extremely well with many other wide angle lenses (even if they are not 21mm) to reduce or elimiate red edge often seen with the M9.
Dave
As for coding, on the M8, where red edge issue is rarely (or less often) a problem with wide angle lenses in general, many code it as a WATE, if you have a Zeiss 18mm that brings up the same framelines as a WATE. Apparently in the U.S. (and possibly elsewhere), the Zeiss 18mm was imported with mounts that brought up one of two possible frameline combinations.
On the M9, coding the Zeiss 18mm as a Leica 21mm f2.8 (pre asph) virtually eliminates the red edge problem. For some reason this particualar coding seems to work extremely well with many other wide angle lenses (even if they are not 21mm) to reduce or elimiate red edge often seen with the M9.
Dave
zleica
Established
Vick,
I have had color shift problems with non coded lenses (including the wide angle lenses you mentioned) for in-door lighting condition. You can solve this problem by using Cornerfix software, but it's not an ideal solution. I ended up buying a Leica WATE. Technically, the WATE is an excellent lens. But with the viewfinder, the WATE is too big not to mention it's an expensive lens. If you are looking for use the 18mm both indoor and outdoor for color images, consider to have the lens coded (by DAG).
I have used both Cosina 15 and 21 with coded LTM to M adaptor. I really like the images rendered by these lenses.
I have had color shift problems with non coded lenses (including the wide angle lenses you mentioned) for in-door lighting condition. You can solve this problem by using Cornerfix software, but it's not an ideal solution. I ended up buying a Leica WATE. Technically, the WATE is an excellent lens. But with the viewfinder, the WATE is too big not to mention it's an expensive lens. If you are looking for use the 18mm both indoor and outdoor for color images, consider to have the lens coded (by DAG).
I have used both Cosina 15 and 21 with coded LTM to M adaptor. I really like the images rendered by these lenses.
Last edited:
kbg32
neo-romanticist
This lens is great on the M8, 24mm with the crop factor. I use the Milich mount. Lens is sharp and a joy to use! I have had no problems whatsoever. Make sure you use a UV/IR filter.
I haven't had luck with the CV 15. I am extremely disappointed with it on the M8. The 12mm works great, though sharpness could be a bit better.
I haven't had luck with the CV 15. I am extremely disappointed with it on the M8. The 12mm works great, though sharpness could be a bit better.
Vickko
Veteran
....design points....
....design points....
I was referring to the filter mount for the Zeiss; it seemed more sensible than the "red thread" Leica mount.
....Vick
....design points....
I was referring to the filter mount for the Zeiss; it seemed more sensible than the "red thread" Leica mount.
....Vick
Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
A little late in the thread but...
... I tested the ZM 18mm Distagon against the Leica 18mm Super-Elmar on My M8.2 shortly after the Leica became available. The result was that I found them to be virtually identical. I liked the way the Leica handled better (but that was almost completely offset by its funky - and expensive - IR/CUT filter).
Both were coded to read as the Super-Elmar.
Some of the test photos can be seen here:
http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=975572
... I tested the ZM 18mm Distagon against the Leica 18mm Super-Elmar on My M8.2 shortly after the Leica became available. The result was that I found them to be virtually identical. I liked the way the Leica handled better (but that was almost completely offset by its funky - and expensive - IR/CUT filter).
Both were coded to read as the Super-Elmar.
Some of the test photos can be seen here:
http://photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=975572
Bill Blackwell
Leica M Shooter
I use a Milich coded lens mount modified to bring up the 50mm framelines and coded as a Super-Elmar.
I bought a CV 15mm thread-mount when they first became available (about 10-years ago?), which I sold to ‘trade-up’ to the M mount version.
Then I tested the latest 15mm CV in M mount against the Zeiss 18mm Distagon. The Zeiss completely blew the 15 away. So since the 18mm FL is plenty wide-enough for my purposes I opted not to buy the CV 15 M.
Those who have tested the CV 12 against the 15 have indicated the 15 is better by comparison, but qualify this by saying there is no direct competition for the 12.
Vickko
Veteran
Thanks Bill
I'm tending to the conclusion that the 18mm Zeiss is the one to buy, and if I do use it on my M8, get the 52mm UV/IR from B&W and a Milich mount.
Thanks
Vick
I'm tending to the conclusion that the 18mm Zeiss is the one to buy, and if I do use it on my M8, get the 52mm UV/IR from B&W and a Milich mount.
Thanks
Vick
Vickko
Veteran
Oh, yeah, the other option is to get a WATE. But not the Franken-finder. What where they thinking?
The Leica 18mm Super Elmar comes with a mount that brings up 50mm framelines, and is coded 110100
My Zeiss 18mm Distagon also came with a 50mm mount, and I had DAG code it the same. It works beautifully on my M8, and is usefully wide enough for most purposes. I think there's a good reason for the complex optical construction, as it is superior optically to my screw-mount CV 15mm. But it's way larger and more expensive too.
Still, when I need the extra width, I use the 15!
My Zeiss 18mm Distagon also came with a 50mm mount, and I had DAG code it the same. It works beautifully on my M8, and is usefully wide enough for most purposes. I think there's a good reason for the complex optical construction, as it is superior optically to my screw-mount CV 15mm. But it's way larger and more expensive too.
Still, when I need the extra width, I use the 15!
zleica
Established
Optically, the Franken-finder is excellent. I use mine regularly on both M8 and M6/M3.