Leica wide angle choices

NWPhil

Rookie
Name
Phillip Ferreira
Hi,
I love wa and uwa lenses on my canon system, but I want to keep a small and compact lineup with my m240.
I am happy with the vc 12mm and 35 cron asph - however, find my zeiss 18mm not versatile enough, and the vc 28mm too narrow at times. Ideally (aside a zoom) I think either a 21 or 24-25mm would do me the best.
I like the slower focals because they are compact, but the fast summilux are tempting because of the rendering and shallow focus I like to use sometimes, despite looking at the 21-25mm range for landscaping and some urban/street shooting.
Then also very tempted with the tri-elmar 16-18-21 despite being a bit slow and on the large side.
the 18 and the 28 will be sold, so I just want one lens as a replacement, but I am spinning my wheels going nowhere.....would someone please voice their opinion about what's available and better yet any share personal experience within this focal ranges?
Thanks
Phil
 
Hi Phil,

It sounds as if a 21mm might work for you most of the time. That or a 24mm. If you go with the 21mm, you can crop it a bit to get to 24mm or 28mm, but not vice-versa.

21mm is about as wide as I use before I start really noticing that something's different about the field of view. If you're looking for "wide as an effect" then you need to go wider, to perhaps 18mm. Otherwise the 21 or 24mm is likely your lens. If so, go with the 21mm, and crop a bit should you need an effective 24mm for some shots.

As to a fast 21mm ... Unless you're working with things close-up and want to blur the background a bit, save size and money and go with a slower one instead. If you're shooting more "scenic" than "subject," then that extra open aperture isn't going to help much.

Next, what are you looking for in character? Depending on what you're going for, there are some lenses that might be better than others.
 
Hi Carlb,
Thanks for your reply and insights.
as far as wide, I have vc 12mm, and it's a play lens sort of speaking, but comes handy.
21mm is the focal I have been thinking the most as a matter of fact. The main reason for a fast wa, would be night shots and occasional nightscapes.
Regarding character, I like the way the summilux 21mm renders the out of focus areas, but not so much the overall look above f/4. yes it's sharp, but that's it.
Open for suggestions by all means
Phil
 
One lens as a replacement ... that's tough.

The closest compromise among many considerations for your single lens is likely the Voightlander 21mm f1.8.

Sharp, fast, wide. A small amount of lateral chromatic aberration, the price paid for it not being huge. If you can't take the aberration, jump up to the Leica 21mm f1.4, but it's bigger, heavier, and much pricier.

Personally, I don't think I could go with a single lens to cover the above. I just love the 21mm f3.4 asph Super-Elmarit: small and perfect (aside from it being a bit slow).

I think I'd stay with the Super-Elmarit for 90% of what I shoot, and pick up the Voightlander specifically for night and low-light shoots.

Always tough choices, for certain.
 
LOL you are evil Carlb :D
yeah, the summilux price and size (only) is a contender with the tri-elmar
voigtlander wins in cost and leaves room for a 24mm budget wise
what do you think of the elmarit 21mm 2.8?
go to think really well about this, because looking at my dslr kit, I don't have anything faster than 2.8 below 35mm focal.....but the point of having the leica is to go outside my usual setup.
I started with saying that I would have two lenses tops - yeah right. that's why I need/want just one, so I can keep it as a smaller kit.
the vc 12mm, cron 35 asph and vc 50 1.1 are staying. other one likely to go is the vc 75mm 1.8...
I have the apo elamrit 100 and the gorlitz trioplan 100mm with adapters doing double duty on both systems, but those are not everyday use lenses.
on the other hand, I really would like to have a kit with 4 compact lenses - hence a cron 50mm (replacing the vc) and then either the sem or elmarit 21mm fitting the bill perfectly

hmmm - going to look at reviews and samples of the 21mm sem and elmarit
Thanks once again
Phil
 
21 Elmarit is excellent, from what I read. But I can't speak from experience for it, I hope someone else will speak on it here. Otherwise the "usual" website personalities have their thoughts (which are usually pretty honest and insightful).

What I know of the 21 SEM from having it:
  • Beautiful and sharp rendition. Corner-to-Corner, regardless of f-stop. Not "clinical."
  • Great sunstars (9 aperture blades, tight well-formed stars).
  • Controls flare exceptionally well, especially for a wide. (Use mine without a hood, tiny bit of PS)
  • Minimizes magenta shifts at the left and right edges.
  • Compact as you'll get for a wide.
  • It really is the best super-wide angle lens I've ever used.
One idea: Get the 21 Elmarit or SEM. Take a tripod along when shooting the low-light and night sky shots at 1 second, etc. Keeps you honest to your limited-lens promise.
 
21 Elmarit is excellent, from what I read. But I can't speak from experience for it, I hope someone else will speak on it here. Otherwise the "usual" website personalities have their thoughts (which are usually pretty honest and insightful).

What I know of the 21 SEM from having it:
  • Beautiful and sharp rendition. Corner-to-Corner, regardless of f-stop. Not "clinical."
  • Great sunstars (9 aperture blades, tight well-formed stars).
  • Controls flare exceptionally well, especially for a wide. (Use mine without a hood, tiny bit of PS)
  • Minimizes magenta shifts at the left and right edges.
  • Compact as you'll get for a wide.
  • It really is the best super-wide angle lens I've ever used.
One idea: Get the 21 Elmarit or SEM. Take a tripod along when shooting the low-light and night sky shots at 1 second, etc. Keeps you honest to your limited-lens promise.
Hi Carl,
what do you think about the elmarit-m 21mm 2.8 pre-asph? (E-60)#348xxxx, so it's a type 2.
 
The SEM will outperform the Elmarit, no question. Except for f-stop. Better contrast, sharper, better sensor color-shift control at the edges, better sunstars, especially better flare-control.

Here's a few comparisons, about 1/3 of the way down the page:
f/Egor: Impressions of a Leica Super-Elmar-M 21mm f/3.4 ASPH Lens - The Leica Camera Blog

I've been thinking about it for while: I'd go with the SEM (used is fine) for now. Be tickled with what you're going to get from it: there's nothing out there that beats it. And get that Voigtlander later when you really want to do the low-light shots.

There's just no single decent compromise existing for your shooting scenarios. At least to my mind's eye ...
 
I never had the chance to use the 21 SEM but from Carl's picture, I can see that it is very nice. Personally, for the UWA, I like the Tri-Elmar WATE. The 21SEM is around $2200-$2500. WATE is closer to $3500. Aperture is pretty close at 3.4 vs 4.0. Nice thing about the WATE is that it is a zoom. Yeah, there are notches to indicate 16-18-21 but you can also go in between. It also gives you a little bit more flexibility. And boy, it is sharp. I really missed the WATE. I am sure I will be getting one again in the near future.
 
ah-ah - yes the tri-elmar has been in my mind. Would be ideal for travel, but the size and f/4 aperture holds me back a little bit
I am trying to build a kit with 3 small lens and 3 specialty lenses, sort of speaking (one of them does double duty)
I have the voigt 12mm asph ltm with adapter and a cron 35 f/2 asph that I will keep - the issue is that the zm 18 gets a bit woo wide sometimes, and the vc 28 ultron not quite enough, but it's a f/2 - hence looking at either 21 or a 24-25 ( I prefer a 21mm at this moment)
on the I-don't-care-about-size side, the nokton 50 f1.1, and the apo elmarit-R 100mm 2.8 are fine - rethinking a bit the vc 75mm 1.8, but that would imply getting rid of the apo too, and get the 90mm macro elmar (leaving this alone for now)
I like the rendering of the SEM, but lust for the speed of the lux ...LOL
OTOH, f/2 - f2.8 still gives me enough OOF when needed, and still able for night scenes/low light situations
out of the six versions, well really five, the SA and the pre-asph are out of consideration
the lux is....well, tempting but for less almost as fast the VC would do (somewhat) and price and size makes the tri-elmar tempting, which is not really the way I want to go (or at least trying to convince myself of such)
Left with the 21 asph 2.8 and sem 3.4 - the zeiss is the right aperture, wrong size and is really good but not special.

So, another question - what do you have on the 21 asph? :hide:
 
I did not find the size of the WATE to be an issue. The 15mm distagon on the other hand is a different story.

The speed is also not too much an issue for me. When I check the pictures I used with the UWA, most of the time, it is for landscape and outdoors. I ended up never missing the high speed. I think on some occasion here and there, I can see the need for it but not that often. Most of the time, I am looking to use a ND filter with my UWA to slow down the speed.

I don't have the 21 asph but I do have the 24 Elmarit ASPH and it is a great lens as well.
 
Again no personal experience, Phillip. Depending on how highly you rank the other factors versus f-stop, it might give you just enough more speed to make it worthwhile overall. But 8-blade sunstars at f16 max - 'meh' for me!

My guess is you won't be completely happy with it should you decide to go that way, but I could well be wrong.
 
I am now looking for a SEM :dance2:
...but if a WATE shows up with a great price, I don't know if I can resist (LOL)
Thanks you guys for listening at my rambles and provide you insights.
It's very confusing with all versions, and personal expectations/feedback one can read all over the forums. Got one person praising the pre-sph, and then other bashing it.
In the end comes down to the lens performance and compromises one is willing to take.
 
Phil, beauty is in the eyes of the beholder. What is beautiful image for one person might be ugly to the other. I think that is why the difference in opinion. Some people might like the softer look, older classic film like look while others like to see more pop, micro-contrast, more corrected or even highly corrected image that an older lens might not be able to provide. The beauty sometime of the older lens is because of its flaws.
 
I saved quite a few hundred on a clean SEM, because the hood was missing.

So far, I haven't missed it, even shooting directly into the sun. What little flare I've encountered has been readily minimized with PhotoShop. (Cut the magenta, smart-area brush touch-ups using sliders for hue, etc.)

I've thought of ordering a new hood for it, but if it ain't broke ...
 
I saved quite a few hundred on a clean SEM, because the hood was missing.

So far, I haven't missed it, even shooting directly into the sun. What little flare I've encountered has been readily minimized with PhotoShop. (Cut the magenta, smart-area brush touch-ups using sliders for hue, etc.)

I've thought of ordering a new hood for it, but if it ain't broke ...
well, what about one in red:
Thorsten von Overgaard Gallery Store - Ventilated Lens Shade Black Paint and Silver for the Leica 35mm Summilux-M ASPH f/1.4 FLE
(it fits the 21 SEM too)
 
They do look cool ...

Thinking about that red-anodized lens-cleaning/beard-trimming kit ... :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top