donald_ingram1 Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 <p> After a couple of weeks using the Zeiss ZM 21, I have to say I'm very happy with it's performance. It's great fun have a 21 again after gap of a few years. </p> <p> The resistance to reflections seems to be better than the Leica 21 ASPH : that and flare only just show up in backlit shadow zone. </p> <p> Sharpness is beyond any film I have used so far and contrast seems to hold up well into the corners. </p> <p> I've added a few examples to my <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/member- photos?user_id=591130"> gallery </a> </p> <p> BTW. The Zeiss OVF is also extremely impressive - all metal plus great geometry and sharpness ( except a little CA in the corners ) </p><div></div> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stuart_richardson Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 That bad??? The lens is amazing! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
runkel Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 I assume that was irony and not faint praise in your headline. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donald_ingram1 Posted March 7, 2006 Author Share Posted March 7, 2006 In Glasgow it would be 'Pure dead brilliant' - Edinburgh is a bit more restrained ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 How large have you tried printing images taken with this lens? I'm considering it for my shopping list. Thanks! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjm photo Posted March 7, 2006 Share Posted March 7, 2006 Donald I am also considering this lens, by chance have you used the 21mm Elmarit ASPH...if so how would you compare the performance of the two? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
arthuryeo Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Robert, the Dec/Jan issue of LFI has a article describing the 21mm, 24mm & 28 Elmarit Asph. I have the 24mm Elmarit Asph and I believe the 21mm has similar fingerprints. It's an ultra-corrected lens but the price is steep unless you can find a used one. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rjm photo Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Yes Arthur I also am familiar with the 24mm Elmarit "fingerprint", I sold mine with the intention of getting the 21mm Elmarit....but the ZM lens sure has my attention. I sold the 24mm because I often found it to be a bit short for my purposes, I really enjoy 21mm or greater. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ronald_moravec1 Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 The color shots are great as I would expect from Zeiss. Something is very wrong with the train station black and white and to a lesser degree the power station. The film appears fogged or lacking contrast or something. Maybe its the scanner. It is wonderful now that we have a reasonable cost alturnative to Leica glass. I have used Zeiss on a Hassy and my little Rollie 35 Tessar. Nothing to complain about there. I also have 12,15, and 25 CV lenses. The 25 gets carried daily because it is nice and small and the 21 and 28 Leica glass hasn`t been used in years. I don`t mind a premium price for premium glass, but Leica has simply gotten out of hand. Glad I got mine when I did as I would not spend that much now. My 21 was $650 new, 90 pre asph around $500, the 28 maybe $550. Why should prices be up by a factor of 6? Good thing this stuff is made to last a lifetime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
donald_ingram1 Posted March 8, 2006 Author Share Posted March 8, 2006 <p> Arthur, The Museum shot printed out near to grain free at A3 ( 12" x 16" ) and would go up to 16"x20" size if I traditionally printed it. I used to do that from Tech Pan and the Leica 21s'. Digitally I'm also limited to what's possible with a 4000dpi scanner. </p><p>If large prints are what your after, rather than a compact M system, that SWC your thinking about will always win as grain and dust are less magnified. <p> On the other hand, the 21mm in 35mm with 3:2 aspect ratio would crop to give you close to the 38mm in 6x6 but with a large degree of front shift for perspective correction. </p> <p> Robert, I just took the Leica 21 ASPH at face value, as the best available, and never really did any aggressive testing. It was however a step better than the 21mm E60 I had before. Now with the Zeiss lens being so good, it's not really possible to justify the close to double cost of the Leica 21mm ASPH anymore. </p> <p> Ronald, The Museum Hall is roof lit with all white walls and floor - so trying to fit the tone range to a screen does not give such a good visualisation ( it looks ok on my mac, but the PC at work makes it a bit flat ). The <a href="http://www.photo.net/photodb/ photo?photo_id=4197279&size=lg">super-large version </a>fills screen with less fine detail turning grey and so looks better</p> <p> The straight print also looks a lot better, but I acknowledge what your saying and, it could do with some masking to give better contrast. For the gallery I was more interested in showing the good resolution and geometry. </p> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nathaniel_pearson Posted March 8, 2006 Share Posted March 8, 2006 Ronald wrote: "It is wonderful now that we have a reasonable cost alturnative to Leica glass." The cheaper, long-available CV 21mm f/4 Skopar is fantastic. But point taken: choice and speed are good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now