Voigtlander 21mm

[HK71]

<p>Hi Friends,<br>

I use film camera(Leica M6 .85) for my hobby and digital SLR(Nikon D300) for documentation. I would like to ask your opinion about Voigtlander 21mm P for my Leica M6 .85. I really like ultrawideangle photography-especially in b&w. I am considering to replace my Nikon D300 with M8 and use my other purchased lenses (50 and 90mm summarits-6 bit coded) with it. I loved the feeling of M6 and its quiteness. Hoping to catch the same joy with digital. I used to have 20mm f/2,8 of Nikon, it was very satisfying. What do you think, is 21mm skopar f/4 P a really good lens to spend on. I can not afford Leica versions because of the sets'(21mm viewfinder+lens+hood) huge costs. Second question, can I also use it on M8? I am also considering to get a 21mm voigtlander viewfinder for my M6 with the lens, no problem with that but how will I manage it with M8? As you know, it is not full frame.. How will I assume the distance?<br>

Thnx in advance,<br>

Hakan </p>

[hiromu_kurosaki]

<p>It's very good if you don't want to spend much $$. But then, you can probably live with LTM version, which is cheaper and comes with 21mm finder. For the use with M8, you can add 28mm finder from voigtlander... I used to have LTM version of this lens, but now have C-Biogon and happier.</p>

[tedms gallery]

<p>I have the ltm version, and like it quite a bit. The LTM version comes with a finder. I don't use a finder with it, just the whole of the VF. Here are some photos with an M8, all unretouched here:<br>

http://matsumura.smugmug.com/Photography/Central-OR-WA-w-CV-214-LTM-M8/9460508_CXFzG/1/634720771_ey4oU</p>

[james_smith44]

<p>If you like ultrawide and proper photography, then you'll love the Zeiss glass. The Skopar pancake is alright but soft in the corners when blown up. It's a great budget lens. I like the Zeiss compact Biogon a lot. After playing with it, decided to opt for the Biogon 21/2.8. At f2.8, the Biogon has real old school flavour. By f4.5, it's just like the C-Biogon. The Zeiss 21mm viewfinder is the best I've seen on the market. The Super Angulon 21mms are really expensive compared to the Zeiss. You can use both Zeiss and the Voigtlander 21mm lenses for anything less than 35mm film photography too. Probably works out better for digital since you won't get the soft corners with the Skopar. </p>

[Aoresteen]

<p>The 21mm Voightlander stays attached to my Leica IIIf. I've had it for about 5 years now and I like it a lot. Stopped down to f/8 it is very good.<br>

I'll never sell it.</p>

[Aoresteen]

<p>The 21mm Voightlander stays attached to my Leica IIIf. I've had it for about 5 years now and I like it a lot. Stopped down to f/8 it is very good.<br>

I'll never sell it.</p>

[Rob F.]

<p>If you like the quietness of your M6, you will probably not experience the same satisfaction with an M8. By all accounts, the M8 shutter is very loud. My D200 makes a fairly gentle sound, not sharp or metallic. Not as quiet as my M6 or MP cameras, but quieter than my Nikon F3 and FE2. Probably about on a level with my FA.</p>

[35mmdelux]

<p>I'm a 80% 35mm Summilux asph shooter so I decided not to spend big on a lens that wouldn't be used all the time. I have the 21 M-mount version. Very well constructed. None of the 21s are avail light shooters, except for the 21mm Summilux; I decided f/4.0 was good enough knowing I'd be shooting with it f/5.6-f/11.</p>

[rjm photo]

<p>Hakan<br>

I have two 21mm Skopar lenses, one in LTM and one in "S" mount for Nikon rangefinder. They are excellent lenses, none is "soft" in the corners. I also use a 21mm Zeiss Biogon F2.8 ZM which is a fine lens in of itself - but the 21mm Skopars are close and unless you are enlarging past 11 x 14 I doubt you would notice a difference. The Zeiss has greater micro contrast that gives the image real snap where as the Skopars give a less mechanical look, of course all IMHO.</p>

[norris_lam]

<p>Hakan, numerous years ago, i have used this V brand 21mm lens on my M6 simply because i won't afford the price of a Leica 21mm. I have read a comparison of the two lens and V brand lose over the edge performance only. Now, it's become my favourte lens on my M8 as it become 28mm now and it's horribly sharp and full of details. It's been the default lens to stay on my M8. Of course the 39mm IR filter is not cheap and not easy to find. <br>

I think your next question should be how about V brand 15mm? it's marginally ok in M6 using slide but it totally fail in M8. I ain't sure if the new version will be better but i won't want to try casue the '28mm' already given me surprise from time to time.<br>

My 2 cents.</p>

[anthony_ilardi]

<p>Another vote for the Color-Skopar, which I have used for 5 years. I have the LTM version and use it on film Leicas. At 10x15 or 12x18 enlargements, I have not noticed objectionable softness in the corners any more than from any other lens (including my Summicrons). There is some barrel distortion, easily correctable in Photoshop, and nothing out of the ordinary for a lens of this focal length. Unless you are photographing something with straight lines most of the time you will not even notice the slight distortion. Similarly, there is sometimes, depending on lighting conditions, some vignetting, but if truth be told, I can also see some very occasional vignetting even on my 35mm Ver. IV Summicron. In any event, the vignetting is also easily corrected in Photoshop. Finally, I have used this lens successfully for available light, shooting B&W at an EI of 1600. On an M6 it can easily be handheld at 1/15 and sometimes at 1/8 of a second. Of course, if the subject it moving, these low speeds may not always freeze action, but you would be surprised how often it can. It's a very good lens at a very good price.</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>I've had the Color-Slopar LTM since it came out. The supplied finder went out on me in Paris (I've used Leiz 21mm finders since then) but the lens has never done me wrong. It is a real babe. It is perfect (without hood) on my R4A. Here is a sample of what it can do. Pardon the size. </p><div></div>