21mm question

[david_franklin1]

<p>I am hoping to buy a 21mm lens soon for my M4. I am trying to decide between a Zeiss zm f4.5 (for its compactness and performance) and a Leica pre-asph. Also, is there any difference between the two versions of the pre-asph apart from the front of the mount/filter size. I quite like the compactness of the early version before it went to E60. <br>

(I don't really need f2.8 and wasn't keen on the Zeiss f2.8 version and have already considered the Voigtlander)<br>

Views on the pre-asph particularly, would be gratefully received.<br>

Many thanks<br>

David</p>

 

[kyoken74]

<p>David,<br>

Zeiss C Biogon 21/4.5 happens to be one of my favorite lenses. I do not have other lenses you mentioned in your post to compare to, but I can tell you my experience with this lens.<br>

Biogon is small. This has the following implications.<br>

Small lens does not intimidate people even in an extremely crowded space. People don't take you seriously, which I believe gives them more natural look. If you're not into giving people directions (I am not) this is a great advantage.<br>

The lens blocks very little of the VF when a hood is attached to it. I am using Leica MP + C Biogon 21/4.5 with Zeiss 21mm VF. With the hood attached, the top part of the lens blocks very little of the bottom part of the external VF that I usually don't even notice it. I can imagine that if you have lenses any larger (i.e. Biogon 21/2.8 or Leica pre-asph) the blockage must be far greater. Without the hood, the Biogon does not block the external VF at all.</p>

<p>Biogon flares easily. I suspect that this is not so much the lens design but because of the fact that it is 21mm. By nature of its focal length, it collects a lot of stray light so that the lens flares. I do recommend using a hood.<br>

Biogon's maximum aperture of 4.5 is a disadvantage, but to what extent it is a problem really depends on your subject and how you shoot. During the day, I shoot between f8 and f16. Even in early evening or bright indoors, at 21mm, you can hand-hold at relatively slow speed; I often shoot at 1/8 sec when the primary subject is stationary. When it's dark, I simply switch to a different lens or underexpose and push process.<br>

Biogon's lack of barrel distortion means that the subjects at corners get stretched outward. When I approach a subject (people in some of my photographs), I try to engage them head-on so that they don't end up in odd corners.<br>

Since you are shooting M4, this is not relevant to you, but MP's internal light meter works with Biogon, whereas I've been told it does not work with Superangulon.<br>

You can see some of the images shot with C Biogon 21/4.5 at<br>

http://www.flickr.com/photos/kyoken74/sets/72157623372371904/detail/<br>

Do share your experiences with whatever lens you decide to get. 21mm is an exciting focal length and I am always happy to learn what others are doing with it.<br>

Yuki</p><div></div>

[aplumpton]

<p>David, I must partially disqualify myself, in view of my non experience with the pre-ASPH lens. I bought the ASPH lens before hearing about the Zeiss Biogon 21mm ZM lens. In retrospect, I would have opted for the Zeiss lens if it was available then, as they have done great things with a non aspherical formula and have provided both compacity and low cost. The ASPH lens, quite expensive, is a very fine lens, but I have witnessed some shortcomings in its edge performance, at the wider apertures and in the far range (unless one focusses precisely on distant objects, rather than be content with a DOF-conscious intermediate distant setting). </p>

[Robin Smith]

<p>I had the VC 21mm and had no complaints with it whatsoever. Much cheaper than the Zeiss and the Leica too.</p>

[pensacolaphoto]

<p>I chose to save some money, so I bought the Nikon 2.1cm 4.0 in Nikon F mount. I will get a Leica M adapter for the lens. It came with its Nikon 21mm finder, This lens has a very good reputation to be nearly as good as the best 21mm lens out there.</p>

<p>Raid</p>

[Alex_Es]

<p>Of the lenses mentioned, I have the Color Skopar 21/4 and the Zeiss 21/2.8. I have only good things to say about the two of them. I highly recommend the Zeiss 21/2.8. </p>

[Bill Blackwell Images]

<p>The Leica pre-Asph Elmarit-M is really quite good, but there are issues with the barrel coming loose - it was put together with glue (I'm not kidding!). Look out for this if you decide to buy one.<br>

<br>

I wouldn't rule out the Zeiss Biogon f/2.8. It performs almost as well as the Leica Asph Elmarit-M. The primary differences will be noted in color renditions (the Leica looks richer, IMHO), but can be corrected in Photoshop. The folks at Zeiss did a fine job with these lenses - many Leica users use them with no shame whatsoever (myself included).<br>

<br>

The Biogon f/4.5 is better stop-to-stop on the specs, but given the options outlined, I'd put my money on the Zeiss f/2.8 - even over the Leica pre-Asph.<br>

</p>

[Bill Blackwell Images]

<p>Leica M2, 21mm pre-Asph Elmarit-M. ...</p><div></div>

[Bill Blackwell Images]

 

<p>Leica M2, 21mm pre-Asph Elmarit-M (one more). ...</p>

<div></div>

[bobmichaels]

<p>Do not overlook the Zeiss 21mm Biogon in ContaxG mount and an inexpensive G1 body to mount it on. It is one of the best 21mm lenses, if not THE best. The lens plus body combo costs substantially less than any of the Leica or other Zeiss lenses. And with a 21mm, the body does no more than hold the lens and film in alignment. I used that combo for years with great results. <br>

<br />I know the original poster said he was not interested in the CV 21mm. To each his own. I just have to add that I find that an excellent lens before one considers price / value. And once you take price / value into consideration, nothing comes close. But then I am just one of those that evaluates a lens solely based on the photos it makes.</p>

[wolfgang_simon]

<p>I don't know, if this might be helpful for you, but here you could find links to all 21mm lens reviews and forum discussions I know so far:</p>

<p><a href="https://sites.google.com/site/wosimsphotography/links-testberichte-reviews/testberichte-objektive-leica-lens-reviews-12mm-25mm">https://sites.google.com/site/wosimsphotography/links-testberichte-reviews/testberichte-objektive-leica-lens-reviews-12mm-25mm</a></p>

<p>I use the WATE, which is really stunning.</p>

[john_r._fulton_jr.]

<p>If it's a Leica it deserves Leica/Leitz glass. Sorry. I know that will upset some here who buy the off-brand glass but if you can afford the 21mm f2.8 pre asph you should go for it. You will not regret it. Mine has worked hard for me since the late 1980's. I bought my first Leica (M2) in 1966 which I still have. I've always been happy with the Leica or Leitz glass. I see no reason to shoot anything else on my Leica M's. Good shooting out there.</p>

[pensacolaphoto]

<p>The Nikkor 2.1cm is similar in optical performance to the Biogon 21mm I am told by users who have both lenses. I bought the Nikkor for $400, and it is certainly less expensive than any Leica 21mm lens you could buy these days.</p>

<p>I have quite a few Leica lenses, but I spent money on getting a Leica M8 last month, so I want to economize a little.</p>

<p>Raid</p>

[paul_neuthaler]

<p>Take a look at the superb Nikkor 20mm 1:3.5. No viewfinder necessary -- just point it in the general direction!!</p>

[paul_neuthaler]

<p>Here's a pic. of fabulous 20mm Nikkor</p>

[john_kwok]

<p>@ John R. Fulton -<br>

The choice of lens should depend on the photographer, not on those who think that only lenses from Brand "A" should be mounted on rangefinder cameras of Brand "A". I personally think that my 50mm Planar is better wide open than my Wetzlar-made black 50mm Summicron, but the real surprise is the 25mm Biogon which is slightly better wide open than the 24mm f2.8 Elmarit ASPH-M.</p>

 

[john_kwok]

<p>@ David -<br>

If it helps, I know photographer Lee Friedlander has been photographing with the 21mm f4.5 Zeiss Biogon-C lens alot. Have heard from others how much they like that lens for its compactness and superb image quality edge to edge. I'm one Leica M user who thinks highly of the Zeiss ZM lenses; I own the 50mm Planar, 35mm f2, 28mm and 25mm Biogon lenses and prefer using them to my Leica equivalents, especially the ASPH-designated ones. I happen to prefer the greater contrast from the Zeiss lenses.</p>