Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 1998/02/17
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Eric, there are (at least) 2 high reliable sources on Leica's 21 mm M lenses, which result in different conclusions. The first came from Henning J Wulff in Nov last year, and the second from Erwin Puts three weeks ago. While Henning described the 3.4/21 mm SA's rendition as more pleasant than the rendition of the 2.8/21 asph Elmarit, Erwin described the the optical parameters of the asph lens as (very slightly) superior to the SA. I have thousands of 3.4/21 SA b/w negatives (FP4, Tri-X), landscapes and persons, and 3 rolls of 2.8/21 asph Elmarit slides (E100s). I agree, that's it's hardly a base for lens testing. On the other hand, I didn't need more to find out, that I didn't like the rendition of the asph 21 mm lens in most pictures. It is too "hard", shows too much constrast, and the rendition of the out-of-focus areas agrees to the 1.4/35 asph Summilux, while the SA's out-of-focus rendition agrees to the non-asph 2/35 Summicron (or the 1.4/75 Summilux). In short: To me, the rendition of the 2.8/21 asph Elmarit is disharmonic, not in general, but in too many pictures. I see from your web site, that you love high contrast lenses. So, you will be happy with the 2.8/21 asph Elmarit (and you would need her, since you take news pictures most of the time). Different, I prefer low to middle contrast lenses, so I'm more happy with the 3.4/21 Super Angulon. Besides-1, I promise, that you'll hate the 2.8/21 asph Elmarit also - because you love the out-of-focus rendition of your 1.4/75 Summilux. Besides-2, the color rendition of blue-green and blue is diffferent in both lenses (in my perception). It is somehow flat from the 2.8/21 asph Elmarit, and comparable to the non-asph 2/35 Summicron from the 3.4/21 SA. Alf - ---------------------------------------------------------------- At 20:23 16.02.1998 -0600, Eric answerd on my question: >>And, did you ever try any other 21 mm ? > >Nope, I defer to Erwin on this one.