Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2001/05/28
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Erwin says the non-ASPH does "not bear the Leica badge with full honour." As he is a very subtle guy that's like us saying it is total dog doo. He calls the Asph "a quantum leap forwards in relation to all predecessors" For him that's exuberance. For anyone it would be. It does tend to sound like these two pieces of glass represent polar opposites but read it yourself: http://www.imx.nl/photosite/leica/mseries/testm/m21.html I have found Erwins advice second to none. More than a ring of truth to anything he says. But check it our for yourself. I'd rather shoot with the 3.4 Super-Angulon that with the pre Asph Elmirit by a long shot! But I'd expect the Asph 21 to match up nicely with the quality i get from all my other Leica glass which is all pretty current. I do have the 24 Asph. But when i go that wide i may go for the Super Angulon. By the way i always thought 21 was superwide because it had the same diagonal as the 38 Biogon form the Hassy "superwide." but i find out this week that the horizontal angle on my 24 matches that on the 38 Biogon. (Actually a 25 mm lens would more exactly (Distagon?)) So I'm already shooting superwide and didn't even know it! So a 21 I'd call an Ultrawide! Mark Rabiner Portland, Oregon USA http://www.rabiner.cncoffice.com/