Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2009/07/26

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: [Leica] Any comparison between the 18mm Elmar to the WATE?
From: hopsternew at gmail.com (Geoff Hopkinson)
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2009 08:40:31 +1000
References: <004d01ca0df0$bc838b10$358aa130$@net> <005701ca0dfc$63bc3980$2b34ac80$@net> <14DDE0D8-7270-469E-8ACE-97AA757913FC@frozenlight.eu>

I have only handled and tried a couple of frames with the Wide Angle Tri
Elmar.
If you need the 3 focal lengths then of course there is no decision needed.
It is not very bulky or too heavy so handling is affected actually. It has
some subtle complex disortion that is just detectable at the 16 setting.
(visible in straight lines if you look carefully)
The finder is fairly bulky but again I do not think it affects handling
much. It has visible distortion, like the earlier smaller 21-24-28 finder (I
have).

I had the new Super Elmar 18 twice to try. First time for a dozen frames or
so and second for several hours.
I did not find it bulky in handling nor heavy at all. Much better than the
21 Summilux in that respect..

I was extremely impressed with the Super Elmar in use. I do have the Zeiss
18 which also gives great results. The lenshood arrangement on the Super
Elmar is much more efficient. You do need a special UV/IR for the M8.
The camera firmware is doing considerable correction for the presence of the
UV/IR on a lens that wide. As long as you use the filter and correct setting
that is zero problem.

You can see web size samples of cars, buildings and people in my gallery
here. There are also shots from the Elmar M 24 (mine) and the Summilux 21. I
couldn't assassinate enough other enthusiasts to get my hands on
the Summilux 24 to try.
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/g/l_001/
You should also consider the external viewfinder required for each lens (for
film or digital M).
I think that the Cosina/Voigtlander ones are the best value. The Zeiss and
Leica ones are very expensive. If you are willing to spend the money I think
the Zeiss ones are superior to the Leica ones regarding clarity and lack of
distortion. You need to look at what frameline options you want though.



2009/7/27 Nathan Wajsman <photo at frozenlight.eu>

> No. You must buy them both and let the rest of us know so we can spend our
> money wisely :-)
>
> Nathan Wajsman
> Alicante, Spain
> http://www.frozenlight.eu
> http://www.greatpix.eu
> http://www.nathanfoto.com
>
> Books: http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/search?search=wajsman&x=0&y=0
> PICTURE OF THE WEEK: http://www.fotocycle.dk/paws
> Blog: http://www.fotocycle.dk/blog
>
>
>
> On Jul 26, 2009, at 4:21 PM, Frank Filippone wrote:
>
>  It was too early for my fingers to work properly.....
>>
>> Super Elmar......
>>
>> Frank Filippone
>> red735i at earthlink.net
>>
>> I am curious if there has been a comparison between the Wide Angle Tri
>> Elmar
>> and the 18mm Super Duper Elmar for the M series?
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Leica Users Group.
>> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Leica Users Group.
> See http://leica-users.org/mailman/listinfo/lug for more information
>



-- 
Cheers
Geoff
Alles was eine gute Kamera braucht / Everything a good camera needs:

http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/gh/
http://www.pbase.com/hoppyman


In reply to: Message from red735i at earthlink.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Any comparison between the 18mm Elmar to the WATE?)
Message from red735i at earthlink.net (Frank Filippone) ([Leica] Any comparison between the 18mm Elmar to the WATE?)
Message from photo at frozenlight.eu (Nathan Wajsman) ([Leica] Any comparison between the 18mm Elmar to the WATE?)