Wide angle for R8 21-35highend--what is low end?

greenspun.com : LUSENET : Leica Photography : One Thread

I have been using my R8 for serveral years now, but the widest coverage I have is from my 28-70 3.5-4.5. Now that the 21-35 is soon due, it seems to have solved my problems as a travel-amateuer landscape photographer. HOWEVER- c.$1900 is a lot of money. Therefore, if $1900 gets me a new lens to solve my problems, what is the budget route. (19mm?) Please advise me the correct prices, years and serial numbers - I am anxious to buy!

-- J Wheeler (jhw@gmx.de), March 06, 2002


I don't think there's anything cheap about the 19mm. KEH has a LN- one listed for $2469.00. So $1900 for a 21-35 is really a bit more economical, especially since it would add the 24mm length to your outfit as well as everything in between.

-- Bob Fleischman (RFXMAIL@prodigy.net), March 06, 2002.

Yes the 21-35mm is a good price by today's Leica R prices. You will not get a current 19mm for this price. The budget route is via the older 19mm or the 21mm Super-Angulon f4 ($700-$1100).

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), March 06, 2002.

The 21/4 Super Angulon is a fantastic lens for landscape photography. By f/8 it is free of vignetting and sharp to the corners. You don't need the wide-open performance (or expense or bulk) of the 19mm's. If you are happy with the performance of the Sigma/Leica 28-70 you will be deliriously delighted with the 21/4.

-- Jay (infinitydt@aol.com), March 06, 2002.

I might have a 21mm SA f4 for sale. If you are interested let me know and I can send you some shots of it. I was gearing up to sell it on ebay, but if you are interested, do email me privately.

-- Robin Smith (smith_robin@hotmail.com), March 06, 2002.

I looked at (and through) the older 19mm Elmarit and the pincushion distortion was terrible.

-- Peter Hughes (ravenart@pacbell.net), March 06, 2002.


For what it is worth, I have the a late version of the 19mm and a German 24mm. As you might expect, both are good lenses. Although I bought them both used, I have MORE than 1900.00 USD tied up in both of them.

Unless I needed a faster lens then the f/4 of the new zoom, I would give the new 21-35 serious consideration. Erwins Puts's review of the lens speaks for itself.

From the size/weight/focal range perspective, as well as the financial aspect, this lens makes a lot of sense. (Combined with the 35-70/4 and/or the 80-200/4 and you have a very versatile kit)

That is my two cents worth...good luck.

-- Scott (PFD261@hotmail.com), March 06, 2002.

I second what Jay says exactly about the Super Angulon 21mm f/4. It's a little soft in the corners wide open, better at 5.6, and very sharp at f/8. Distortion is very low. K.E.H. lists one in excellant -plus condition for $959.00. Good luck

-- Ronald Wills (youngdeer@earthlink.net), March 06, 2002.

you could get a canon eos 3 and 17-35 f2.8 together for the same price.

-- Matthew Geddert (geddert@yahoo.com), March 06, 2002.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ