Keep my WATE...or, 18mm 3.8...or, 21mm 1.4?

[Reynolds]

I am absolutely happy with the WATE. Just wondering what arguments there are for a switch? 21mm too heavy? 18mm image quality? What are your thoughts?

 

[otumay]

I'm just in the same position. I lust over the Super-Elmarit 18, although I'm well aware that nothing is wrong with my WATE. Maybe it's just a spring sensation...
Osman

 

[Ocean]

I went through similar process recently and decided to just keep the WATE. I am sure that the new Super-Elmarit 18 and Summilux 21 are fantastic performers. To me, the WATE, is more practical and has the reach of 16. I keep my WATE!

Kind regards,

 

[glenerrolrd]

Generally this type of question depends on three factors (1)what type of photography you tend to do..street shooting maybe different from landscape (2) how much you feel comfortable in investing (sort of a combination of what you can afford and how important getting the best value is to you) (3) you self assessed ability to use the lens...e.g.what good is a Noctilux if you can t focus it precisely .

I enjoy street photography and do very little real landscape work ...you will normally see me with 2 bodies and rarely with a tripod.

The WATE for me is always at 16mm at f4 or f5.6 . I think it renders most scenes with great tone separation and color saturation. It produces a beautiful image . I has excellent contrast but resolution isn t as good as other wide angles. I don t care about using the lens at 18 or 21 but if I was using just one body this might be important.

I don t have the 18/3.8 but everything I have read would indicate that its better than the WATE in every area....except its not a 16MM lens. This may not sound like much but I could always tell the difference between a 21 and a 24 on FF and thats what a 16 and an 18 represent.

The 21 1.4 is in a totally different class......with the speed advantage of 3 stops ....its can you make an image or not. The M8 is way better at 160 than at 640 and I think the fall off in sensor performance is much more than the differences in lens performance. The ability to dial in depth of field and to a certain extend contrast are big advantages on the street. The 21 is large..but its balanced toward the body. This is a big difference from say the Noctilux ..where the weight is in the front elements . The Noctilux is clumsy to handle in a two body system.....the WATE is not and I think the new 21 1.4 will be fine.

I am waiting for the 21 1.4 as it will probably become my most used focal length...I don t know if the 2 stop advantage over the asph 2.8 version will be worth the cost and size .

 

[Paratom]

I am happy with the wate and I like the flexibility regarding focal length. I dont see any reason to replace it with a 18mm fixed focal length. Tom

 

[Mark Gowin]

I'm with Roger on this one. I find that I almost always use the WATE at 16mm so the new Super Elmar 18mm doesn't do much for me. However, the new 21 Lux has my interest.

Mark

 

[Erik Five]

I would go for the 21 lux. The Wate is to slow, but I live in a northern country were it gets early dark at winter time

 

[S.P.]

I would sell the WATE and buy the 21/1.4,
because in this forum it´s all about buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell, buy, sell...

 

[Reynolds]

Well, despite all of that, any other thoughts?

 

[junglehs]

I will keep my wate for now. 21 is nice but so big and heavy. 18 has a similar performance to the wate.

if money were no object my lenses would be:

Wate, 21 lux, 35 lux, 50 noct and lux, 75 lux. That's it.

Greetings,
Al.

 

[otumay]

Well, despite all of that, any other thoughts?

My Super-Elmar 18/3.8 has just arrived. Will respond very soon.
Regards,
Osman

 

[dseelig]

I too thought of selling my wate but I have decided to keep it when I just have a leica with me the flexibility just cannot be beat and the 21 lux well I bought the 24 lux and am very happy . The 24 is smaller and I never have been a 28 fan which is what the 21 is on an m8 . when we get full frame 21 is too wide to be as practical as a 24 .

 

[gero]

I would sell the WATE and buy the 21/1.4,
because in this forum it´s all about buy, sell, buy, sell,...

I'd say it is about TOOLS and how to use them. OR NOT.

For me it's just has been buy,buy,buy,use,use,use...

 

[otumay]

Well, here are the first images from the 18/3.8. The second mosque shot is with WATE, included for comparison. I intend to work harder on this subject this weekend, weather permitting...
Best regards,
Osman

 

[sclamb]

Osman, congratulations on the 18/3.8. I love mine and I see you are loving yours too

I look forward to seeing more from you and the lens. Here's two of mine from the first day out with it:

Simon

 

[otumay]

Simon, those are remarkable! Virtually no distortion at all! Bravo!
Yes, I instantly loved the 18/3.8, but to return to the subject of this thread, I cannot part from my WATE. It is so practical and yields admirable results. So, my verdict will be: Keep'em both!
Cheers,
Osman

 

[sclamb]

Thanks Osman. I did consider the WATE but decided that, given the size of it and the way in which it needs to be set to use on the camera, I would prefer working with the 18/3.8.

Simon

 

[Reynolds]

VERY helpful, Osman!! Thanks so much!!! Definitely keep the WATE.

 

[D&A]

Hi Renolds,

Just sent you a PM regarding your WAtE if you do eventually decide to switch. I currently use the Zeiss F4 but haven't yet seen any direct comparisons vs. the Leica 18mm. Thanks!