Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Fun with the 21mm Loxia

M

mark1958

Member
David
Why did you go from the WATE to the Loxia 21mm? Have you compared the two --- side by side. Everyone keeps talking about having an 18mm to complement the Batis 25mm .. so why not the Batis 25mm and WATE? Those two give me perfect wide end focal lengths. The WATE with the variable close up Voigtlander adapter gives one the ability to use the WATE at very close distances. It is the most diverse wide angle lens. It is small too. Expensive yes.....but not too much if the alternative is two lenses to cover the wide side. The other thing is that I would give up the 4mm to have the AF of the Batis. I love that lens too. Mark

Viramati said:
Okay a couple more discoveries today after a bit of street shooting
1. Infinity stop is not quite infinity as in the other Loxia's (exactly why they do this for a WA lens I'm not sure)
2. The lens hood when reversed in storage position on lens doesn't really click into place and fell off twice today and thus has already got scratched (informed my Dealer)
3. I really am finding the focus-throw at the long end a pain especially after the WATE but I am sure I will get used to it and have bought a white sharpie to makes some reference marks on the lens. Bad bit of design and about the only functional niggle I have.
4. IQ seems good but the light is so bad and I haven't really had the right subjects to test it on yet.
Click to expand...
 
V

Viramati

Member
mark1958 said:
David
Why did you go from the WATE to the Loxia 21mm? Have you compared the two --- side by side. Everyone keeps talking about having an 18mm to complement the Batis 25mm .. so why not the Batis 25mm and WATE? Those two give me perfect wide end focal lengths. The WATE with the variable close up Voigtlander adapter gives one the ability to use the WATE at very close distances. It is the most diverse wide angle lens. It is small too. Expensive yes.....but not too much if the alternative is two lenses to cover the wide side. The other thing is that I would give up the 4mm to have the AF of the Batis. I love that lens too. Mark
Click to expand...
I haven't and can no longer compare the two as I have now sold my WATE. As good as the WATE was on the M240 it didn't get a lot of use when I moved to the Sony system and consequently was a very expensive piece of glass just to leave sitting in the safe. I find that my CV15 mkIII on the whole (and especially in the corners) performed better than the WATE at 16mm. I also wanted something a little faster than f4 as I often like to shoot wide open even in landscape work to get some subject separation. The only thing so far I missing about the WATE on the Loxia (and I don't want to go on about it) is the focus-throw at the long end. If they had bought to a Batis 21 I may have gone for that but as it is the 25 is to near the focal length of my Leica Q. The WATE also has the moustache distortion which can be hard to correct. So basically I loved the WATE but couldn't really justify keeping it for the use it was getting
 
Barry Haines

Barry Haines

Active member
Hi Tom, Not exactly the kind of example sample that you were hoping or looking for I’m sure :( + It’s also way to close and some field curvature of the lens is probably not helping matters either!
The weather here is still dreadful, rain, cloud and now gales!!! No stars in sight and a tripod would take off like an umbrella in a hurricane!...Anyway it may be of some help or informative to you, I will let you be the judge ;)
The lights are sharper in the middle where I focused and the lights spread/stretch very slightly outwards when they are at the edge and corner of the frame, as said earlier I’m much to close at f2.8 and some lens field curvature and wind on the cable is probably at play...Loxia 21mm shot at F2.8 "handheld" 1/13th sec...I have included the “FULL SIZE” SOOC for you as the link below so you can pixel peep at a 100% :D
Cheers Barry



 
M

mark1958

Member
David Thanks for the information. I don't think the corners are that bad on the WATE but i have not compared with the CV15. There is some vignetting. I also rarely shoot at wide open on the wide end so that is not an issue for me.

Viramati said:
I haven't and can no longer compare the two as I have now sold my WATE. As good as the WATE was on the M240 it didn't get a lot of use when I moved to the Sony system and consequently was a very expensive piece of glass just to leave sitting in the safe. I find that my CV15 mkIII on the whole (and especially in the corners) performed better than the WATE at 16mm. I also wanted something a little faster than f4 as I often like to shoot wide open even in landscape work to get some subject separation. The only thing so far I missing about the WATE on the Loxia (and I don't want to go on about it) is the focus-throw at the long end. If they had bought to a Batis 21 I may have gone for that but as it is the 25 is to near the focal length of my Leica Q. The WATE also has the moustache distortion which can be hard to correct. So basically I loved the WATE but couldn't really justify keeping it for the use it was getting
Click to expand...
 
V

Viramati

Member
mark1958 said:
David Thanks for the information. I don't think the corners are that bad on the WATE but i have not compared with the CV15. There is some vignetting. I also rarely shoot at wide open on the wide end so that is not an issue for me.
Click to expand...
For it's price the CV15 mkIII is a remarkable lens and I was finding that it bettered the WATe ver so slightly when even when stopped down. The other thing with the WATE is that it is a real pain to use with grad filters or big stopper. Anyway I am sure I will miss it is some ways as I do the Leica M but it was time to move on
 
frozenbb

frozenbb

Member
Thanks David and Barry.

It's still too early to tell for sure, but coma does seem reasonably well corrected in the Loxia 21 - certainly better corrected than some of the Leica/Canon/Nikon ultrawides I've seen. So yes, it may be a reasonable choice for ultra-wide field astrophotography (a bonus as far as I'm concerned). Did I mention that I want this lens? :bugeyes:
 
Barry Haines

Barry Haines

Active member
frozenbb said:
Thanks David and Barry.

It's still too early to tell for sure, but coma does seem reasonably well corrected in the Loxia 21 - certainly better corrected than some of the Leica/Canon/Nikon ultrawides I've seen. So yes, it may be a reasonable choice for ultra-wide field astrophotography (a bonus as far as I'm concerned). Did I mention that I want this lens? :bugeyes:
Click to expand...
Tom, it might pay to hold tight just until we establish if infinity images are truly achievable (or stars in your case) as you will be shooting WO at F2.8...just my 2 pence worth...Otherwise this lens looks pretty good for your needs I think.
signing off now to get some sleep...chat later...Cheers Barry

21mm Loxia...Quay Light







21mm Loxia close up at F2.8



 
Last edited:
frozenbb

frozenbb

Member
Of course you're right that we need more info regarding infinity performance... The good news (for my wallet) is that Zeiss production capacity will FORCE me to hold tight for at least a month or two!
 
V

Viramati

Member
Infinity on mine is ever so slightly back from the stop. I don't do astro photography but I don't think it would be problem as I find it quite easy to judge. I would test but we never really get to see stars here in central London:)
 
M

mark1958

Member
I picked up a CV 15mm III today and to my surprise it was just a tad better than the WATE... really in the corners and edges only.. close thought...

Viramati said:
For it's price the CV15 mkIII is a remarkable lens and I was finding that it bettered the WATe ver so slightly when even when stopped down. The other thing with the WATE is that it is a real pain to use with grad filters or big stopper. Anyway I am sure I will miss it is some ways as I do the Leica M but it was time to move on
Click to expand...
 
C

chrisjmitchellphotography

New member
Good read, but a dangerous, dangerous thread :eek: I've just picked up an A7ii and I'm really tempted by the Loxia glass as a nice travel setup in conjunction with some Canon Zooms via the Metabones adaptor..... just not sure I can justify the £1100 cost of this one.... that said I'm probably more willing to pay £1100 for this than almost £1000 for the 35mm Loxia....
 
drevil

drevil

Well-known member
Staff member
go get it, you wont regret it, i know the 21 and i....its gonna be a happy marriage :cool:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top