Zeiss Biogon 21mm f2.8 Lens

[Guest]

Bernard,
Thanks for the reply. This is also what I suspected, since I vaguely remembered having read something about this, but . . .
I have measured all the (as far as I can see) relevant dimensions compared to the other three lenses (both in the "off camera” position as well as with the ring turned to the mounted position, see below).
No measurable difference, however.
I have looked more carefully at the 21 mm bayonet mechanism and while manually pressing down (one after the other) the two tiny pins I was able to turn the ring while the lens was not on the camera. I have done the same for the other three lenses and . . . . . Clearly it feels different for the 21 mm than for the other 3 lenses when each is turned to the position which is equivalent to locked into the camera bayonet (there is no "stop-kind of resistance" at the end of the turn of the ring).
No fiddling around for me on this piece of mechanics anymore therefore.
Anyhow it feels like I have to bring it to the importer here in the Netherlands, since I think I do not trust the mechanics to be repaired by just a repair shop.

Peter

 

[Guest]

> Sorry my answer wasn't more helpful, but it exhausted my knowledge. Good luck.

 

[nicolas2]

Hello,

Is there somebody who had tested and compared the 21 mm (that I have) and the 21/4 MM of Voigtlander that I would like to have with my "M6" ?
Thank You for your reply,

Nicolas

 

[cyberstudio]

I got a G2 set used complete with 21/28/45/90. I haven't used the 21 much, it is not even a standard part of my camera bag, but probably because of my fears more than anything. I am well aware that it might be one of the sharpest 21mm ever on any 35mm camera, but I do not have the training the properly frame it. The hot shoe finder is cumbersome, and you have to figure out parallax correction yourself. I have been spoiled by the autozoom parallax-correcting finder from 28mm to 90mm.

I was told that people just use the 21mm without the hot shoe finder, so I did a little calculation using the focal length. A 21mm should be 1/6 larger on each of the 4 sides in the frame. Still, not seeing those is not seeing those. Not being able to frame and the 21mm is no better than the 28mm if not worse. I understand it is my lack of technique more than anything since many Leicaphiles use wider-than-finder lenses all the time. So, I wish to learn from you guys any tips which would solve my problem. Thanks !

 

[acquit]

> Hi, you don't know what you are missing by not using your 21. It is the most distortion-free 90-degree lens you can ever have. Once you get used to seeing, it is awesome.

Take advantage of vanishing points, such as long shots on a bridge or road, or right against a building.

Disregard the conventional wisdom and use the 21 for PORTRAITS. Capture the subject in a background which tells the story, then shoot the subject off-center with a bust shot or even a headshot, and include the background. Remember that the 21 DOF is really deep. The lens works well with interesting content in both the background and the foreground.

 

[smartrav]

> I agree with Steven deCastro. The 21mm is my favorite lens. If you only have two lenses it should be the 45mm and the 21mm.

 

[robgo2]

Be not afraid of the 21G lens. It is fabulous, and the accessory viewfinder is actually much brighter and clearer than the internal VF in the G2. With a little thoughtful practice, this lens will reward you with some wonderful images--assuming that your skills are up to the task.

 

[malcg1uk]

> I completely agree. The G series is worth using for this lens alone > (one of the truly great lenses in the 35mm format), and I find the > 21mm accessory finder easier to compose with than the dim, small G1 > finder (parallax excepted of course). So much so, in fact, that I'm > considering buying the 35mm finder made for the Bessa series cameras, > just to avoid using that nightmare built-in G1 finder with my other > most frequently used lens. Anyone know how good it is? Best wishes, > Malcolm. >