Does anybody have any input regarding the Leica 24mm 2.8 Elmarit R?

I researched the Leica 24 some time ago - not one of Leica R strong points - I believe it has adapter problems with some cameras. Check pebbleplace for adapter feedback info.

The Leica is a rebadged Minolta MD 24/2.8. Good but not great.

I'd say the real question is ZE/ZF 25 vs the Oly 24.

I just got the Oly 24/2.8. I haven't done extensive testing but it seems very sharp so far. Vignetting seems fairly high at f/2.8, but it is the smallest SLR lens I own by far.

Edit there's a comparison of the Oly 24 vs other lenses here:
http://www.16-9.net/lens_tests/24mmcup/final/24mm_final1.html
Not bad for a lens that costs 1/10th as much as a 24L.

Zuiko 24/2.8 is so small and compact, and yet pretty sharp...
It's great for hiking......you can practically carry in your pocket.....

I've had the Leica R 24 for over 10 years now and have shot many magazine DPS (double page spreads) and covers with it when I was using Velvia 50. As others have said it may not be the sharpest tool in Leicas shed but it doesn't deserve the bad rep it seems to have. Who cares if it was designed by Minolta? By way of comparison, I also have the current R 28 and the R 24 does not have the same level of resolution.

I tried the Contax Zeiss 25 and although it seemed like a decent lens it was not impressive in any way. I haven't tried the Olympus 24/2.8.

The Leica R 24 won't work on 1dsMk2 so it won't work on other FF bodies. It works fine on my 40D where I tend to use it wide open and the crop still gives me an image with excellent sharpness overall although you can already start to see some falloff in sharpness in the corners. The lens performs best around F8, as do most lenses of this kind.

JJ

JohnJ wrote:
I tried the Contax Zeiss 25 and although it seemed like a decent lens it was not impressive in any way. I haven't tried the Olympus 24/2.8.



The Zeiss ZF/ZE 25mm is a significant improvement over the old Contax 25mm.

Thanks everyone ...

I've got the Oly 24 2.8 ... I like its colors & I like the 3D ness of Zeiss. Was wondering if maybe the Leica might sit somewhere between the two.

the difference between 25mm and 28mm is tiny! I have a 25/28 accessory viewfinder from zeiss and the gap is about one step back or forward! So I would consider the Leica 28mm (if the funds stretch that far) or the new Zeiss ZE 28/2 as well

Kent, good choice

Second that.

I have had two Om 24/2.8's and have been unanimously impressed. They have Red-Green CA but it is extremely easily corected.


Reportagé

Since I'm posting images, may as well make it an extravaganza

Thanks all.

Thrice ... moving the subject (er, discussion) toward 28mm, I had my eye on the C/Y 28mm 2.8. How would you compare that to the Leica 28mm?

While the CY looks great, might I recommend a Zuiko 28/3.5? It's sharp as nails and costs less than a carton of beer. Cheap fun!

It's my take-with-while-drinking lens

Paul Yi,,, Perfect Exposure.....

cjfromaustin wrote:
Paul Yi,,, Perfect Exposure.....

+1
Paul's got that 'foggy / misty' exposure nailed down

Empire wrote:
While the CY looks great, might I recommend a Zuiko 28/3.5? It's sharp as nails and costs less than a carton of beer. Cheap fun!

It's my take-with-while-drinking lens

+1 for the Zuiko 28 f3.5. When I did side-by-side comps with my C/Y 28 f2.8, the Auiko won it hands down, and even with the lowered price on the Zeiss, the Zuiko is a fifth the cost -

+1 for the Zuiko 28 f3.5. When I did side-by-side comps with my C/Y 28 f2.8, the Auiko won it hands down, and even with the lowered price on the Zeiss, the Zuiko is a fifth the cost -


The Zuiko has more 3Dness than the Zeiss ?? ... and still has Oly colors ??

Kent,

I don't find a lot of "3D" in the Zeiss 28. It's a very sharp "edgy" kind of look. It's not as sharp into the corners FF as the Zuiko, but that may not matter on your 1DII crop body - haven't seen it there.

I have just picked up a used copy of a Zeiss Contax 28mm f2.8 lens.My first impressions are this is an impressive lens.I see no distortion, and CA is non existent.Sharpness and color are a given.Few Samples below
-Jim

1. at 2.8

Thanks,

Recommendations for more 3Dness if not the 28mm 2.8 C/Y ??

Everyone's definition of 3D-ness will be different even if it is a real thing. I don't think someone could prove one 24/28mm lens has more of it than another.

RustyBug wrote:
Thanks,

Recommendations for more 3Dness if not the 28mm 2.8 C/Y ??


More 3D than the 29/2.8 c/y?? Perhaps the Zeiss 28/2.0...