Well it seems that you boys are filling your bags with M gear..
Just thinking myself of getting a ZM Biogon 21/2.8 and a LTM to M converter on Ebay, but someone stroked first.. guess who were the winners - Jaapv and Marbrink..
Please Jaapv, let us know how perform this nice lens on a M body ( if it`s the M8 better of course..
marbrink wrote:
artur, That adapter wasn't cheap Not the CV 28/1.9 either. Prices have really gone up since the M8 was announced.
And we are to blame, I'm afraid
Do you remember Rita Hayworth singing "put the blame on Mame.. "
now it's "Put the blame on Guy " (Just kidding, Mr. Mancuso )
Better grab anything you need before a CV Nokton 50/1.5 reaches Contax 21/2.8 status.!
So why didn't they just put an MP finder with the same framelines in the M8? Just make the lenses bring up a different frameline and add a mechanical (locking) frameline selector. It's kind of odd that a .72 finder can fit a 28mm frameline while the M8 with even less magnification can only fit 32mm (equivalent). They must have narrowed the finder view quite a bit.
Jan, I think the difference is that the 28mm frame on a 0.72 film body is pretty much unusable, especially if you wear glasses. Making the finder 0.68 and restricting the frame to 32mm EqFov should make it much easier to use. My own time with the M8 has shown that the frame for the 24mm will be perfectly usable.
Mark Norton wrote:
Jan, I think the difference is that the 28mm frame on a 0.72 film body is pretty much unusable, especially if you wear glasses. Making the finder 0.68 and restricting the frame to 32mm EqFov should make it much easier to use. My own time with the M8 has shown that the frame for the 24mm will be perfectly usable.
Far from everyone wears eyeglasses! I shot the last few days with the CV 28/1.9 on my M6, and it's great. I find the framelines very easy to work with, and I'm growing to like the focal length. (Nice lens, too.) It's a bummer I won't be able to put my ZM 21 on the M8 and use it in this fashion.
I'm no fan of the need to use aux finders either but I think putting a 21 on the M8 and using what you can see in the viewfinder will be accurate enough for most purposes. Unlike the M6 0.72 finder where the frame is pretty much up against the limits of view, there is space around the 24mm/32mm EqFoV frame on the M8.
Mark,
I hope so too and that would be great.
On the other side working with a 21/2.8 on a 1.33 crop sensor gives you quit some DOF and I would assume that guessing the distance would work pretty well (actually it does when using the 21 on my rd1) - so using an external viewfinder doesnt seem so bad to me.
Mark Norton wrote:
I'm no fan of the need to use aux finders either but I think putting a 21 on the M8 and using what you can see in the viewfinder will be accurate enough for most purposes. Unlike the M6 0.72 finder where the frame is pretty much up against the limits of view, there is space around the 24mm/32mm EqFoV frame on the M8.
I think the thing to do will be to compare the 28 framelines in an M6 with the M8 finder once one is in your hands to determine this feasibility. One can put black tape on frameline illumination window to get rid of the framelines too.
Tom
fish_shooter wrote:
However, there will be a new player on the 21 scene - the ZM 21 'compact Biogon' f/4.5, which interestingly is the same max aperture as the Biogon in Hassy superwides.
Tom,
I've heard about it. Should work really well with a 24mm or 25mm finder on the M8. What's strange is that Zeiss haven't released a finder for the Zeiss Ikon for it..
Yes, probably a nice interior, architecture and landscape lens where you don't need the extra stop.. Personally I would rather get the slightly longer and faster Zeiss 21mm 2.8 though..
I had a great deal last week with a 4 months old 21 Elmarit asph at 1800 € included the 21-24-28 finder ! (new they cost a total of 3500 € here).
So far I found the 24 slightly more contrasty, sharpness is on par, maybe the 24mm has a very slight edge at wider apertures, on the R-D1 at least.
The 21 has slightly more vignetting but I tend to like the drawing of the 21 more than that of the 24.
The 24m is more clinical, the 21mm has more pastel look.
Both are great lenses and IMO the choice should be based on focal lenght rather than optical performance.
The 24mm can be used on the M8 without an external finder, so that I'd need an external finder only for the CV 15 and I could frame the other lenses with the viewfinder.
But I'll get the 1.25x magnifier to accurately focus and frame the Noctilux 50 and longer lenses. With the 1.25x I could still frame the 'lux 35, but I'd need to put it off for the 24mm (or use an external finder).
If I keep the 15, 21, 35, 50 and 75 I could use the 21-24-28 finder for the 15 and 21 while using the internal framing with 1.25x magnifier for the 35mm up.
This is for the "ergonomics", but I'm waiting to get the M8 to see which focal lenghts I will like more on the 1.33x crop.
Btw, don't you think that a "flip" magnifier would be a great accessory ?
Screw a ring with a flip magnifier, flip it on for longer lenses, flip it off for wider ones.
I'd even like a 2x magnifier for 50mm up if it would be so easy to use.
That adapter wasn't cheap 
