회원가입
로그인라이카(M)의 렌즈 시리즈- Super Angulon 21mm F4(Screw Mount)
페이지 정보
- 작성자 : 윤세영
- 작성일 : 02-05-13 15:16
관련링크
본문
▽ 이름:윤세영 (syyun0505@Kornet.net)
▽ 분류:정보
▽ 2001/4/23(월) 21:08
▽ 조회:757
라이카(M)의 렌즈 시리즈- Super Angulon 21mm F4(Screw Mount)
Super Angulon 21mm F4
1955년에 등장한 슈퍼앵글론21mm F4렌즈는 이름에서도 알수 있듯이 슈나이더사의 설계에 의하여 4군9매구성의 대칭형렌즈구성을 가진 광각렌즈이다. 이 시대는 M형 뿐 아니라 IIIg등 바르낙형의 바디도 아직까지 함께 판매되고 있었기 때문에 M베이요넷 마운트와 스크류마운트, 및 비스고정의 베이요넷 Adapter를 갖춘 겸용타입 등 의 3종이 준비되어 있었다.
이렌즈는 대칭형렌즈 구성 때문에 렌즈의 뒷부분이 커서 사용할 때 상당히 바디를 가리는 렌즈이다. 예를 들면 캐논의 레인지화인더라면 IV형까지는 문제가 없으나 V형이 되면 렌즈의 뒷부분이 바디의 내부에 부딪히기 때문에 장착할 수 없으며, 같은 이유로 Voigtlander의 Bessa-L에도 장착할 수 없다.
물론 라이카라면 어느 바디에도 장착할 수 있으나 M5, CL은 측광용 장치에 닿고, M6에서는 노출계로 전달되는 빛의 통로(光路)가 렌즈의 뒷부분에 의하여 차단되기 때문에 노출계의 사용이 불가능해지는 등 제약이 많다.
또, 옛날 스크류마운트렌즈에 많은 앞렌즈 회전식(前玉回轉式)Focusing 때문에 핀트를 맞추는 것과 동시에 조리개 지표의 위치가 돌아가 버리는 등 전반적으로 사용하기 편한 렌즈라고 말하기 어려우나 이와같이 사용하기 어려운 렌즈를 사용할 수 있게 되는 것도 라이카사진을 촬영하는데 있어서 하나의 쾌감이 될 수 있다고 생각한다.
사진에 대해서 말하면 샤프하지만 상당히 부드럽고 아름다운 묘사를 보인다. 대칭형렌즈 구성이라는 점도 있어서 왜곡수차는 매우 잘 보정되어 있지만 옛날 렌즈이기 때문에 콘트라스트는 그리 높지 않고 촬영조건에 따라서는 상당히 후레아가 나타나는 듯한 묘사가 되기도 한다. 또, 흑백촬영에서는 암부의 처리가 약하기 때문에 인화하는데 어려움이 있으나 최신 렌즈의 샤프하지만 Dry하며 개성이 없는 렌즈에 비하여 Wet한 묘사를 하는 슈퍼앵글론의 가치가 점점 높아지는 이유이기도 하다.
슈퍼앵글론 21mm F4는 5년간 약 5300개 생산된 후 1963년에는 개방 F값을 3.4로 하여 직진 헤리코이드를 채용한 신형으로 바뀐다. 이 F3.4 타입은 F4타입에 비하여 콘트라스트등이 크게 개선되어 절대 성능면으로는 F4 타입보다는 상당히 결점이 적은 광각렌즈가 되어 그 만큼 현대적이 되기는 하였지만 맛은 줄어들었다.
그 후에 등장하는 레트로포커스 설계의 엘마리트 21mm나 최신의 Elmarit 21mm Aspherical렌즈를 포함하여 역대의 라이카용 21mm 중에서는 개인적으로는 이 슈퍼앵글론 21mm F4의 묘사가 가장 부드럽고 좋다. 칼라로 선명한 사진을 얻고자 한다면 신형렌즈가 좋은 것은 물론이지만 모티브와 광선상태가 렌즈가 가지는 묘사특성과 일치하였을 때 보여주는 독특한 세계는 슈퍼앵글론 21mm F4만이 가지는 독특한 것이라고 생각한다.
댓글목록
*이기원*님의 댓글
*이기원*
요즘들어 앵글론 렌즈에 집중하고있습니다.
좋은 글로 다시한번 탄력받고 갑니다!
최현석5님의 댓글
최현석5
Rangefinderforum.com에 Tom A라는 분께서 적으신 여러가지 21mm렌즈에 대한 글입니다. 도움이 될 만한 글인것 같아 Copy & Paste를 해 봅니다.
원본글은 http://www.rangefinderforum.com/foru...ad.php?t=44343 여기 있습니다. 전체 스레드를 읽어 보시는 것도 재미있을 것 입니다.
I did a quick "test" if you can call it that. I used my stash of 21's and shot a couple of rolls with each one. Mainly 100 asa films as those tend to give you a bit more information.
Here it goes:
21/3,4 Super Angulon (very late # 2.9xx xxx). Still one of my favourites, but mainly for sentimental reasons. I have had a 21 SA since they came out in 1964. Then it was a stellar lens. Very sharp centre performance, but distinct fall off in the edges. Today it is a decent lens with a 'signature" to it. center sharpness is still among the best available, but it is not up there with the rest anymore.
21/4 VC LTM: This lens was sensational when it came out. A $400 package with the finder and it was and is still a formidable lens. Yes, it is a stop slower than Leica and Zeiss's newest, but unless you are planning to do "mega" blow up's, it will serve you well. The flexibility of being able to use it on LTM and M bodies is attractive too.
21/4 P VC: This is the 21VC in a dedicated M mount. If you are strictly a M user it is a good deal, though you dont get a finder with it anymore. The aperture ring is easier to get a grip on than on the LTM mount version. Performance is the same as the LTM version which means excellent. It is a remarkably distorsion free lens - actually better than the 21/2,8 Asph from Leica in this aspect.
21/2,8 Asph Elmarit: I had one of these for many years and though I cant complain about the performance, it is BIG and rather clunky to use. Nice, even rendition, but with typical Leica Aspherical harshness to the image and rather high contrast. More distorsion than the VC 21 or the Biogon 21/4,5
Biogon ZM 21/2,8: I like the Zeiss line of lenses for several reasons. One is that, although not small, they are smaller than the Leica equvivalents and that the contrast and "tone" of the lenses is the same from the 21 up to the 50mm lenses. When you look at negatives the tonal rendition is the same across the board, only the angle of view is changing. This is quite a remarkable feat in consistency. Resolution and distortion is similar to the 21/2,8 Asph from Leica although the slightly lower contrast makes it look "softer" but I think that is deceptive and i would use either one without any hesitation.
Biogon 21/4,5 ZM: Very nice lens. It has the same tonality as the rest of the ZM lenses and based on the 20-25 rolls so far, it is up there with the best of them when it cames to resolution. Where it really shines is in the almost total lack of distortion, it is something in the order of 0,14% which is negligble for all practical purposes. Considerably smaller than the 21/2.8 ZM. Same diameter barrel, but shorter. The 46mm filter size and bayonet is the same as the 2.8 and you can use the 21/2,8 hood with it. On the Bessa R4M I prefer to use it with the 25 ZM hood instead as it prtrudes less in the R4 finder.
Biogon 21/4.5 (1957) Contax/Nikon mount: It was a classic lens in the 50 and 60's and the Biogon formula has always been the top formulation for distorsion free images (Think Hassselblad SW/SWC with its 38mm Biogon!). I remember shooters carrying a Contax or Nikon just for this lens, while everything else was Leica M! It is an ergonomic disaster, minute engravings on chrome and HEAVY and finding a hood that both worked and stayed on was a challenge.
Ricoh 21/3,5 LTM: I have one of these rather scarce lenses and mine is even in black! Good lens, but not even close to the 21/4VC. Quite a bit of fall off and a weird arrangement for setting aperture and focus. A small protruding lever for the aperture ring which keep fouling up your finger when you try to focus and usually end up either shooting stuff 1 stop over or under by mistake.
Which to pick? It depends what you want to do with it. The 21mm focal length tends to be a bit of a special event lens. Unless you are in crammed asian or european cities, it is usually too wide for street shots and it is not flattering for people , particularly if they are close to the edge of the image. It is great landscape focal length and also for "city scapes". If you do commercial work and need straight lines for architectural, either the VC 21 or the Biogon 21/4,5 would work well (i assume that if you shoot this kind of stuff, you use a tripod and most likely would be stopping down to f11 or 16 anyway). If you do interiors and you are mainly hand holding, the 2.8's would do well though I have always felt that on a 21 or wider, speed is less of a problem than even illumination and overall image quality.
If you already have the 21/4 VC in LTM mount, be happy and keep shooting. If you are looking for a 21 and are willing to spend a little look for the 21/4 P, if your budget allows a bit more look at the 21/4,5 ZM or the 21/2,8 ZM (the latter if you are a slow color film shooter where 1 stop can make a difference) and if you just won the lottery or inherited chunks of money and like to carry large. bulky objects, look at the 21/2,8 Asph Elmarit.
All of these lenses will do you well. There is not that much distinction between them for my style of shooting (mostly handheld, asa 100 to 400 bl/w processed for printing rather than scanning) so my choice comes down to ergonomics and weight as well as performance. I rarely print larger than 11x14 and with wide angles tend to shoot around f8-11 when I can.
At the moment, I have been using the 21/4,5 ZM more than any of the other, but that is also because it is new to me. I suspect that it will remain more or less welded to my R4M, but that does not mean that I will not take any of the others out for a spin. Particularly the 21/3,4 Super Angulon as it is my "flash back" lens. Tri X/M2/21f3.4 - how 60's can you get!