http://www.cameraquest.com/Voigt_SL2.htm
February 2011: 75/1.8 SL II for Nikon and Canon EOS Announced!
75/1.8 Classic Heliar for Nikon AIS and Canon EOS Announced Feb 12, 2011
Delivery Date and Price Not Yet Announced
Anyone have any thoughts or guesses on this item?
Will it be a performer, or will it be just a Heliar only in name?
I thinking of sending in the $100.00 deposit...
The 40/2 pancake lens looks cool, I think I would like to get that one.
Should have made the 58/1.4 available for EOS also, but there still isn't one.
Can you mount the Nikon on a simple adapter for EOS?
I have the 75 f/1.8 for Leica M. It's optically the same according to Cameraquest. I think it's a good lens, but it will depend on your expectations. Its leaning is towards 'classical' rendering, meaning not bitingly sharp wide open with fairly weak corners. Stopped down a bit and it's very nice, but the corners never really catch up. It has a bit of CA and also exhibits LoCA quite strongly in the right situations. Lastly, in controlled testing it exhibited a fair amount of focus shift as it stopped down, but in real world use so far, it hasn't been that significant. The M version sells around $700, so I'd guess a similar price point for the SL version.
Hi,
Do you have any photo examples from the M version?
rscheffler wrote:
I have the 75 f/1.8 for Leica M. It's optically the same according to Cameraquest. I think it's a good lens, but it will depend on your expectations. Its leaning is towards 'classical' rendering, meaning not bitingly sharp wide open with fairly weak corners. Stopped down a bit and it's very nice, but the corners never really catch up. It has a bit of CA and also exhibits LoCA quite strongly in the right situations. Lastly, in controlled testing it exhibited a fair amount of focus shift as it stopped down, but in real world use so far, it hasn't been that significant. The M version sells around $700, so I'd guess a similar price point for the SL version....Show more →
I do, but you'll have to dig through the Leica M9 thread here on the Alt forum. My images are all sized to 1000 pixels, so hopefully it will give you enough info. Also, I got the lens in late February and immediately went on a trip until mid March, so don't go back before that point. Unfortunately I don't have anything conveniently organized to point you towards elsewhere.... Maybe I should write up a blog post about it, but that won't happen for at least a week or so.
I was very curious about this lens too as it is a true Heliar unlike the Voigtlander Color Heliar 75mm f/2.5 which is really double gauss--not that dissimilar to the Zuiko 85/f2 I have in rendering from what I can tell. The classic Heliars are supposed to have lower microcontrast but nice resolution making it good for portraits. The 50mm Heliar has a good reputation but I have never seen any real Heliar. 75mm seems like an oddball FL to me too. I'll pay close attention to any posted images here.
Michael Gordon wrote:
I was very curious about this lens too as it is a true Heliar unlike the Voigtlander Color Heliar 75mm f/2.5 which is really double gauss--not that dissimilar to the Zuiko 85/f2 I have in rendering from what I can tell. The classic Heliars are supposed to have lower microcontrast but nice resolution making it good for portraits. The 50mm Heliar has a good reputation but I have never seen any real Heliar. 75mm seems like an oddball FL to me too. I'll pay close attention to any posted images here.
75 is a standard frameline for Leica-derived rangefinders, which is where both of the Voigtlander designs originated and thus the source of the odd by SLR standards focal length.
Aah, thanks for clarifying. Perhaps it will be a nice portrait lens with the lower microcontrast and in that use the corner softness would not be a biggie. The bokeh is supposed to be nice. There are a ton of super nice portrait 85-90mm lenses though, so it may be difficult to justify. On second thought, that has not stopped me before.
Michael Gordon wrote:
I was very curious about this lens too as it is a true Heliar unlike the Voigtlander Color Heliar 75mm f/2.5 which is really double gauss--not that dissimilar to the Zuiko 85/f2 I have in rendering from what I can tell. The classic Heliars are supposed to have lower microcontrast but nice resolution making it good for portraits. The 50mm Heliar has a good reputation but I have never seen any real Heliar. 75mm seems like an oddball FL to me too. I'll pay close attention to any posted images here.
I'm not familiar with what a true Heliar would be, but the 75 f/1.8 does seem to fit in the category of "lower microcontrast but nice resolution."
These are some photos I posted a while ago the day I got the lens. Nothing special, but hopefully it offers something. Unfortunately I don't have a lot of people photos with this lens that I can post... and none in the selection below.
These were on the M9 processed from RAW in Lightroom. I did tweak all of the images for more pleasing contrast. Many are set to the neighbourhood of 50 points contrast and also a steeper s-curve. None have had any clarity applied. I also don't remember the f/stop used, but it would be at or close to wide open. You can't rely on the f/stop value in the M9's exif because it's a guess by the camera based on the exposure given the shutter speed and ISO setting.
Here's a more distant scene. I think these are shot in the sequence of f/1.8 or f/2, 2.8, 4, 5.6.... but I'm not 100% sure, though the shutter speed change for each image is one stop, so it's probably the case. Regarding f/1.8 vs. f/2 - from casual observation I can't see a difference, which makes me wonder if there is an actual difference.
The downsized full images below have been sharpened. The 100% crops only have default LR sharpening of 25/1/25 with no luminance NR (and were shot at ISO 320).
The above crops though are an area that is not within the plane of focus. Here's the left edge with some of the fence along the same plane of focus as the central crop:
Thanks very much for posting the images. It seems to make a nice portrait lens. I see the corner issues and CA. Seems like the bokeh is good as it should be.
More historical data on the Heliar design: http://www.antiquecameras.net/heliarlenses.html
The optical signature for this desgn is stated to be very high resolution wiht low microcontrast and smooth bokeh.
I like my zuiko 85/2 for a travel portrait lens, but the bokeh gets edgy with the background at 10 feet or so. I waited a few mintues too long on yabe to snag a CV90/3.5 and haven't seen an SLI in OM mount for over 1.5 years.
in OM mount
I thought I would bump this back up to see if you still have the lens and what your thoughts are on it a few months later. I'm mostly interested in it for people/portraits. The third shot of the baby is nice, I think it shows that 'classical' look. It seems to be a nice portrait lens.
In the meantime, if you're curious about it, head over to Flickr and run a search on the camera model and lens
"NEX Heliar 75" for example... there are quite a few photos there. After seeing them I made the decision to buy the lens. I will probably have some photos to post next week.
- a friend's baby. These would have all been shot wide open. All have been sharpened during downsizing.