Initial impression from the above link is optics sound to be the same as the previous CV50/1.5 LTM. The closer 70cm focusing is nice, as is the slimmer design with the cool scalloped focusing ring. I have the LTM version and TBH, it doesn't really excite me. It purple fringes quite easily wide open and seems to have a central sweet spot with sharpness falloff. Not great if you're hoping for across the frame FF performance. I think I need to use it again to regain some feel for it, but from what I remember, it didn't really seem to have any unique character. IIRC, it's centrally sharper than the 50 Lux ASPH at nearer distances, but the Lux is better across the frame (and also a lot more expensive), with more neutral background rendering and more creaminess, while vintage M/LTM 50s from various brands offer more character. I'd go with the Nikkor 5cm/1.4 or an early 50 Cron instead. Or even the CV40/1.4, which I really like.
If the new lens is optically redesigned, it will be interesting to see how it has changed...
Thanks Doug. According to TA, it's the same optical design. Which means it will be a solid, clinical performer. Oh yeah, and I forgot about the onion rings...
Cosmetically though it looks wonderful, especially in chrome.
Glad that they reissue this lens, the 1.1 just doesn't seem to have the same reputation. Hope they reissue the 35/1.7 and 28/1.9 ASPH as well, and the Apo Lanthar 125 pleaseeeeee
sirimiri wrote:
Ron, I rather liked the LTM Nokton 50mm f/1.5, I thought it performed very nicely for its cost.
I have a 40mm S.C. that I don't use enough but it's also a treat of a lens and the 40mm viewpoint has really grown on me.
I don't disagree - it's a great performer and I need to revisit it to see if my impressions are justified. My feelings about it are fairly lukewarm because it didn't really make a lasting impression, and this is shared by at least one poster in the RFF thread. In the end, there wasn't anything that particularly drew me to it, but I still own it, for some reason. Yes, it appears to be sharper than the 50 Lux ASPH at closer distances, but in higher contrast lighting, is prone to purple fringing wide open. I use the 50 Lux wide open a lot, and it doesn't share this problem, plus it's sharper wide open across the frame than the CV. And the slightly softer 'creamy' wide open Lux rendering is more charming to me. Definitely a huge price difference though. And I guess that's the point... if you're looking for an affordable fast 50 that is sharp (centrally) from wide open, the 50/1.5 is the one to get. If you can settle for f/2, then I think the ZM50 Planar with its Zeissy characteristics is to my eyes more appealing, or an older 50 Cron for a bit more character. The ZM50/1.5 Sonnar is more of a character lens compared to the CV or 50 Lux, so depends on what you're after. I guess the bottom line is there are only three 'f/1.4' M-mount 50s on the market, and only the CV might be under $1000.
Considering that the previous version is still available at Cameraquest for $800 and typically sells used for around $500, I would guess the new lens will be in the $750 range. Maybe a bit less. Cosina has been pretty realistic with their pricing, if you consider the 21/1.8 is 'only' $1250, which is cheaper than the slower ZM21 options and way below Leica. Of course I could be wrong, but I would be surprised to see it substantially higher than this.
To speculate even more, perhaps this is intentionally timed around the M240 release precisely to offer an affordable fast 50 option. There are bound to be a lot of new-to-Leica M240 owners looking for reasonably priced lenses. The chrome 50/1.5 could add a great look to the chrome M240. Considering the M240 has live view, Cosina could have made this lens unique among modern M mount 50s by extending the close focusing limit to 50cm or closer... but 70cm will make a big difference over the 90cm of the LTM version.
BTW, in the RFF thread, I think, someone refers to the mystery ZM lens to be released this year. My bet is on a 35/1.4.
If feel like this will be mistaken for grumbling, but the fake retro emphasis on design really doesn't appeal to me.
Putting aspherical elements in such a lens feels wrong from a design perspective. If I was considering a lens for it's classic appearance and build quality, then I'd much rather have a genuine vintage lens from an older maker and the sense of associated history that comes with it. It's the unbroken tradition of function over form that gives Leica it's aura of mystique and allows for their older lenses retain popularity.
In contrast, the reissue of the Zeiss Sonar 50/1.5 feels like a much nicer idea. it offers old-style rendering with high-contrast coating, while employing modern lens construction techniques and standards to keep costs bearable.
_julian_ wrote:
If feel like this will be mistaken for grumbling, but the fake retro emphasis on design really doesn't appeal to me.
Putting aspherical elements in such a lens feels wrong from a design perspective. If I was considering a lens for it's classic appearance and build quality, then I'd much rather have a genuine vintage lens from an older maker and the sense of associated history that comes with it. It's the unbroken tradition of function over form that gives Leica it's aura of mystique and allows for their older lenses retain popularity.
In contrast, the reissue of the Zeiss Sonar 50/1.5 feels like a much nicer idea. it offers old-style rendering with high-contrast coating, while employing modern lens construction techniques and standards to keep costs bearable....Show more →
i'd love it if modern high performing lenses came in metal bodies made to the high standards of build quality from 50 years ago. it's not just fake styling like say the OM-D either, it's fully functional retro build, though i'm sure with some modern design elements and methods. the new sonnar 50/1.5 looks almost exactly like the old one too btw and is made in the same way (possibly on the same equipment) as this new voigtlander so i don't really understand the difference?
Yeah, the screw mount version of this lens doesn't exactly exude quality. This one looks smaller and better built, which is a good thing.
I do agree with Ron's comments about purple fringing, though. This has been a problem with a few of the fast Voigtlanders that I've owned, and the 50/1.5 was no exception.
I had the ltm version and it was a decent lens for the price. I paid much less than what it goes for used nowadays. Agree with Ron on the characteristics but definitely sharp and clinical enough for everyday pics although nowhere near the 50lux asph. Some say its the poor man's version of the 50lux pre asph. The bokeh does look somewhat edgy wide open and can be distracting but at the same time charming old school look.
I do like the retro looks of the reissue and the 0.7m mfd but if its around 700-800 usd, I think the zm50p is a better bet or maybe an older 50cron. With the m240, f/1.4 or f/1.5 isn't really necessary for low light and if one is looking to shoot wide open only, I would prefer the characteristics and look of the zeiss sonnar 50 1.5.
the old version was half the going rate of the cron.