p.14 #1 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
I'm feeling relatively sure that it's not the lens itself in my case, because sometimes it performs perfectly. I don't know everything about lenses, but I've never heard of an intermittent problem like that with a lens. The quality is nice enough that I think I'm willing to push forward and try to figure it out and work it out. I got some beautiful results yesterday evening, as well as a few not-quit-as-nice left sides. Of course it might be denial working on my cognition, because I really don't want it to be the lens.
I've got a chance to take it out again today, so I'll do another round.
A friend suggested I use a voice recorder (on an iPod in my case, since I don't have a smart phone) to take time-stamped notes. I don't see myself taking detailed notes on paper after each exposure in the field, so this might help. I can detail things I vary by voice note. Right now it just seems random, but it's also weird that it seems to be generally getting better. I don't know what I'm doing differently than I was at first. Something, apparently.
p.14 #2 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
OK, I'm quite sure the lens is fine. What I was seeing was the field curvature when focused at infinity. If I avoid infinity focus, I can get both edges quite sharp.
The field curvature is really something to deal with, and I knew ahead of time. I was both reluctant and excited to get this lens. It often disappoints me, and it sometimes blows the top of my head off and leaves me breathless. I figured the former might happen, but I'm a bit surprised how good it can be.
p.14 #3 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
jlehet wrote:
OK, I'm quite sure the lens is fine. What I was seeing was the field curvature when focused at infinity. If I avoid infinity focus, I can get both edges quite sharp.
The field curvature is really something to deal with, and I knew ahead of time. I was both reluctant and excited to get this lens. It often disappoints me, and it sometimes blows the top of my head off and leaves me breathless. I figured the former might happen, but I'm a bit surprised how good it can be.
Thanks for the update, though I have the 35/2.8 Sony, it's just for AF and it's not stellar in many ways (like it has not very good sun stars - pretty ugly actually). It's also slow which can be a problem at times when I want low DOF at 35mm.
p.14 #4 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
OK, hundreds and hundreds of exposures later, and I'm pretty ecstatic about the optics of this lens. Really no complaints about the edges -- I don't know why I was seeing it at first and not now. I think I must have been slightly over-focusing past infinity, while as Phillip found it is much better to focus a bit closer instead. Whatever use pattern I've adopted, it's working.
Ergonomically it's rather poor compared to the Loxias and I miss the EXIF. I really wish I was better at taking notes.
Compared to the Loxias (50 and 21, at least as far as I've been able to figure without the EXIF) this Voigtlander has a more extreme falloff in quality from f8 to f11. Losing some quality at f11 to diffraction is of course expected, but it is quite a dramatic difference from "This is brilliant and amazing!" at f8 to "ho hum, sure wasn't worth squeezing a little more depth of field" at f11."
p.14 #5 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
jpg compression loses the good detail on each dandelion head, etc. Will make a better print than a web presentation. With the Ultron probably at f8, yesterday afternoon.
edited -- the image looks much better on retina screens on the web page:
p.14 #7 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
The crazy thing is that I made about 160 exposures on that walk, with 3 primes (a fourth just a little). Though I probably used the new Voigtlander a little more than the other two (testing, excitement), I think 80% of the "wow!" exposures were done with it. Some of that comes down to the 35mm focal length being perfect for the situation, but there is maybe something else going on. It's really a nice lens. And the other two lenses I used, Loxia 50 and Loxia 21 are no slouches. This lens is fantastic.
I'm pretty new on these forums. Is there a best way to post images? What I did, posting a link to the image on my server, results in an image that looks blurry on a "retina" screen.
p.14 #8 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
The more I read about this lens, the more I want to get one. The black version is price the same as the chrome version in the U.S., $980. I saw some folks stating $650 for the black version in Europe. I am wondering if our European friends could share the names of reputable online retailers that still sell this lens at that price.
p.14 #11 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
I bought mine from Leica Shop. At the time the price was 540 Euro. It has since gone up to 665 Euro. But that includes free worldwide express shipping (via UPS in my case). Seems Robert White might be a tad less, though not sure how much shipping will narrow the difference.
p.14 #12 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
rscheffler wrote:
I bought mine from Leica Shop. At the time the price was 540 Euro. It has since gone up to 665 Euro. But that includes free worldwide express shipping (via UPS in my case). Seems Robert White might be a tad less, though not sure how much shipping will narrow the difference.
Thanks Ron. Man, the price sure went up fast, but not as fast the $200 increase of the E mount 10mm in one month, .
p.14 #13 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
I think the 35's price increase is more directly tied to the strengthening of the JPY vs other currencies since the middle of last year. Keep in mind though that it has stayed at about the same USD retail price since introduction (I think), which kind of shows how much 'buffer' was enjoyed by the US distributors. As for the 10mm price jump, I'm not as sure.
p.14 #16 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
Wanny wrote:
So would it be recommended to order this lens from a EU seller (to save money)?
Whats the risk shipping it to the USA?
I ordered one from the U.K. link above. They shipped pretty quickly and it will be here tomorrow. I think the risk is if you get a bad copy, if will be a PITA to return/exchange it. I suspect the reputable stores in the U.S. have more generous return policy than most other places. Also warranty can be an issue too. I am not sure how that will work. I took the risk but saved $200.
p.14 #18 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
Robert White is in the UK. Leicashop is in Austria. I've dealt with both, each only a single transaction thus far, but had no problems.
I agree that the risk is getting a dud and having to resolve the problem to your satisfaction, though suspect the odds of that happening will be low. I can't recall much bad feedback about the lens, out of the box, other than Phillip Reeve stating his was decentered and thus returned. Mine is slightly weaker on one side, but not enough to be a problem, IMO. I doubt you'll get US warranty support. I believe there is language to this effect on Cameraquest's site (one of the US importers)... For this lens the price difference used to be over $300, which IMO made it an easy decision.
.
