p.8 #2 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
theophilus wrote:
Thanks Phillip,
So vignetting and field curvature are significant. Corners don't look like they ever cleaned up.
On unmodded Sony. Corners are sharp by f/4 on the M240, assuming the lens is not decentered. But the M240 seems to have more color shift than Sony, though it is minor.
p.8 #3 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
Nice! But I donīt know, if I like it. Is it really better than its cousin, the Nokton 35/1.4? It lacks its superb Focustab, but has the same strong Field Curvature. Maybe its just another Huff-hyped lens. Guess I`ll save my money, keepin my combination A7II + VC 35/1.4 and stay lucky
p.8 #4 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
Sure it has lots of field curvature on the a7 and not of the good inward bound kind but by f/8 the corners of a flat subject are sharp enough for me. Bokeh is really gorgeous and contrast and sharpness at f/1.7 leave little to be desired.
I would not be able to justify the money/performance ratio for the new ultron on the A7 bodies. A mod or 240, maybe.
I would advise Cosina to study the Sonys closer because they would sell many more with a better tuned lens (meaning tuned for the Sonys). The competition at 35 for M is pretty strong, but the field is much more open on the FE.
p.8 #6 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
uhoh7 wrote:
I would not be able to justify the money/performance ratio for the new ultron on the A7 bodies. A mod or 240, maybe.
I would advise Cosina to study the Sonys closer because they would sell many more with a better tuned lens (meaning tuned for the Sonys). The competition at 35 for M is pretty strong, but the field is much more open on the FE.
i don't know, phillip's last shot looks pretty sold for landscape and significantly better than your cv 35/1.4 seems to perform in the outer 1/3 of the frame. the bokeh of the f/1.7 is much better wide open than the 35/1.4 at f/2 as well.
p.8 #7 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
sebboh wrote:
i don't know, phillip's last shot looks pretty sold for landscape and significantly better than your cv 35/1.4 seems to perform in the outer 1/3 of the frame. the bokeh of the f/1.7 is much better wide open than the 35/1.4 at f/2 as well.
+1 I also was impressed by Philip's last infinity landscape shot.
p.8 #8 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
Tariq Gibran wrote:
+1 I also was impressed by Philip's last infinity landscape shot.
I agree - I checked out CV 35 1.4 before buying the Ultron, and was very unimpressed with its sharpness. While I haven't done a side by side test, based on what I have shot so far the Ultron is significantly sharper.
p.8 #9 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
Nex Barker wrote:
Nice! But I donīt know, if I like it. Is it really better than its cousin, the Nokton 35/1.4? It lacks its superb Focustab, but has the same strong Field Curvature. Maybe its just another Huff-hyped lens. Guess I`ll save my money, keepin my combination A7II + VC 35/1.4 and stay lucky
Yeah, good observation. Steve can be very enthusiastic about things which in use fall short of his zeal.
p.8 #10 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
uhoh7 wrote:
Lens looks nice on the 240, but the FE 35/2.8 would just smoke it for landscape work on un-moddifed A7 bodies, no?
I would not be able to justify the money/performance ratio for the new ultron on the A7 bodies. A mod or 240, maybe.
I would advise Cosina to study the Sonys closer because they would sell many more with a better tuned lens (meaning tuned for the Sonys). The competition at 35 for M is pretty strong, but the field is much more open on the FE.
I haven't used it enough for a conclusion but I might keep it. I like the bokeh better than that of any other 35mm lens (Rx-1 excluded) and it has really nice contrast and sharpness from f/1.7.
It is also sharp across maybe 90% of the frame. Not in a flat plane but a curved one. Check out that full resolution picture of the stone bench, there is a lot of sharpness close to the corner. This is a clear advantage over older lenses which are good in the center but quickly fall off.
Sure I would prefer it if it performed like on the M240 but at f/8 it is quite sharp for infinity landscape images and that is what counts for me.
Also prices in Europe are more affordable, I paid 649 for the black version. I think in the US it is nearly $1000.
I don't read Huff, I read FM and Ron's images made me try the lens
p.8 #11 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
sebboh wrote:
i don't know, phillip's last shot looks pretty sold for landscape and significantly better than your cv 35/1.4 seems to perform in the outer 1/3 of the frame. the bokeh of the f/1.7 is much better wide open than the 35/1.4 at f/2 as well.
I regard the Nokton on the un-moddifed A7 as highly quirky with large dips, which can be seen in the A7r landscape, above. I don't consider the 35/1.4 as a landscape 35 for M9, much less a stock A7.
The Ultron landscape above is quite weak on the edges at F/8, to my eye looking at the full. To me, the A7.mod w/ CV 35/1.4 is better, but I might be wrong. I would expect the Ultron to out-perform the Nokton; both on a A7.mod at F/8. But on a stock A7x it does not appear to me a remote competitor to FE 35/2.8 as a nice crisp across the frame landscape lens, with no big dips at 5.6 or 8, and strong edges. As say, the ZM 35/2 performs on the M9.
But that's a view from a single Ultron landscape, so perhaps some more will appear to show the Ultron better than it seems to me in that shot.
Does no one else see a loss of sharpness along the edges of the Ultron landscape?
p.8 #13 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
uhoh7 wrote:
I regard the Nokton on the un-moddifed A7 as highly quirky with large dips, which can be seen in the A7r landscape, above. I don't consider the 35/1.4 as a landscape 35 for M9, much less a stock A7.
The Ultron landscape above is quite weak on the edges at F/8, to my eye looking at the full. To me, the A7.mod w/ CV 35/1.4 is better, but I might be wrong. I would expect the Ultron to out-perform the Nokton; both on a A7.mod at F/8. But on a stock A7x it does not appear to me a remote competitor to FE 35/2.8 as a nice crisp across the frame landscape lens, with no big dips at 5.6 or 8, and strong edges. As say, the ZM 35/2 performs on the M9.
But that's a view from a single Ultron landscape, so perhaps some more will appear to show the Ultron better than it seems to me in that shot.
Does no one else see a loss of sharpness along the edges of the Ultron landscape?
there is a sharpness drop on the corner, i don't really see much of an edge drop off if you follow a line of equal subject distance. the zm 35/2 has a corner drop on the m9 too. i'm sure the three zm lenses probably all perform better on the m240 than this on an unmodded a7, but it looks good enough for me not to care about getting sharper. the FE 35/2.8 and loxia both look very unattractive to me because i use 35mm lenses mostly at short to mid distance and i find their drawing style a bit distasteful (i really don't like the loxia).
p.8 #14 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
sebboh wrote:
there is a sharpness drop on the corner, i don't really see much of an edge drop off if you follow a line of equal subject distance. the zm 35/2 has a corner drop on the m9 too. i'm sure the three zm lenses probably all perform better on the m240 than this on an unmodded a7, but it looks good enough for me not to care about getting sharper. the FE 35/2.8 and loxia both look very unattractive to me because i use 35mm lenses mostly at short to mid distance and i find their drawing style a bit distasteful (i really don't like the loxia).
I went back to the fulls again, comparing the Ultron also to my CV fulls from the 1.2 (stopped down) on the mod. Philip's landscape is right with it and maybe better out to the sides.
So maybe this is now the best RF 35 for the A7. Next question: colorcast? I think Ron said there was some on the 240? A7r2 seems to show less of this than the A7 or A7r, in general.
Love to see more like that landscape but at f/4 and 5.6
p.8 #20 · Official: Voigtlander 35 F1.7 Ultron M mount
Phillip Reeve wrote:
The same, so far I haven't seen it in a singe real world image
Unfortunately I can confirm that magenta corners occur on the A7R - I've set up a LR preset that corrects very well with a radial filter, but it is disappointing. I'm away on a photo trip at present so can't post anything now, but can put up some examples of straight and corrected images in 2 or 3 days. John
