naturephoto1 Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
rscheffler wrote:
Hi Rich,
I may have posted this already, but I have the 15III in M-mount and use it on the M240. After re-reviewing the tests I did last year with it, I would say my copy is between Fred's and Choppy. Corners are on the soft side, but don't look as smeared as Fred's and Boris's examples. However, they also don't sharpen up as well as Choppy and Chuck's copy. Near distance subjects in corners seem to resolve a lot better when the lens is at infinity than infinity subject details in the far corners. On the Leica M there might be slight field curvature towards the camera at the edges. Also, my copy appears to have a slight loss of resolution in the left mid zone area.
As I wrote earlier, something that struck me with sample photos by others was that the 15III looked a bit better in the outer zone on the Sony cameras than on Leica. It could be optimized closer to Sony specs than Leica. Somewhere in the middle so that it's decent on both, but maybe slightly better on Sony.
Boris: I would exchange it. I have no confidence that the Voigtlander distributor would have the means to service the lens, which means they would send it back to Japan, which would probably take ages to turn around. The more these are returned as unacceptable, the sooner Cosina will get the message that something isn't right. Also, from my impressions reading Roger's blog posts, it seems that fiddling with UWA lens element alignments is very, very difficult when it comes to lining everything up for perfect performance (assuming it's even possible). ...Show more →
Hi Ron,
Thanks for the input and response. I wasn't really expecting to purchase one of the CV 15III lenses. I will just rely on my WATE and my M 24mm f3.8 Asph with my A7rM V3 and also use my soon to arrive A7r with my WATE (less often) and my R lenses primarily though the R lenses will also be used on the A7rM V3.
Thanks again.
Rich
|