p.39 #2 · Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Here are my corner crops.
This is the M version with Hawk's adapter. This is the same lens I had SK Grimes remove the petals (FWIW) I believe I bought this around the same time as Guy.
p.39 #3 · Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Charlie N wrote:
What's interesting is KH's tests, WATE on M9 vs CV15 on M9, most of the frame is the same, but the extreme corners, the WATE takes it.
On the A7rii, WATE does about the same as the M9, just with more MP, however the CV15 definitely does better than WATE in the extreme corners.
I've only used the CV15 once (M mount), still have the original raw file, sharp to the corner, no smearing.
Hi Charlie,
I believe that focus and focus point/location may be critical.
I am posting the image of Dark Hollow Falls that I posted earlier in this thread taken with my tripod mounted A7r and my WATE at 18mm, ISO 50, f8, 1/5 second and 100% crops for all 4 corners below.
The image was focused on the Gold colored leaf on the left side of the large rock at the lower right of the image and the image was shot at f8.
When reviewing the 4 corner images, it must be understood that there are some limitations for this image because the lower left image is of flowing water and a sharp focus was not possible in a 1/5 second exposure. On the lower right image the large rock is 3 dimensional and we are observing the shape of the rock itself.
Rich
Full size original image tripod mounted A7r WATE at 18mm, ISO 50, f8 at 1/5 second full image
p.39 #4 · Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
fishjump wrote:
Here are my corner crops.
This is the M version with Hawk's adapter. This is the same lens I had SK Grimes remove the petals (FWIW) I believe I bought this around the same time as Guy.
Paul
Another Choppy!
wait...did you notice that all good copies have the hood removed!!
p.39 #5 · Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
This seems like a lottery. I recently had a similar issue with the Sony FE 35 2.8. First copy I got had very good corners except for the top right one, which was very bad. Second copy only had slight differences between corners, but none of the corners were anywhere near as good as the good corners on the first copy. So both went back. Can't be bothered to try a third time. I was also interested in the CV 15 III, but after following this thread for the last weeks makes me shy away from it.
If at least they made consistently bad copies ... for many of us the performance would still be sufficient even with slight corner smearing (certainly for me) ... but parting with lots of money and being left with the nagging feeling (or certainty as in many cases here) that you maybe got a lens that is not as good as it could be is what bothers me.
p.39 #6 · Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Lol . Dremel in hand.
Actually I said something crazy about this already. What if, yea yea what if the petals are actually causing a very slight extreme corner soft vignette. If that is the case it be exactly what we are seeing is smearing in the extreme corners.think about it if you put a hood on lens and it vignettes not only is it causing black in the frame it's also causing smearing before it goes black.
I know, I know conspiracy theory but what if
Fred Miranda wrote:
Another Choppy!
wait...did you notice that all good copies have the hood removed!!
p.39 #9 · Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Now Fred did say this and i have not had a E mount in my hands yet. He said it looks like the petals are smaller than the M mount. So that blows my whole theory out the window.
p.39 #12 · Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Ah Fred I need to stop reading your threads, that WATE performance is insane but that's worth more than all my camera equipment combined!! Guess I'll tough it out with my very good 16-35, I love sharpness all over but at some point I'll just take some convenience over perfection
p.39 #13 · Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
tsdevine wrote:
With all these bad copies, it makes me feel like I need to test mine again....that there is no way it could be good. At some point the distributors should get the message (which has already happened in the US as they also sell direct) and you would think they'd need to go back to CV with the issue. Eventually we need to hear what CV's stance on this.
I imagine Amazon would start looking into this too. Too many returns would normally trip a warning for them.
p.39 #15 · Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
OK, a bit of the history of my lottery game, first copy from dealer B went back, all 4 corners are smeared, second copy from dealer B has OK right corners but smeared left corners (to my eyes anyway), it's going back for a refund, first copy from dealer C has smeared issues in all 4 corners, sent back for a refund. This first copy from dealer V I received last night seems to have better corners than the last 3 copies, of course it's not a scientific comparison, just to my eyes. At least I could read words at the corners. I hate returning lenses as this is not really my "tradition". I don't have trained eyes for pixel peeping. It's no Choppy but I think I may just keep this one and crop the corners if needed.
Interesting that last 2 digits of the 2nd copy from dealer B is 97, the last 2 digits of the copy from dealer V is 93, all other digits are the same.
Sorry I am posting more than 5 pictures. Any comments are welcome.
Douglas
#407 without cropping: Sorry this got moved to the last.
p.39 #16 · Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
The micro-harmonic vibrations caused from cutting off the petals surely aligns the crystalline structure within the glass in a more uniform manner, resulting in better across the frame sharpness.
p.39 #18 · Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Douglas - if it was me I'd live with it. While it's not Choppy perfect, it's much better than the 'defective' ones we've seen.
k-h.a.w wrote:
I did the following comparisons:
• Choppy and WATE on Leica M9
• Choppy and WATE on Sony A7r2 and TechArt Pro LM-EA7 autofocus adapter
When using the rangefinder focusing on the M9, the WATE gave best results with rangefinder focusing.
Choppy is almost as well calibrated, but gave slightly better results when set to the infinity stop.
Both lenses perform remarkably well at f/8 on both cameras. Following in the next posts are the images.
K-H.
Karl-Heinz - thanks for taking the time to test the lenses on the M9 alongside the Sony! I downsized the Sony+Choppy file to match M9 dimensions (which will still benefit the Sony with better fine detail resolution) and while the light changed a lot between images, I think the lens performs slightly better on the Sony. I also think Choppy+M9 performs better than my copy on my M240.
p.39 #19 · Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
rscheffler wrote:
Douglas - if it was me I'd live with it. While it's not Choppy perfect, it's much better than the 'defective' ones we've seen.
Karl-Heinz - thanks for taking the time to test the lenses on the M9 alongside the Sony! I downsized the Sony+Choppy file to match M9 dimensions (which will still benefit the Sony with better fine detail resolution) and while the light changed a lot between images, I think the lens performs slightly better on the Sony. I also think Choppy+M9 performs better than my copy on my M240.
Agree, Ron. I hate returning lenses multiple times. I truly feel bad for the dealers.
DSC00407