Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
p.43 #1Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Yeah...I can live with what I get with these 2 filters stacked, all the waterfall shots I posted had these 2 filters stacked. If at some point it bothers me, I'll send it out to have the petals removed. Once I put 67mm filters on it, then it will get big in the bag (like my Batis 25).
GMPhotography wrote:
Tim why I made Choppy. Going out to 67mm just eliminates any issue .
I'm pretty sure I'll do Choppy II already got the step up and extra filter ring today . I want to test it first though before I attack with Dremel
May 13, 2016 at 07:00 PM
p.43 #2Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
So someone who has a good FE mount version posted a portion of his serial number on DPReview, and it's close to mine. The guy who asked, who has a "bad" one, has a serial number that was quite a ways off from our two.
Good
0862006X
0862021X
Bad
0892039X
While the above is anecdotal, anyone else with a good FE copy? It would be interesting to see where it falls relative to the others.
-Tim
May 13, 2016 at 07:40 PM
p.43 #3Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Thanks Tim. Where do you find the serial number? 
Regards, K-H.
Regards, K-H.
May 13, 2016 at 07:45 PM
p.43 #4Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
It's on the mount...threw me for a loop too.
-Tim
May 13, 2016 at 07:47 PM
p.43 #5Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
These are the 4 copies I tried:
0862029x bad
0862029x-decent-keeping
0862016x bad
one more, didn't keep the serial #, bad.
0862029x bad
0862029x-decent-keeping
0862016x bad
one more, didn't keep the serial #, bad.
May 13, 2016 at 07:58 PM
p.43 #6Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Well, I guess we've eliminated any serial number/batch based theory. Which makes sense given the low number of keepers.
May 13, 2016 at 08:00 PM
p.43 #7Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Frankly, my guess is they don't really test the lens at 15mm once it's produced. Perhaps for two reasons...they don't have the equipment to test a ultra wide and/or the lens does not have real optical adjustments. They try to be careful during production but nothing is 100% perfect and it shows in a ultra wide angle. -- Especially when we are looking for problems at the very edge at 1:1. 
So, they assemble the lens element by element separated by a ring spacer and once it's completed they test for obvious defects a longer focal lengths and send them for shipping. Some will have perfectly aligned elements and some won't. I don't think this is a batch issue. It's just how the lens is produced.
The reason I think it's random is because I've seen this over a long period of time and it's not only affecting the E-mount. So, for those who really love this lens, you have to try until you get a good one. It could take 10+ copies or just 1. Just odds.
So, they assemble the lens element by element separated by a ring spacer and once it's completed they test for obvious defects a longer focal lengths and send them for shipping. Some will have perfectly aligned elements and some won't. I don't think this is a batch issue. It's just how the lens is produced.
The reason I think it's random is because I've seen this over a long period of time and it's not only affecting the E-mount. So, for those who really love this lens, you have to try until you get a good one. It could take 10+ copies or just 1. Just odds.
May 13, 2016 at 08:12 PM
p.43 #8Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
The only reason I had mentioned it was the closeness of my copy to another good copy. Given this spans M and E mount, what you say makes perfect sense.
May 13, 2016 at 08:13 PM
p.43 #9Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
tsdevine wrote:
The only reason I had mentioned it was the closeness of my copy to another good copy. Given this spans M and E mount, what you say makes perfect sense.
Tim, you copy looks as good as mine. Best at f/5.6-f/8 and noticeably worse at f/11.
The only reason I had mentioned it was the closeness of my copy to another good copy. Given this spans M and E mount, what you say makes perfect sense.
Tim, you copy looks as good as mine. Best at f/5.6-f/8 and noticeably worse at f/11.
May 13, 2016 at 08:19 PM
p.43 #10Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
WATE @ 16mm and f/8 with geometrical (mustache) distortion, visible at the top of the image.
 |
||
 |
||
|
May 15, 2016 at 12:05 AM
|
p.43 #11Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
With geometrical correction in ACR.
Edited on May 15, 2016 at 12:20 AM · View previous versions
|
||
 |
||
|
Edited on May 15, 2016 at 12:20 AM · View previous versions
May 15, 2016 at 12:09 AM
p.43 #12Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Choppy without geometrical correction.
|
||
 |
||
|
May 15, 2016 at 12:11 AM
p.43 #13Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Actually like choppy better here. My tests on Freds copy has slipped till Monday. My newest grandson was born yesterday morning. So been busy with all that. Everyone is doing great 9lbs 12 ounces. L'il truck. 
Hope to run it Monday morning. I also need to test a older model Hawk adapter and I got a Fotodiox stretch by accident. I actually cancelled the order but came anyway. So want to try them on my VC 35 1.7. Might keep both as I would not mind having a VC 75 or whatever else is out there to leave the GM 85 home on travel stuff. The only other lens outside a 28mm is maybe the Batis 18 for more reportage work but the price tag is holding me back. Would like to have a AF lens that wide for pR work and compliment the GM 24-70.
Hope to run it Monday morning. I also need to test a older model Hawk adapter and I got a Fotodiox stretch by accident. I actually cancelled the order but came anyway. So want to try them on my VC 35 1.7. Might keep both as I would not mind having a VC 75 or whatever else is out there to leave the GM 85 home on travel stuff. The only other lens outside a 28mm is maybe the Batis 18 for more reportage work but the price tag is holding me back. Would like to have a AF lens that wide for pR work and compliment the GM 24-70.
May 15, 2016 at 03:33 AM
p.43 #14Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Hate to say it but Choppy is far sharper than the WATE. Look at the crack in the bottom left
May 15, 2016 at 04:58 AM
p.43 #15Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Honestly I think where the VC 15 shines is in the mid range. If you look back in this thread on the Big Bronco wall test , Choppy even wide open is amazing in the corners. Im totally comfortable shooting it at 5.6.
May 15, 2016 at 05:00 AM
p.43 #16Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Congratulations on your new grandson Guy.
With kind regards, K-H.
PS: Choppy is quite a lens.
With kind regards, K-H.
PS: Choppy is quite a lens.
May 15, 2016 at 05:30 AM
p.43 #17Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Choppy seems to have higher contrast--more Zeiss like than I would have expected from CV. Too bad there is not more detail in the upper left and right corners as I sometimes wonder about field curvature/depth of field and plane of focus when comparing near ground corners. Still, it does look like there is likely a bit more detail (not just contrast) in the extreme corners on choppy. Would like to see something like this comparison at infinity. The tests on the kolari mod do indicate a slight improvement in corner sharpness over a stock A7r2, so does not surprise me to see choppy win in the extreme corner especially given that it is a prime lens.
May 15, 2016 at 12:24 PM
p.43 #18Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
Luvwine wrote:
Choppy seems to have higher contrast--more Zeiss like than I would have expected from CV. Too bad there is not more detail in the upper left and right corners as I sometimes wonder about field curvature/depth of field and plane of focus when comparing near ground corners. Still, it does look like there is likely a bit more detail (not just contrast) in the extreme corners on choppy. Would like to see something like this comparison at infinity. The tests on the kolari mod do indicate a slight improvement in corner sharpness over a stock A7r2, so does not surprise...Show more →
Thanks Luvwine. As far as I can tell at this moment, Choppy has the following advantages over my WATE:
* Higher contrast, micro- contrast across the entire image, sharper detail.
* Quite useable corners, (even at f/4.5) and particularly at f/5.6. WATE best be used at f/8.
* Significantly smaller geometrical distortion than the large mustache distortion of the WATE at 16-21mm.
* A factor of 6x lower new purchase price.
If others can add to this list, please be my guest, including advantages of the WATE.
Thanks again, K-H.
Choppy seems to have higher contrast--more Zeiss like than I would have expected from CV. Too bad there is not more detail in the upper left and right corners as I sometimes wonder about field curvature/depth of field and plane of focus when comparing near ground corners. Still, it does look like there is likely a bit more detail (not just contrast) in the extreme corners on choppy. Would like to see something like this comparison at infinity. The tests on the kolari mod do indicate a slight improvement in corner sharpness over a stock A7r2, so does not surprise...Show more →
Thanks Luvwine. As far as I can tell at this moment, Choppy has the following advantages over my WATE:
* Higher contrast, micro- contrast across the entire image, sharper detail.
* Quite useable corners, (even at f/4.5) and particularly at f/5.6. WATE best be used at f/8.
* Significantly smaller geometrical distortion than the large mustache distortion of the WATE at 16-21mm.
* A factor of 6x lower new purchase price.
If others can add to this list, please be my guest, including advantages of the WATE.
Thanks again, K-H.
May 15, 2016 at 01:58 PM
p.43 #19Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
k-h.a.w wrote:
Thanks Luvwine. As far as I can tell at this moment, Choppy has the following advantages over my WATE:
* Higher contrast, micro- contrast across the entire image, sharper detail.
* Quite useable corners, (even at f/4.5) and particularly at f/5.6. WATE best be used at f/8.
* Significantly smaller geometrical distortion than the large mustache distortion of the WATE at 16-21mm.
* A factor of 6x lower new purchase price.
If others can add to this list, please be my guest, including advantages of the WATE.
Thanks again, K-H.
Hi K-H,
Of course the WATE offers 3 focal lengths and everything in between. The WATE offers the Leica look while the CV 15III may show more the Zeiss look.
By the way for the WATE have you tested the lens on a Kolari Modified A7 series camera to see if the corners will hold up at f5.6?
Also, have you used the LR adjustments for the WATE profiles for the different focal lenghts to see if there is an improvement in the moustache distortion at different focal lengths? I have never used my for architectural subject matter at this point, only for nature.
Thanks.
Rich
Edited on May 15, 2016 at 02:32 PM · View previous versions
Luvwine wrote
Choppy seems to have higher contrast--more Zeiss like than I would have expected from CV. Too bad there is not more detail in the upper left and right corners as I sometimes wonder about field curvature/depth of field and plane of focus when comparing near ground corners. Still, it does look like there is likely a bit more detail (not just contrast) in the extreme corners on choppy. Would like to see something like this comparison at infinity. The tests on the kolari mod do indicate a slight improvement in corner sharpness over a stock A7r2, so does not surprise me to see choppy win in the extreme corner especially given that it is a prime lens.* Higher contrast, micro- contrast across the entire image, sharper detail.
* Quite useable corners, (even at f/4.5) and particularly at f/5.6. WATE best be used at f/8.
* Significantly smaller geometrical distortion than the large mustache distortion of the WATE at 16-21mm.
* A factor of 6x lower new purchase price.
If others can add to this list, please be my guest, including advantages of the WATE.
Thanks again, K-H.
Hi K-H,
Of course the WATE offers 3 focal lengths and everything in between. The WATE offers the Leica look while the CV 15III may show more the Zeiss look.
By the way for the WATE have you tested the lens on a Kolari Modified A7 series camera to see if the corners will hold up at f5.6?
Also, have you used the LR adjustments for the WATE profiles for the different focal lenghts to see if there is an improvement in the moustache distortion at different focal lengths? I have never used my for architectural subject matter at this point, only for nature.
Thanks.
Rich
Edited on May 15, 2016 at 02:32 PM · View previous versions
May 15, 2016 at 02:26 PM
p.43 #20Official: Voigtlander 15mm f/4.5 III E-mount
I do like the WATE simply because it's one lens in 3 focal lengths and if you did the math it's actually cheaper. Big one is one filter size too
Right now VC 15 is 58, Batis 18 is 67 and Loxia is 52. Really a PITA.
The really big downside on the CV 15 is finding a choppy. Apparently very very hard
Right now VC 15 is 58, Batis 18 is 67 and Loxia is 52. Really a PITA.
The really big downside on the CV 15 is finding a choppy. Apparently very very hard
May 15, 2016 at 02:31 PM