p.6 #2 · Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2 Lens tests with PCX Front Filter
DavidBM wrote:
Interesting. My Yeenon is the older one without infinity lock (the newer ones do have it) but the resistance is just perfect - that's what I like about it - silky smooth firm brass helicoid. No skew. I just tested it for infinity because @phillip reeve@ was wondering if it could be used with lenses with front filters, but sadly infinity is at (one on M) and just before (on another) the hard stop.Maybe Shoten is not Yeenon (or as you say unit issue). It's possible it isn't: there are a ton of CV clones out there (Tinray etc) which the Shoten could be. But only Yeenon, as far as I know, makes a range of rather nicely engineered designs of their own......Show more →
With mine the resistance is pretty small and not bad at all when actually using the helicoid but I think it's pretty easy to rotate a little by accident when not intending to use the helicoid. When I'm shooting with a helicoid adapter I only typically do close ups requiring adapter helicoid extension every once in a while like 1% of the shots, so it's important to have it stay firmly in unextended position most of the time. Shoten just looks exactly identical to Yeenon except for the branding and printed text so I though it must most likely be rebranded Yeenon. Others seemed to comment similarly in some articles that showcased the Shoten adapter. I should find the sales box in my closet and look at the paperwork to see if there are more hints about the origin there...
Anyway, originally I bought the Shoten because I thought I might find use for the extended helicoid extension over CV (6mm vs. 4mm) but in reality I don't ever need to shoot at closer than 4mm extension and the IQ usually gets worse when utilizing the helicoid to the max. And then the skew that seemed to be there based on one test turned me off from using it altogether.
I do like the Shoten better than CV in one area, i.e. weight as it's considerably lighter. The worst part of CV adapter is the weight as I'd like to keep my setup with small RF lenses as light as possible. Then my Rayqual often comes into play as it's way lighter than both and built perfectly and actually my favorite, very close to spec thickness. So much so that on my A7II many of my lenses had their ideal infinity right at the hard stop of the lens with the Rayqual which I liked a lot. No helicoid with Rayqual but I can often go without the helicoid extension.
p.6 #3 · Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2 Lens tests with PCX Front Filter
By the way, I'm surprised that 28/2 Ultron is giving so good results on A7rII without any PCX. I remember some people I know were pretty disappointed with the performance of 28/2 Ultron on their original A7 cameras (after using it on Nex-6 or Nex-7) and found smearing on the edges etc. It was also never reported to work that well with A7r. At the time I had the 28/1.9 Ultron LTM which had pretty heavy FC on A7r and A7II so eventually I sold it and I never got the 28/2.
Nowadays I have Minolta M-Rokkor 28/2.8 (very clean one) and Avenon 28/3.5 LTM (Kobalux in the U.S. market but discontinued since 2002) and they are both pretty decent and very small. The Avenon is unexpectedly sharp corner-to-corner at f5.6. I use them for cityscapes and street, not for landscape though.
p.6 #4 · Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2 Lens tests with PCX Front Filter
Juha Kannisto wrote:
With mine the resistance is pretty small and not bad at all when actually using the helicoid but I think it's pretty easy to rotate a little by accident when not intending to use the helicoid. When I'm shooting with a helicoid adapter I only typically do close ups requiring adapter helicoid extension every once in a while like 1% of the shots, so it's important to have it stay firmly in unextended position most of the time. Shoten just looks exactly identical to Yeenon except for the branding and printed text so I though it must most likely be rebranded Yeenon. Others seemed to comment similarly in some articles that showcased the Shoten adapter. I should find the sales box in my closet and look at the paperwork to see if there are more hints about the origin there...
Anyway, originally I bought the Shoten because I thought I might find use for the extended helicoid extension over CV (6mm vs. 4mm) but in reality I don't ever need to shoot at closer than 4mm extension and the IQ usually gets worse when utilizing the helicoid to the max. And then the skew that seemed to be there based on one test turned me off from using it altogether.
I do like the Shoten better than CV in one area, i.e. weight as it's considerably lighter. The worst part of CV adapter is the weight as I'd like to keep my setup with small RF lenses as light as possible. Then my Rayqual often comes into play as it's way lighter than both and built perfectly and actually my favorite, very close to spec thickness. So much so that on my A7II many of my lenses had their ideal infinity right at the hard stop of the lens with the Rayqual which I liked a lot. No helicoid with Rayqual but I can often go without the helicoid extension....Show more →
The Yeenon is only about 20g lighter than the CV: how heavy is the Shoten? That might tell us if they are the same (The Hawks is about 75 g lighter)
p.6 #5 · Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2 Lens tests with PCX Front Filter
Juha Kannisto wrote:
By the way, I'm surprised that 28/2 Ultron is giving so good results on A7rII without any PCX. I remember some people I know were pretty disappointed with the performance of 28/2 Ultron on their original A7 cameras (after using it on Nex-6 or Nex-7) and found smearing on the edges etc. It was also never reported to work that well with A7r. At the time I had the 28/1.9 Ultron LTM which had pretty heavy FC on A7r and A7II so eventually I sold it and I never got the 28/2.
Nowadays I have Minolta M-Rokkor 28/2.8 (very clean one) and Avenon 28/3.5 LTM (Kobalux in the U.S. market but discontinued since 2002) and they are both pretty decent and very small. The Avenon is unexpectedly sharp corner-to-corner at f5.6. I use them for cityscapes and street, not for landscape though....Show more →
I'm very surprised as well. The corners are actually at excellent levels at f/5.6 and f/6.7 on my A7RII. Basically it's a great lens for landscapes. What I think happened, is that some folks didn't realize this lens has heavy focus shift. So, shooting at working aperture is a must. (I believe it would be the case on a Leica as well)
p.6 #8 · Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2 Lens tests with PCX Front Filter
DavidBM wrote:
The Yeenon is only about 20g lighter than the CV: how heavy is the Shoten? That might tell us if they are the same (The Hawks is about 75 g lighter)
I'll re-measure the weight again this evening once I get home. From memory I feel it was more than 20g lighter than CV (like 30-40g) but I don't remember exact figures right now. Will get back on that later today!
p.6 #9 · Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2 Lens tests with PCX Front Filter
Fred Miranda wrote:
I'm very surprised as well. The corners are actually at excellent levels at f/5.6 and f/6.7 on my A7RII. Basically it's a great lens for landscapes. What I think happened, is that some folks didn't realize this lens has heavy focus shift. So, shooting at working aperture is a must. (I believe it would be the case on a Leica as well)
Thanks for detailed info! If there's no new native 28/2 in the next few months I may need to start thinking about getting the Ultron 28/2 Now trying to stay away from purchasing more lenses for a few months...
p.6 #10 · Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2 Lens tests with PCX Front Filter
Fred Miranda wrote:
I'm very surprised as well. The corners are actually at excellent levels at f/5.6 and f/6.7 on my A7RII. Basically it's a great lens for landscapes. What I think happened, is that some folks didn't realize this lens has heavy focus shift. So, shooting at working aperture is a must. (I believe it would be the case on a Leica as well)
Sorry Fred, I don’t quite get your point here. Focus shift may be a concern on rangefinder cameras or using native lenses on reflex/mirrorless systems because those lenses usually focus full open and stop down when the shutter fires, but M lenses are totally manual. You always shoot at working aperture with them because the camera can’t control the diaphragm. Focus shift shouldn’t matter at all using the CV28/2 on A7 cameras.
p.6 #11 · Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2 Lens tests with PCX Front Filter
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I'll re-measure the weight again this evening once I get home. From memory I feel it was more than 20g lighter than CV (like 30-40g) but I don't remember exact figures right now. Will get back on that later today!
OK, now re-measured all my 4 current M to Sony E adapters without any caps on them:
Shoten close focus: 89 g
CV close focus: 120 g
TAP: 134 g
Rayqual: 42 g
p.6 #12 · Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2 Lens tests with PCX Front Filter
artur5 wrote:
Sorry Fred, I don’t quite get your point here. Focus shift may be a concern on rangefinder cameras or using native lenses on reflex/mirrorless systems because those lenses usually focus full open and stop down when the shutteretter fires, but M lenses are totally manual. You always shoot at working aperture with them because the camera can’t control the diaphragm. Focus shift shouldn’t matter at all using the CV28/2 on A7 cameras.
Arthur what some of us do is focus wide open than stop down to shoot. I actually do this because I can see focus better under magnification better wide open than once I achieve focus I’ll stop it down and than shoot. Instead of just focusing directly at the working aperture. The problem lies is stopping down after you already have focus this lens has a focus shift issue. My 35 1.7 it’s extremely small so it’s not showing up.
p.6 #14 · Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2 Lens tests with PCX Front Filter
So I went back to Big Bronco. Couple of conclusions. First off Fred is correct with the focus shift. It is there its not so much huge but its there for sure. Secondly the PCX 5000 actually does improve the corners and mid frame pretty darn good. Im leaning to the fact that the PCX 2500 Fred used is actually over correcting and Im also tending to think if a PCX 3500 or 4000 would be the proper one but have to say the PCX 5000 really is doing a nice job. Im actually thinking I could interchange them .
I shot 4 series of images from F2-F8 separated by my hand in the image.
So here is exactly what I did
Series 1 focused at F2 and left it there and stopped down to F8
Series 2 focused and refocused at working aperture. I can see a little better improvement
Series 3 same as 1 but added PCX 5000
Series 4 same as 2 and added PCX 5000
Love for folks to analyze these as well and see if your seeing what I am seeing.
So I would load them up compare Series 1/2 and you will see the focus shift
Than given you see that well than compare 2/4 as they both are using the stop down method of focusing but Series 4 has the PCX 5000 and you can see a clear improvement
Now having said all that I am not at infinity and as Fred tested at infinity that they maybe a difference in results between infinity and about 30 feet.
Thinking about this more with Fred results at infinity with the PCX 2500, I recall testing one lens with a filter that was too strong and the improvements went in the opposite direct and got worse by over correcting. I tend to think this is what is happening with Fred infinity test. Actually i would bet a dozen donuts on it and be happy to lose as well.
p.6 #15 · Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2 Lens tests with PCX Front Filter
At infinity, I see a very small improvement with the 5m while the 2.5m actually deteriorates IQ.
The improvement at 5m is small enough that I would not even bother with it, especially at smaller apertures.
You may be right that a SLB-50-4000PM may be ideal (even for the CV35/1.7)...
p.6 #18 · Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2 Lens tests with PCX Front Filter
Did you focus this at f/8? that's very hard to nail focus, I would not pass f/5.6 even if shooting at f/8.
After f/4, focus shift is not longer an issue. The main issue is focusing wide open or close to it and stopping down shooting.
At infinity and f/5.6, the difference between 5m and no filter, is smaller on my test. Much smaller than shown above.
p.6 #19 · Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2 Lens tests with PCX Front Filter
Yes but even the 5.6 I can see it. But it does get dark at F8 when focusing so makes it really tough. I would say I would be more accurate at 5.6 because at F8 could be user error(ME). Lol
Now trying to stay away from purchasing more lenses for a few months...
