I am glad you liked my flooded forest shot. I was not sure if I should show it in its original colour or a B+W conversion. I liked the colour of the reeds in contrast to the grey, dead cedar trees.
jowul wrote:
I am glad you liked my flooded forest shot. I was not sure if I should show it in its original colour or a B+W conversion. I liked the colour of the reeds in contrast to the grey, dead cedar trees.
Both shots are fantastic but I agree with you that the color one is kind of special.
I was thinking of buying that Marumi Achromat macro 200 lens (+5) for it.
Can someone who has it, please post some sample of macro photo, closest possible?
I mean I would like to see what this +5 lens can do on 40mm lens, how close you can get, compared to real 1:1 macro lens.
Gentlemen (and ladies if any are following this thread). I knew from the reviews and images when this lens came out it was a lens for me. I know some of these questions have probably been asked ad nauseum but the thread is so long now I would never get through it all. Someone please humor me!
1. If you had both E and M Mount, does this lens seem more of a fit with either camera type (ergonomically, functionally, resulting IQ or an unexplainable ‘natural fit’)? Also, does the M version adapt well to E Mount or are the versions optimized optically to their native mounts?
2. How prone is this lens to being a dud out of the box? Is it risky to buy used? (I buy most of my gear used here) Also, how do you folks test a lens like this? I’m not sure a basic decentered test would be the best way… or is it?
dog rocket wrote:
Gentlemen (and ladies if any are following this thread). I knew from the reviews and images when this lens came out it was a lens for me. I know some of these questions have probably been asked ad nauseum but the thread is so long now I would never get through it all. Someone please humor me!
1. If you had both E and M Mount, does this lens seem more of a fit with either camera type (ergonomically, functionally, resulting IQ or an unexplainable ‘natural fit’)? Also, does the M version adapt well to E Mount or are the versions optimized optically to their native mounts?
2. How prone is this lens to being a dud out of the box? Is it risky to buy used? (I buy most of my gear used here) Also, how do you folks test a lens like this? I’m not sure a basic decentered test would be the best way… or is it?
My experience is that lenses deigned for the Leica M mount do suffer some degradation when being adapted on an E-mount camera. From what I understand this is due to the sensor's filter stack thickness. I have found that this varies considerably depending on the lens model. My CV 28mm f/2 Ultron M mount was much worse at the edges on my Sony A1. My version 2 of this lens is much better. My 75mm f/1.5 Nokton was good on both. I only have the E-mount version of the CV 40mm f/1.2 so cannot comment on how much this is true for this specific lens. Now that I shoot Voitlander lenses primarily on my Leica bodies, I will selling some of my E-mount versions. I will not sell tha 40mm f/1.2 however. It is too special. I will keep it.
I have never had an issue with any of the Voigtlander lenses I have for either my E-mount, or my M mount cameras. The quality is very high on all of my lenses.
I have found that our fellow FM members who sell here on FM are knowledgeable, and straight forward about representing the lenses they sell. FM is the only place other that big resellers with return privileges that I buy used gear. Very low risk. Even lower when buying quality manufactured things like Voigtlander lenses.
My experience is that lenses deigned for the Leica M mount do suffer some degradation when being adapted on an E-mount camera. From what I understand this is due to the sensor's filter stack thickness. I have found that this varies considerably depending on the lens model. My CV 28mm f/2 Ultron M mount was much worse at the edges on my Sony A1. My version 2 of this lens is much better. My 75mm f/1.5 Nokton was good on both. I only have the E-mount version of the CV 40mm f/1.2 so cannot comment on how much this is true for this specific lens. Now that I shoot Voitlander lenses primarily on my Leica bodies, I will selling some of my E-mount versions. I will not sell tha 40mm f/1.2 however. It is too special. I will keep it.
I have never had an issue with any of the Voigtlander lenses I have for either my E-mount, or my M mount cameras. The quality is very high on all of my lenses.
I have found that our fellow FM members who sell here on FM are knowledgeable, and straight forward about representing the lenses they sell. FM is the only place other that big resellers with return privileges that I buy used gear. Very low risk. Even lower when buying quality manufactured things like Voigtlander lenses.
Thanks! Yeah, I know about the whole med to wide angle sensor issue with M glass on Sony but not about this lens in particular. I'm a pretty big trader on the B&S boards with a 134 rating. I have a couple of older digital Leica rangefinders and just came full circle back to Sony mirrorless after a number of years away simply because I need a camera in my kit that I don't mind using as a 'kick around' camera that I can take anywhere and don't have to be overly concerned with it getting 'picked' from my car (or body!) I'm also interested whether anyone here has adapted this lens to a Leica SL2 and how well it pairs (the M mount version, of course).
Good to know about the 75/1.5! Another lens that has my interest.
phinix wrote:
I was thinking of buying that Marumi Achromat macro 200 lens (+5) for it.
Can someone who has it, please post some sample of macro photo, closest possible?
I mean I would like to see what this +5 lens can do on 40mm lens, how close you can get, compared to real 1:1 macro lens.
I do not have the Marumi Achromat macro 200, however I shot these two photos with the Raynox M250 on the Voigtländer Nokton 40/1.2 using the A6600. Both photos are handheld at f4.0 comp_DSC03124-2 by Joachim Wulfers, on Flickr
I'm also interested whether anyone here has adapted this lens to a Leica SL2 and how well it pairs (the M mount version, of course). 
