Well, I finally got a hold of one of these VM Heliar 50mm 3.5s. Definitely one of the sharpest lenses that I own. It takes awhile to get comfortable with it's operation, but once that is done, it really is quite a performer. This is just a test shot, followed by a major (100%) crop. I am very pleased with rich colors and overall IQ. I think with a 75mm view on my crop sensor TL2, it will make a really nice portrait lens also.
I have the version III. When it is used with my Voigtlander Close Focus adapter locked on non-close-focus setting, the collapsed lens does not extend beyond the adapter. So when collapsed and mounted on the camera, the lens will not protrude into the body of the camera. I have no fear of collapsing this lens when mounted with an adapter on my Sony A7iii. You can see for yourself what the collapsed lens looks like in your adapter. Of course if you do not have this lens yet and are asking to collect information in consideration of purchase, you can take my work for it.
The version I had was the latest that does not collapse, but in Nikon rangefinder S mount.
I really don't like that the aperture ring rotates with the focus ring. Pretty much the worse handling lens I had apart from my Lomo Neptune series lenses. Excellent optics though.
Desmolicious wrote:
I really don't like that the aperture ring rotates with the focus ring. Pretty much the worse handling lens I had apart from my Lomo Neptune series lenses. Excellent optics though.
Same here.
The aperture ring rotating with the focus together with the numbers being hard to see are my biggest complaints. The outstanding contrast is what makes me forgive it.
Desmolicious wrote:
The version I had was the latest that does not collapse, but in Nikon rangefinder S mount.
I really don't like that the aperture ring rotates with the focus ring. Pretty much the worse handling lens I had apart from my Lomo Neptune series lenses. Excellent optics though.
I also have the Nikon Rangefinder S mount version of the 50mm Heliar. It requires an adapter that can focus it. I use the Voigtlander Close Focus adapter. So the lens focuses without rotating. This leaves the aperture scale upright all the time. This resolves the aperture ring unpleasantness and replaces it with needing to focus using the adapter and having no focus scale.
This is my favorite way to use this lens on the Sony.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Same here.
The aperture ring rotating with the focus together with the numbers being hard to see are my biggest complaints. The outstanding contrast is what makes me forgive it.
If they just put the optics of this lens in a normal body, I'd be all over it! Something like my Color Skopar 50 2.5 - it would be tiny!
I prefer the Heliar a lot more. I never really like the handling of the Elmar but I really like the handling of the Heliar - it so smooth but it is annoying that the lens rotates - the Elmar does not.
The Elmar is lighter but the Heliar is not heavy - for me and I am weight sensitive - they are both light enough.
The main thing for me is that the Heliar is amazing - the sharpness, 3d pop, fall-off and hi-light control are brilliant. I found the Elmar to be good but not amazing. Something of note is that the Heliar has amazing separation for 3,5 - I would say better than the 2,8 of the Elmar (but the Elmar can take in more light).
Thank you for the answer! I am using a cron iv now, and I am liking the size and weight a lot, the optics not so much and also I do not need f2
Have you used cron ? And in case so, how would you characterize the sharphness of elmar and heliar compared ?
the Heliar has the weight of my cron, the elmar is lighter, that was motivating my question also. Are you using filters and/or protection filters with the heliar ? It seems it has a very small thread.
thanks again !!!!
tri_fin wrote:
I had the Elmar-m and now have the Heliar 3.5.
I prefer the Heliar a lot more. I never really like the handling of the Elmar but I really like the handling of the Heliar - it so smooth but it is annoying that the lens rotates - the Elmar does not.
The Elmar is lighter but the Heliar is not heavy - for me and I am weight sensitive - they are both light enough.
The main thing for me is that the Heliar is amazing - the sharpness, 3d pop, fall-off and hi-light control are brilliant. I found the Elmar to be good but not amazing. Something of note is that the Heliar has amazing separation for 3,5 - I would say better than the 2,8 of the Elmar (but the Elmar can take in more light). ...Show more →
I have had a rigid cron and a later one - I really liked them - the problem with the cron for me was flare. I shoot a lot into the sun and this is a weak point with the cron. They are also quite expensive and I found I could get more for less with Voigtlander compared to Leica.
Maybe a cron and a Heliar / Elmar could be said to be very different. I would say that the Heliar/ Elmar strengths lie in the clarity of the image. Low glass count gives a clear, simple - life like image. The cron is a more subtle controlled look. If you are really interested in the difference I would say you have try for yourself. The cron is a brilliant lens but so are the Elmar/ Heliar. Neither is better or worse just slightly different. If weight / size is important the the Elmar wins - that’s an easy choice!
I have to say that I think I am going to sell my heliar despite saying how amazing it is! I have an apo 50mm f2 and have been trying to decide between this and the heliar. I’ve been out the part two days with Heliar and I can’t deal with the lens markings. I don’t have great close vision and I just can’t read the markings. It drove me insane yesterday… I also have the 50/1.5 & 40/2.8 voigtlander Heliars so I probably have too many!
I find choosing lenses really hard. I think it’s best to just pick a good one and try and get the best out it. I dread to think how much cash I’ve burned by changing lenses…
Flare is very very intense, similar IMHO to one TT lens I had once. They are expensive for what they are. Sharpness is also not amazing IMHO. I have heliar 40 and i like it a lot: tiny, sharph, nice colors, prize ok, collapsible. thanks for the infos
tri_fin wrote:
I have had a rigid cron and a later one - I really liked them - the problem with the cron for me was flare. I shoot a lot into the sun and this is a weak point with the cron. They are also quite expensive and I found I could get more for less with Voigtlander compared to Leica.
Maybe a cron and a Heliar / Elmar could be said to be very different. I would say that the Heliar/ Elmar strengths lie in the clarity of the image. Low glass count gives a clear, simple - life like image. The cron is a more subtle controlled look. If you are really interested in the difference I would say you have try for yourself. The cron is a brilliant lens but so are the Elmar/ Heliar. Neither is better or worse just slightly different. If weight / size is important the the Elmar wins - that’s an easy choice!
I have to say that I think I am going to sell my heliar despite saying how amazing it is! I have an apo 50mm f2 and have been trying to decide between this and the heliar. I’ve been out the part two days with Heliar and I can’t deal with the lens markings. I don’t have great close vision and I just can’t read the markings. It drove me insane yesterday… I also have the 50/1.5 & 40/2.8 voigtlander Heliars so I probably have too many!
I find choosing lenses really hard. I think it’s best to just pick a good one and try and get the best out it. I dread to think how much cash I’ve burned by changing lenses…...Show more →
