p.37 #1 · Pre-order: Voigtlander 110/2.5 Macro APO for $1,099
garydavidjones wrote:
Packing for a globe trotting trip depends on the style
of travel. Lengthy cruises and bus tours with definite
daily itineraries allow one to leave most equipment in
safes in cabin, room, or front desk while bringing
along lens/camera combos that are suitable for
that day's activity. For example, our last trip (5-week
cruise around Cape Horn from LA to Buenos Aires) my
wife and I brought 3 cameras and six lenses ranging
from 24-70 mm to 100-400 mm plus primes.
7D2 was useful for its built-in flash for inside photos
on the ship. (also carried external flash)
I am always mystified about how many fredmiranda.com
commenters say they bring second-rate, lighter
equipment to record once-in-a-lifetime, expensive
trips. If we have relatives in tow, we lend them
camera/lens combos (not latest models/don't sell
old equipment) so the relations can't complain about
photography hobby.
Obviously if we're going on a winter trip to Puerto
Vallarta to warm up, we would minimize.
Independent travel usually necessitates minimizing
the amount of equipment. We dress down and
put equipment in non-descript backpack when not
using.
Only theft we have had was a point and shot camera left on the dresser
of our hotel room in Greece in 1995.
After visiting over 100 countries in 25 years much of
our enjoyment is viewing photos and videos of these
trips. ...Show more →
Hi Gary,
What is your best travel gear? I'm curious why you posted this on the Voigtlander 110/2.5 APO thread. Which one of your lenses do you think will perform better than this one?
Personally when traveling I prefer bringing the Zeiss 85/4 ZM as my telephoto needs for its superb image quality at only 300g.
p.37 #2 · Pre-order: Voigtlander 110/2.5 Macro APO for $1,099
Excellent example Fred.
I have both the 85/4 ZM and 85/1.8 FE - The 85/4 ZM is really compact and optically superior, but no AF nor CPU contacts, while the other is faster and has great AF, but much more bulky. I choose depending on how much gear I want to bring and what the purpose of the trip is.
p.37 #5 · Pre-order: Voigtlander 110/2.5 Macro APO for $1,099
bjornthun wrote:
Hopefully the CV 110/2.5 weight is negotiable for outdoor use. The weather report for San Clemente looks really nice today.
I've been testing it today but still waiting for better lighting in a few hours.
I can advance that at infinity, it performed similarly to the CV 65/2 and Batis 135/2.8 APO lenses.
At macro, I tested it against the 65/2 + Marumi achromat (to get to 1:1 Macro) and they were surprisingly similar at center. However, off-axis, the 110 was way better (night and day)...So for serious 1:1 Macro, I would definitely prefer the 110 as it's sharp to the very edge of the frame at MFD.
Working distance (without the hood) is also much better in comparison (7 inches vs 3 inches)
My only reservation so far is flare if the sun is in the frame. There is definitely ghosting and veiling flare due to internal reflection. Similar to 65/2 though. If the sun it outside the frame, there is nothing to worry about.
Hopefully I will have enough files to start the rolling review today.
p.37 #6 · Pre-order: Voigtlander 110/2.5 Macro APO for $1,099
Hey Fred,
some Qs if i might:
- extention at various typical distances 1:1, 4:1 (a smallish thing), 8:1 (larger thing), head shot, env portrait
- focus breath
- stability extended and semi extended
- weight distribution
- focus throw for regular non-macro work (say infinity to 8:1)
- flare resistence
I found the CV65 exceptional except color/contrast/pop. Unlike the CV40 which has incredible depth. Some of the CV110 samples from Juha show some incredible potential for depth and presence (for a foggyish day no less).
Whats your take on depth CV110 vs B135 from your limited time with it? In the shots you posted, i'd prefer the CV110 to my surprise...
p.37 #10 · Pre-order: Voigtlander 110/2.5 Macro APO for $1,099
Bokehddicted wrote:
Hey Fred,
some Qs if i might:
- extention at various typical distances 1:1, 4:1 (a smallish thing), 8:1 (larger thing), head shot, env portrait
Minimal extension. About 10mm at 1:8 which is about 1m. (I wish this lens could do 4:1 and 8:1 )
- focus breath
It depends on the range. Not fully tested.
- stability extended and semi extended - weight distribution
It's a bit front-heavy, especially for 1:1 macro handheld which I do not recommend.
- focus throw for regular non-macro work (say infinity to 8:1)
Less than 90 degrees
- flare resistence
It's ok but definitely not a strength.
I found the CV65 exceptional except color/contrast/pop. Unlike the CV40 which has incredible depth. Some of the CV110 samples from Juha show some incredible potential for depth and presence (for a foggyish day no less).
My initial impression is that the CV 110 renders similarly to the CV 65 with high contrast on the plane of focus while still maintaining some contrast on the OOF area. Some photographers prefer low contrast outside the plane of focus but that's subjective and actually rare for high performance modern lenses. I didn't do much test on this yet.
Whats your take on depth CV110 vs B135 from your limited time with it? In the shots you posted, i'd prefer the CV110 to my surprise...
I see more contrast and deeper colors on the CV 110 images but the Batis seems to have a slight smoother rendering. It's also capable of a tad more blur when both lenses are equalized.
p.37 #13 · Pre-order: Voigtlander 110/2.5 Macro APO for $1,099
Mine shipped today, hopefully if the mailman doesn't somehow miss me tomorrow, I should have it. I also have the CV 125, so I guess I could do some comparisons. Finding the time will be the hard part.
p.37 #14 · Pre-order: Voigtlander 110/2.5 Macro APO for $1,099
Fred Miranda wrote:
Minimal extension. About 10mm at 1:8 which is about 1m. (I wish this lens could do 4:1 and 8:1 )
It depends on the range. Not fully tested.
It's a bit front-heavy, especially for 1:1 macro handheld which I do not recommend.
Less than 90 degrees
It's ok but definitely not a strength.
My initial impression is that the CV 110 renders similarly to the CV 65 with high contrast on the plane of focus while still maintaining some contrast on the OOF area. Some photographers prefer low contrast outside the plane of focus but that's subjective and actually rare for high performance modern lenses. I didn't do much test on this yet.
I see more contrast and deeper colors on the CV 110 images but the Batis seems to have a slight smoother rendering. It's also capable of a tad more blur when both lenses are equalized....Show more →
Well, remember that the blur amount difference could be a function of actual f-stop vs. indicated. We all know that the labelled max aperture (and focal length) are not the technical actual. That plus stopping a f/2.5 lens down to f/2.8 to match a wide open f/2.8 lens may not show the same amount of blur because of the finite number of aperture blades and the difference in actual f-stop. So differences are to be expected - interesting comparison, but not quite apples-to-apples.
p.37 #16 · Pre-order: Voigtlander 110/2.5 Macro APO for $1,099
Fred Miranda wrote:
My only reservation so far is flare if the sun is in the frame. There is definitely ghosting and veiling flare due to internal reflection. Similar to 65/2 though. If the sun it outside the frame, there is nothing to worry about.
Hopefully I will have enough files to start the rolling review today.
I won't be taking any images with the high overhead sun in the frame with this lens, rather for landscapes it would be a much less bright setting sun in the frame with a dark foreground. Ghosting/flare and general loss of contrast in this situation are of concern. My old Nikkors have this problem, but they have 40 year old coating technology and ought to have issues.
Really only one way to find out - buy one and give it a go!
p.37 #17 · Pre-order: Voigtlander 110/2.5 Macro APO for $1,099
jhinkey wrote:
Well, remember that the blur amount difference could be a function of actual f-stop vs. indicated. We all know that the labelled max aperture (and focal length) are not the technical actual. That plus stopping a f/2.5 lens down to f/2.8 to match a wide open f/2.8 lens may not show the same amount of blur because of the finite number of aperture blades and the difference in actual f-stop. So differences are to be expected - interesting comparison, but not quite apples-to-apples.
It's not apples to apples but it's a way to compare lenses with different FLs and maximum apertures.
From my calculations, the blur amount (CV 110 vs Batis 135) should be similar but the Batis will have a slight advantage when all variables are equalized. (That's visible on the samples I posted)
I think the best here is not to compare lenses too much and just take portraits and other scenes so we can evaluate overall rendering.
p.37 #19 · Pre-order: Voigtlander 110/2.5 Macro APO for $1,099
Not compare lenses too much? Lol
On here?
Good one!
Fred Miranda wrote:
It's not apples to apples but it's a way to compare lenses with different FLs and maximum apertures.
From my calculations, the blur amount (CV 110 vs Batis 135) should be similar but the Batis will have a slight advantage when all variables are equalized. (That's visible on the samples I posted)
I think the best here is not to compare lenses too much and just take portraits and other scenes so we can evaluate overall rendering.
