p.12 #1 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
This one deserves to sell in very large numbers. Tiny, affordable, such an easy carry. Common filter size, and Zeiss could learn something about where to put the aperture ring and CV knurling. CV's M heritage is really paying off for us. But even test shots and the nice interiors a few pages back - very nice depth, color, very satisfying and balanced all round. It will have many people wondering why they need the four figure lenses, and others eager to see what CV does for us next. Thanks very much Fred and Guy.
PS would be great to see a slower 45/50 from them too.
PS2 will 21/24s see the more specialized f1.4 and ~f3.5 lenses win out over the 'foot in each camp' 2.4/2.8 lot? Always loved the idea of Leica's 21 and 24 Super Elmars at 3.4 and 3.8. This one is so much better than a poor man's version of them, might even do them too. And it rates so well against the Loxia.
p.12 #2 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
Yea I’m a pretty delighted how well it does against the Loxia 21/25 as I don’t feel I’m leaving any IQ behind. I’m kind of a pig about IQ and I feel very comfortable with this and not having the Loxia 21. I’ll keep the 25 for sure.
p.12 #3 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
philip_pj wrote:
PS2 will 21/24s see the more specialized f1.4 and ~f3.5 lenses win out over the 'foot in each camp' 2.4/2.8 lot?
I don't consider the 21/25 Loxias as having a foot in each camp. They are ideal for my landscapes where I never need F1.4. They are unchallenged in terms of IQ by any of the faster or slower options, the aperture of 2.4/2.8 with low coma wide open is great for astro (and helps to compose in low light), and size/weight is already superb. I see absolutely no need for anything smaller when photography is the priority.
Although their price is certainly not cheap, they are so good that I have pretty much lost interest in looking at alternatives at these focal lengths. I suspect that's going to be quite a saving in the long run...
Oct 24, 2018 at 09:01 PM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #4 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
A few from the Art Museum (aka Rocky) Steps. Sun was as harsh as you could ask for, but it was clear here. These were all at f/8. It may be worth noting that, on my copy, the distant buildings (approx 1/2 mile away) were *before* infinity, and if I focused on infinity, they were ever-so-slightly soft. Backed up a little and they were pin sharp.
My camera is not meant to be a "landscape camera", but at this FOV and distance, it is tough to imagine a practical application were I'd things that far away to be in critical focus. Maybe Astro, but I haven't had a chance to test it for that yet. Dialed back another .5mm, and everything from the Parkway (1/4mi) to the steps (50ft) was in sharp focus. It is very, VERY easy to zone focus with this lens at f/8.
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
p.12 #5 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
It's worth pointing out that we are examining images at infinity @1:1 magnification though. At closer distances this is not even noticeable.
I'd say, the differences between the Voigtlander 21 and Loxia 21/25 lenses are small and we are really experiencing diminishing returns here. If I didn't already have the Loxia 21 (which I paid full price for), I would definitely consider the Voigtlander 21/3.5 to complement my Lox 25/2.4 for landscapes.
p.12 #6 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
GMPhotography wrote:
Should be noted here as not to confuse anyone. A lot of members here including myself have full AF lenses as well for there kits when in that type of shooting mode. Hobbyists fall into several categories from having a very basic kit than run the gamut to having far more lenses than someone like myself that’s a working Pro. It really depends on where one might be in photography experience for lack of a better word. Some folks may completely ignore MF lenses but than you get folks that’s all they shoot to the combination crowd. As a Pro I love the enthusiasm of the hobbyist crowd, I really do. I think it’s awesome folks are out creating ART, producing amazing images and making their life outside of real work more fun. My hobby is Golf and I’m addicted too. ...Show more →
Yea, the reason I never pulled the trigger on a Loxia is that while I enjoy photography, and have been doing it for almost 30yrs, I couldn't justify the price of a Lox given the amount of day-to-day photography that I do.
I rented a CV 40, and just loved it.It really started working those creative muscles again. And I see the 21 as a great lens to taking hiking without breaking the bank, or back.
p.12 #9 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
I’ve just compared the CV 21 vs Loxia 25 Broncotest images with the ones posted by Guy from his test of the Sony 24-105 (https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1527364/1). The results of my inspection (sharpness-microcontrast) are the following:
Center at f/3.5 vs f/4.0:
CV 21 very slightly worse than the zoom
L 25 slightly better than the zoom
Corners at f/3.5 vs f/4.0:
CV 21 similar to the zoom (slightly worse than the zoom in extreme areas of the corners)
L 25 more than slightly better than the zoom (only slightly in extreme areas of the corners)
Center at f/5.6:
CV 21 slightly worse than the zoom
L 25 slightly better than the zoom (in some positions L25 and zoom are similar)
Corners at f/5.6:
CV 21 similar to the zoom (slightly worse than the zoom in extreme areas of the corners)
L 25 more than slightly better than the zoom
p.12 #11 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
See and some critize Big Bronco wall test. It’s actually a proven record over the years of all the lenses that went against it. So in a pinch it can be used to give a more critical test of lenses at different dates
p.12 #13 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
Enri wrote:
Guy: any comments on the results?
It's not surprising that the 24-105/4G may perform slightly better than the CV 21/3.5. There could be a few reasons for that:
1) It's perhaps the best 24-105/4G zooms ever made.
2) It's optimized for the wide range
3) It has almost twice the number of elements and therefore better corrected
4) All things equalized, a 24mm lens will always perform better than a 21mm lens
I'm sure you are comparing them at 1:1 mag. and since there are a lot of "slightly" adverbs in your comparison, we can all agree they are pretty much similar in regards to resolution. Contrast is hard to say since you were comparing images taken during different lighting.
p.12 #17 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
GMPhotography wrote:
See and some critize Big Bronco wall test. It’s actually a proven record over the years of all the lenses that went against it. So in a pinch it can be used to give a more critical test of lenses at different dates
Thanks, Guy, for the BB C/V 21 test. Your landscape infinity test really shows the mid-zone dip. We're all familiar with mid-zone dips: hell, Leica has a patent on them. But the C/V is particularly acute and localized—quite mysterious. Overall, an excellent value and so small. Congrats to Mr K!
BTW, I put a mechanics lien on the BB building so they can't tear it down without my being informed beforehand.
