I may be interested to adapt this lens in the Sony A7.
I see that it comes in different mounts, Nikon, Pentax and M42 mainly. Is any of them preferable? I have Nikon Rayqual adapter, but the Nikon version of the lens seems to be in higher demand and or is more expensive. Any thoughts?
I may be interested to adapt this lens in the Sony A7.
I see that it comes in different mounts, Nikon, Pentax and M42 mainly. Is any of them preferable? I have Nikon Rayqual adapter, but the Nikon version of the lens seems to be in higher demand and or is more expensive. Any thoughts?
Any experience with the lens?
Regards
Yep I have one in M42.
There’s no reason to choose mounts except by availability and price of adopters and the price of the lens.
I’m guessing most are sold to mirrorless users, but of course the Nikon version will be used and purchased by Nikon F mount users too (so may the K mount version but there are far fewer K mount users)
I have a K-mount version. It seems that it and the M42 version are often cheaper than the Nikon or Canon versions, YMMV. Great lens, if you search the forum you'll find several threads with images. Mine doesn't get a ton of use, but I'm always very happy with the results when it does.
may I ask why it does not see a lot of use? you prefer other alternatives?
regards
austinschutz wrote:
I have a K-mount version. It seems that it and the M42 version are often cheaper than the Nikon or Canon versions, YMMV. Great lens, if you search the forum you'll find several threads with images. Mine doesn't get a ton of use, but I'm always very happy with the results when it does.
Very nice lens! And rare. By one estimate, only 1800-2500 in existence as it was only made for a few months. This lens is sharp as heck at f4, and is unique for its size at this focal length.
I have a M42 version myself. I think the M42 version may be less preferred by some since it it screw mount, not bayonet. No problems coming loose in my experience, if that's a concern. Focus works like butter and reaches infinity no problem on two different (K&F concept and other cheap) adapters.
One downside for adapting the Nikon F version is the aperture control lever on the outside (the sharp metal prongs). It can be removed for use I suppose though.
These are pretty minor differences, so things like the condition and inclusion of the original box will affect the price more.
My sees limited use as well, but I won't sell it.
It's my compact (though not light weight) vacation and hiking tele lens that I can shoot wide open.
Great contrast, color, and sharpness. Bit fiddly to focus at infinity, but is workable with the A7RIII.
Really wish CV would put out a native FE mount version. Would snap it up instantly at just about any price . . .
JH, you are a hard marker if you feel any 180mm lens is not lightweight at 485 grams. It shares filter size with Sony's tiny FE 55/1.8 - 49mm. Klaus Schroiff said back in 2007 that the SL Voigts were the '"unofficial" predecessors of the Zeiss ZF/ZS series lenses'.
'The Voigtlander APO-Lanthar 180mm f/4 SL is one of the forgotten marvels..Optically it is a very good performer without any major weaknesses - it is very sharp, shows very little vignetting and distortions, and CAs and purple fringing are basically non-issues. The build quality is excellent.'
Now imagine adding a decade of glass and design technology to this already desirable base. It's a significant hole at the long end of the Voigt range, and a new age 180mm would be a doddle to focus with IBIS/EVF.
People are schlepping around the high mass (1400 gram) GM 100-400 - a slower, variable aperture job that looks like it escaped from NASA. Three times the weight and size of the V180, and at $2500 twice the likely price of a new 180/4. And the natural environment for such lenses are far from the beaten track, meaning a tough carry.
Even as we see large numbers of fast cookie cutter 100-135mm lenses battling for attention among the fashionistas, the photographic world has become myopic for manual focus users - Zeiss and Cosina are speed-limiting their products to 110mm!
After the 110/2.5, hope springs eternal however: 65 - 110 - 180 has a solid progression to it. I'll talk to my Voigt distributor in Sydney, ask them to pass on the feedback.
Just as a point of reference, I had a CV 180 and sold it after getting a Contax 100-300. Why, you may ask? It's true that the 180 is tiny and light. But the Contax is a superb lens - I did extensive testing and could see almost no difference between them. For every shot where the Voigt seemed a hair better, there was another where the reverse was true. The Contax, while larger and heavier, is still quite compact and light, and I decided to defer to its greater flexibility.
philip_pj wrote:
JH, you are a hard marker if you feel any 180mm lens is not lightweight at 485 grams. It shares filter size with Sony's tiny FE 55/1.8 - 49mm. Klaus Schroiff said back in 2007 that the SL Voigts were the '"unofficial" predecessors of the Zeiss ZF/ZS series lenses'.
After the 110/2.5, hope springs eternal however: 65 - 110 - 180 has a solid progression to it. I'll talk to my Voigt distributor in Sydney, ask them to pass on the feedback.
Yes, I am a hard marker, especially when you have to add a 70gm or so adapter to get from Nikon to E mount
But I take it on vacation anyways along with:
16/3.5 Nikkor
21/3.5 CV
85/1.8 Sony or 85/4 ZM (if I really want a compact kit . . )
RX1RII (that's my 35mm "lens" and backup disaster camera)
A7RIII
Fisheye to 180mm in a very small package and reasonable weight.
I will never slog a zoom on a vacation unless I'm in Iceland and the 100-400GM is worth the hassle to get it there and carry it around.
I now have 21/3.5, 40/1.2, 65/2, 110/2.5 in the current CV line and a renewed 180/4 APO would be a great addition as you alluded to.
I have written a letter to Cosina which our CV distributor has agreed to pass on to them. Thinking about the 'stepping' in FLs, they could produce an all APO range of 65/2, 110/2.5 and 180/4, with a 65-70% step up each time. I made the point that the older 2003 180/4 deters buyers by its elevated price levels and concern about the care by former owners.
They also could look forward to extra sales to Nikon and Canon mirrorless users in the near future. The rate at which these guys are turning out lenses, maybe they will be interested. It's not like they need to change much, and they have a lot of glass expertise and are building momentum fast. We who venture into the back country have so little choice at present apart from the large zooms or older high end primes.
I used to own the M42 version. I don't want to think about the damn lens anymore. I bought it from a reputable store and after using it only two or three times, it developed fungus, despite being stored in a dry cabinet all the time.
Given the complete lack of primes longer than 135mm (let's ignore the 400 GM, shall we ), it would be great, if Cosina updated the CV 180 with new coatings and 10-bladed aperture.
For AF work, the 100-400 GM is hard to beat, but for a compact landscape kit, an updated CV 180 would be a nice addition.
buying used lenses is always a lotery, you never know.
i have shown 100-400 GM in a shop and got horrorized by the size
Chris_88 wrote:
I used to own the M42 version. I don't want to think about the damn lens anymore. I bought it from a reputable store and after using it only two or three times, it developed fungus, despite being stored in a dry cabinet all the time.
Given the complete lack of primes longer than 135mm (let's ignore the 400 GM, shall we ), it would be great, if Cosina updated the CV 180 with new coatings and 10-bladed aperture.
For AF work, the 100-400 GM is hard to beat, but for a compact landscape kit, an updated CV 180 would be a nice addition. ...Show more →
contax 100-300 is the other alternative i have in mind. it is small for today standards. I bought one that pitifully had to send back.
still contax 100-300 is not to bring with you and look around. it is large enought to carry it ony with a purpose in mind and IMHO not for travel. the tradeof is of course the versatility of a zoom compared with a prime... quality should be high in both cases
DannyBurkPhoto wrote:
Just as a point of reference, I had a CV 180 and sold it after getting a Contax 100-300. Why, you may ask? It's true that the 180 is tiny and light. But the Contax is a superb lens - I did extensive testing and could see almost no difference between them. For every shot where the Voigt seemed a hair better, there was another where the reverse was true. The Contax, while larger and heavier, is still quite compact and light, and I decided to defer to its greater flexibility.
Have the CV 180/4 in OM mount. It is a gem and great for macro--goes 1:4 natively and performs well on extension. Curiously the C/y 100-300 I believe can also go to 1:4 but it can't be put as easily in your pocket.
Of course it's true that the Contax 100-300 is larger and heavier than the 180 - almost *anything* is longer and heavier than the 180! - but the Contax is actually quite compact and light for its focal range and its high quality. I got it to replace a Canon 100-400, which was so big and heavy that I didn't carry it unless I specifically knew that I needed it. The Contax can go anywhere. (Some who like to travel with only one or two small lenses will disagree; I'm used to carrying a lot more from the days when I took medium- and large format equipment on reasonably long walks.)
buying used lenses is always a lotery, you never know.
i have shown 100-400 GM in a shop and got horrorized by the size
I know, with used glass you never know the history. I guess, I'm just mad that fungus developed so rapidly in such a rare (and not that old) lens that had been described as very good/close to mint condition by the store. I got fungus inside a Minolta lens once, but that was a cheap 30-year old 100 Macro and the fungus was very hard to detect. With the CV, I kept wondering why I didn't manage to get any sharp infinity shots and blamed it on me not being able to accurately MF that thing.
Re 100-400: The lens is definitely worth the price and size, assuming you have a need for fast AF at 400mm. If you don't need AF or can live with slightly shorter lens, there are of course more compact alt options. In the end, it's all relative, I guess. For those of us shooting birds the 100-400 GM is a comparatively compact piece of kit .
This is a very good price and David is one of the most positive members of FM. A great lens, at a great price, from a great seller. If I had a need for the lens I would get it.
