Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
p.34 #1Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
I don’t see any coding on my 21/1.4. Here’s a site, though, that will show you how to code it. Apparently, the newer VM glass has a groove on the mount which can be used for this purpose. (I see that on my 75/1.5 also.)
https://bophoto.typepad.com/bophoto/2009/05/coding-strips-for-zeiss-voitlander-lenses.html
And, here’s a reference for the codes (scroll down):
https://www.devonbuy.com/how-to-6-bit-code-leica-m-lens/Keep in mind, however, the 6-bit codes are only for Leica M mount lenses. There is not code for the Voigtlander lenses. You could use the code for a similar Leica M lens, but the extent that they are different in distortion and vignetting (or anything else in the code, correction of color fringing on the edges, CA, etc.) then the code will be correcting for the wrong lens and potentially messing up the image. Often you would be better using a profile for the Voigtlander lens that either you make yourself or that is provided by the software manufacturer.Are 6-bit adjustments cooked into DNG files or a JPEG correction only?
Just like with a Sony body, I much prefer turning these adjustments OFF and deal with lens corrections in post.If you have lens detection activated then the image will be corrected for vignetting and color drift in camera, so if you don't want this then turn off lens detection. There are no other corrections performed in-camera as far as I know.DNG or only JPEG?
DNG for sure but I suppose also JPEG although I only use DNG
joakim wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
imoretti wrote
james3shin wrote
Quick question: is the M-mount version 6-bit coded by chance?https://bophoto.typepad.com/bophoto/2009/05/coding-strips-for-zeiss-voitlander-lenses.html
And, here’s a reference for the codes (scroll down):
https://www.devonbuy.com/how-to-6-bit-code-leica-m-lens/
Just like with a Sony body, I much prefer turning these adjustments OFF and deal with lens corrections in post.
DNG for sure but I suppose also JPEG although I only use DNG
Jun 24, 2020 at 03:57 AM
p.34 #2Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
How would this compare to the VM version? Do you guys know if there is a review of the VM somewhere?
Jun 24, 2020 at 05:43 AM
p.34 #3Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
rhawidantas wrote:
How would this compare to the VM version? Do you guys know if there is a review of the VM somewhere?
Same optical formula tweaked for different sensor thicknesses.
So, the E-mount version's verdict and tests from this thread should also apply to the Leica version.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1603441/0#14903007
I've posted a resolution/contrast infinity test showing how the VM version performs on both the Leica and 'Sony + adapter.' This could be useful for those who want to use the VM version with both systems:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1647789/4#15256999
How would this compare to the VM version? Do you guys know if there is a review of the VM somewhere?
Same optical formula tweaked for different sensor thicknesses.
So, the E-mount version's verdict and tests from this thread should also apply to the Leica version.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1603441/0#14903007
I've posted a resolution/contrast infinity test showing how the VM version performs on both the Leica and 'Sony + adapter.' This could be useful for those who want to use the VM version with both systems:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1647789/4#15256999
Jun 24, 2020 at 10:34 AM
p.34 #4Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
imoretti wrote:
I don’t see any coding on my 21/1.4. Here’s a site, though, that will show you how to code it. Apparently, the newer VM glass has a groove on the mount which can be used for this purpose. (I see that on my 75/1.5 also.)
https://bophoto.typepad.com/bophoto/2009/05/coding-strips-for-zeiss-voitlander-lenses.html
And, here’s a reference for the codes (scroll down):
https://www.devonbuy.com/how-to-6-bit-code-leica-m-lens/
------------------
If you decide to make your own 6-bit code template from the JPEG file, just print it to Paper Size (US Letter) and use Scale (53%).
Link to Original Article
I played with it today and was able to print a template that fits my M-lenses perfectly. I don't think you can use a sharpie anymore because Leica tweaked the 6-bit sensor with recent bodies. You may need to use a 'flat' black and white paint when using the template.
Fred
james3shin wrote
Quick question: is the M-mount version 6-bit coded by chance?https://bophoto.typepad.com/bophoto/2009/05/coding-strips-for-zeiss-voitlander-lenses.html
And, here’s a reference for the codes (scroll down):
https://www.devonbuy.com/how-to-6-bit-code-leica-m-lens/
------------------
If you decide to make your own 6-bit code template from the JPEG file, just print it to Paper Size (US Letter) and use Scale (53%).
Link to Original Article
I played with it today and was able to print a template that fits my M-lenses perfectly. I don't think you can use a sharpie anymore because Leica tweaked the 6-bit sensor with recent bodies. You may need to use a 'flat' black and white paint when using the template.
Fred
 |
||
 |
||
|
Jun 24, 2020 at 01:18 PM
p.34 #5Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
Nice! Since I use my VM glass on a Z7, I’m hoping that this will be useful to those with a Leica body (or adapter) that could actually read the codes. But, who knows, I may yet join those ranks!
Thanks, too, for your other reminder that the profiles would only be approximations as the codes were created for Leica lenses. I also realized after I posted the links that they were from about 10 years ago, so probably missing newer lenses.
Thanks, too, for your other reminder that the profiles would only be approximations as the codes were created for Leica lenses. I also realized after I posted the links that they were from about 10 years ago, so probably missing newer lenses.
Jun 24, 2020 at 01:35 PM
p.34 #6Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
imoretti wrote:
Nice! Since I use my VM glass on a Z7, I’m hoping that this will be useful to those with a Leica body (or adapter) that could actually read the codes. But, who knows, I may yet join those ranks!
Thanks, too, for your other reminder that the profiles would only be approximations as the codes were created for Leica lenses. I also realized after I posted the links that they were from about 10 years ago, so probably missing newer lenses.
The Z7 uses a Sony sensor but many say the stack is slightly thinner. Still, it's likely the 21/1.4 E-mount + adapter would perform better on the Nikon body compared to the VM version.
Unless you intend to use the VM version on a Leica body as well, I would go with the E-mount version for both Sony and Nikon cameras.
Nice! Since I use my VM glass on a Z7, I’m hoping that this will be useful to those with a Leica body (or adapter) that could actually read the codes. But, who knows, I may yet join those ranks!
Thanks, too, for your other reminder that the profiles would only be approximations as the codes were created for Leica lenses. I also realized after I posted the links that they were from about 10 years ago, so probably missing newer lenses.
The Z7 uses a Sony sensor but many say the stack is slightly thinner. Still, it's likely the 21/1.4 E-mount + adapter would perform better on the Nikon body compared to the VM version.
Unless you intend to use the VM version on a Leica body as well, I would go with the E-mount version for both Sony and Nikon cameras.
Jun 24, 2020 at 02:08 PM
p.34 #7Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
I didn’t realize this... just did the proverbial “assumed”...
I already have the 21/1.4, 28/2, 40/1.2 and 75/1.5 all in M so a little difficult to turn back now.
makes a good excuse down the road (a few years?) to pick up a Leica.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thanks, too, for your other reminder that the profiles would only be approximations as the codes were created for Leica lenses. I also realized after I posted the links that they were from about 10 years ago, so probably missing newer lenses.The Z7 uses a Sony sensor but many say the stack is slightly thinner. Still, it's likely the 21/1.4 E-mount + adapter would perform better on the Nikon body compared to the VM version.
Unless you intend to use the VM version on a Leica body as well, I would go with the E-mount version for both Sony and Nikon cameras.
I already have the 21/1.4, 28/2, 40/1.2 and 75/1.5 all in M so a little difficult to turn back now.
makes a good excuse down the road (a few years?) to pick up a Leica.Fred Miranda wrote:
imoretti wrote
Nice! Since I use my VM glass on a Z7, I’m hoping that this will be useful to those with a Leica body (or adapter) that could actually read the codes. But, who knows, I may yet join those ranks!Thanks, too, for your other reminder that the profiles would only be approximations as the codes were created for Leica lenses. I also realized after I posted the links that they were from about 10 years ago, so probably missing newer lenses.
Unless you intend to use the VM version on a Leica body as well, I would go with the E-mount version for both Sony and Nikon cameras.
Jun 24, 2020 at 02:16 PM
p.34 #8Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
imoretti wrote:
I didn’t realize this... just did the proverbial “assumed”...
I already have the 21/1.4, 28/2, 40/1.2 and 75/1.5 all in M so a little difficult to turn back now. makes a good excuse down the road (a few years?) to pick up a Leica.
Thanks, too, for your other reminder that the profiles would only be approximations as the codes were created for Leica lenses. I also realized after I posted the links that they were from about 10 years ago, so probably missing newer lenses.The Z7 uses a Sony sensor but many say the stack is slightly thinner. Still, it's likely the 21/1.4 E-mount + adapter would perform better on the Nikon body compared to the VM version.
Unless you intend to use the VM version on a Leica body as well, I would go with the E-mount version for both Sony and Nikon cameras.
I'm using the 21/1.4 on the Nikon Z7. It needs some color cast correction (use Capture One, for example), but probably less than other lenses with shorter exit pupil to sensor distances. The lens has some coma wide open, and any aberrations induced by the sensor stack at oblique ray angles is probably much less than the coma. My initial assumption would be that both version (VM and E) are essentially the same on the Nikon Z7. I bought the VM version because I have a couple of Leica M lenses that I'm also using on the Z7.
I didn’t realize this... just did the proverbial “assumed”...
I already have the 21/1.4, 28/2, 40/1.2 and 75/1.5 all in M so a little difficult to turn back now.
makes a good excuse down the road (a few years?) to pick up a Leica.Fred Miranda wrote
imoretti wrote
Nice! Since I use my VM glass on a Z7, I’m hoping that this will be useful to those with a Leica body (or adapter) that could actually read the codes. But, who knows, I may yet join those ranks!Thanks, too, for your other reminder that the profiles would only be approximations as the codes were created for Leica lenses. I also realized after I posted the links that they were from about 10 years ago, so probably missing newer lenses.
Unless you intend to use the VM version on a Leica body as well, I would go with the E-mount version for both Sony and Nikon cameras.
I'm using the 21/1.4 on the Nikon Z7. It needs some color cast correction (use Capture One, for example), but probably less than other lenses with shorter exit pupil to sensor distances. The lens has some coma wide open, and any aberrations induced by the sensor stack at oblique ray angles is probably much less than the coma. My initial assumption would be that both version (VM and E) are essentially the same on the Nikon Z7. I bought the VM version because I have a couple of Leica M lenses that I'm also using on the Z7.
Jun 26, 2020 at 01:42 AM
p.34 #9Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
AcuteShadows wrote:
I already have the 21/1.4, 28/2, 40/1.2 and 75/1.5 all in M so a little difficult to turn back now. makes a good excuse down the road (a few years?) to pick up a Leica.
Thanks, too, for your other reminder that the profiles would only be approximations as the codes were created for Leica lenses. I also realized after I posted the links that they were from about 10 years ago, so probably missing newer lenses.The Z7 uses a Sony sensor but many say the stack is slightly thinner. Still, it's likely the 21/1.4 E-mount + adapter would perform better on the Nikon body compared to the VM version.
Unless you intend to use the VM version on a Leica body as well, I would go with the E-mount version for both Sony and Nikon cameras.I'm using the 21/1.4 on the Nikon Z7. It needs some color cast correction (use Capture One, for example), but probably less than other lenses with shorter exit pupil to sensor distances. The lens has some coma wide open, and any aberrations induced by the sensor stack at oblique ray angles is probably much less than the coma. My initial assumption would be that both version (VM and E) are essentially the same on the Nikon Z7. I bought the VM version because I have a couple of Leica M lenses that I'm also using on the Z7.
I have the E version that I use on the Z7. I don't see any color cast that needs to be corrected. The lens does have quite a bit of coma wide open, but it clears up mostly by f/2.8 and pretty much totally be f/4. It is sharp across the frame from f/2.8 as well. The Z cover glass is a lot more like Sony cover glass than Leica cover glass, so I suspect the E version is a little better on the Z camera, but I have not seen direct comparisons.
imoretti wrote
I didn’t realize this... just did the proverbial “assumed”...I already have the 21/1.4, 28/2, 40/1.2 and 75/1.5 all in M so a little difficult to turn back now.
makes a good excuse down the road (a few years?) to pick up a Leica.Fred Miranda wrote
imoretti wrote
Nice! Since I use my VM glass on a Z7, I’m hoping that this will be useful to those with a Leica body (or adapter) that could actually read the codes. But, who knows, I may yet join those ranks!Thanks, too, for your other reminder that the profiles would only be approximations as the codes were created for Leica lenses. I also realized after I posted the links that they were from about 10 years ago, so probably missing newer lenses.
Unless you intend to use the VM version on a Leica body as well, I would go with the E-mount version for both Sony and Nikon cameras.
I have the E version that I use on the Z7. I don't see any color cast that needs to be corrected. The lens does have quite a bit of coma wide open, but it clears up mostly by f/2.8 and pretty much totally be f/4. It is sharp across the frame from f/2.8 as well. The Z cover glass is a lot more like Sony cover glass than Leica cover glass, so I suspect the E version is a little better on the Z camera, but I have not seen direct comparisons.
Jun 26, 2020 at 11:20 AM
p.34 #10Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
Steve Spencer wrote:
I already have the 21/1.4, 28/2, 40/1.2 and 75/1.5 all in M so a little difficult to turn back now. makes a good excuse down the road (a few years?) to pick up a Leica.
Thanks, too, for your other reminder that the profiles would only be approximations as the codes were created for Leica lenses. I also realized after I posted the links that they were from about 10 years ago, so probably missing newer lenses.The Z7 uses a Sony sensor but many say the stack is slightly thinner. Still, it's likely the 21/1.4 E-mount + adapter would perform better on the Nikon body compared to the VM version.
Unless you intend to use the VM version on a Leica body as well, I would go with the E-mount version for both Sony and Nikon cameras.I'm using the 21/1.4 on the Nikon Z7. It needs some color cast correction (use Capture One, for example), but probably less than other lenses with shorter exit pupil to sensor distances. The lens has some coma wide open, and any aberrations induced by the sensor stack at oblique ray angles is probably much less than the coma. My initial assumption would be that both version (VM and E) are essentially the same on the Nikon Z7. I bought the VM version because I have a couple of Leica M lenses that I'm also using on the Z7.I have the E version that I use on the Z7. I don't see any color cast that needs to be corrected. The lens does have quite a bit of coma wide open, but it clears up mostly by f/2.8 and pretty much totally be f/4. It is sharp across the frame from f/2.8 as well. The Z cover glass is a lot more like Sony cover glass than Leica cover glass, so I suspect the E version is a little better on the Z camera, but I have not seen direct comparisons.
The color cast is less than on the current Summicron 28mm, but it's there. Maybe you can see it if you take a picture of a gray sky through a translucent glass or plastic, and check the color values. Otherwise, the effect can be subtle, like if you would light the centre with a small lightbulb. The main downside is that the surrounding light (towards the edges) appears to become increasingly cold, and that may introduce some claustrophic atmosphere to an image. I have no way to determine the actual thickness of the sensor stacks, and the optical properties of the layers. But the results of using the same lenses on Nikon Z and on Sony cameras are different, and - with regard to aberrations - the only plausible explanations i can give is differences in the sensor stack, including possibly the microlens array design.
AcuteShadows wrote
imoretti wrote
I didn’t realize this... just did the proverbial “assumed”...I already have the 21/1.4, 28/2, 40/1.2 and 75/1.5 all in M so a little difficult to turn back now.
makes a good excuse down the road (a few years?) to pick up a Leica.Fred Miranda wrote
imoretti wrote
Nice! Since I use my VM glass on a Z7, I’m hoping that this will be useful to those with a Leica body (or adapter) that could actually read the codes. But, who knows, I may yet join those ranks!Thanks, too, for your other reminder that the profiles would only be approximations as the codes were created for Leica lenses. I also realized after I posted the links that they were from about 10 years ago, so probably missing newer lenses.
Unless you intend to use the VM version on a Leica body as well, I would go with the E-mount version for both Sony and Nikon cameras.
The color cast is less than on the current Summicron 28mm, but it's there. Maybe you can see it if you take a picture of a gray sky through a translucent glass or plastic, and check the color values. Otherwise, the effect can be subtle, like if you would light the centre with a small lightbulb. The main downside is that the surrounding light (towards the edges) appears to become increasingly cold, and that may introduce some claustrophic atmosphere to an image. I have no way to determine the actual thickness of the sensor stacks, and the optical properties of the layers. But the results of using the same lenses on Nikon Z and on Sony cameras are different, and - with regard to aberrations - the only plausible explanations i can give is differences in the sensor stack, including possibly the microlens array design.
Jun 26, 2020 at 11:28 AM
|
p.34 #11Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
AcuteShadows wrote:
I already have the 21/1.4, 28/2, 40/1.2 and 75/1.5 all in M so a little difficult to turn back now. makes a good excuse down the road (a few years?) to pick up a Leica.
Thanks, too, for your other reminder that the profiles would only be approximations as the codes were created for Leica lenses. I also realized after I posted the links that they were from about 10 years ago, so probably missing newer lenses.The Z7 uses a Sony sensor but many say the stack is slightly thinner. Still, it's likely the 21/1.4 E-mount + adapter would perform better on the Nikon body compared to the VM version.
Unless you intend to use the VM version on a Leica body as well, I would go with the E-mount version for both Sony and Nikon cameras.I'm using the 21/1.4 on the Nikon Z7. It needs some color cast correction (use Capture One, for example), but probably less than other lenses with shorter exit pupil to sensor distances. The lens has some coma wide open, and any aberrations induced by the sensor stack at oblique ray angles is probably much less than the coma. My initial assumption would be that both version (VM and E) are essentially the same on the Nikon Z7. I bought the VM version because I have a couple of Leica M lenses that I'm also using on the Z7.I have the E version that I use on the Z7. I don't see any color cast that needs to be corrected. The lens does have quite a bit of coma wide open, but it clears up mostly by f/2.8 and pretty much totally be f/4. It is sharp across the frame from f/2.8 as well. The Z cover glass is a lot more like Sony cover glass than Leica cover glass, so I suspect the E version is a little better on the Z camera, but I have not seen direct comparisons.The color cast is less than on the current Summicron 28mm, but it's there. Maybe you can see it if you take a picture of a gray sky through a translucent glass or plastic, and check the color values. Otherwise, the effect can be subtle, like if you would light the centre with a small lightbulb. The main downside is that the surrounding light (towards the edges) appears to become increasingly cold, and that may introduce some claustrophic atmosphere to an image. I have no way to determine the actual thickness of the sensor stacks, and the optical properties of...Show more →
My experience comparing the Z7 and A7r II is quite different. The E version of the Voigtlander 21 f/1.4 performs almost identically on the two cameras. Any differences are very subtle and I don't see a color cast with either camera. Below is an example of a sunset shot with the E version with no correction for color cast. I just don't see it in this image or in any image I have shot with the lens on the Z7. The Sony and Nikon cameras have a similar set up for their cover glass with a pice of glass on the sensor itself and a piece of glass mounted with the dust shaker a bit off the sensor. The Leica has no dust shaker and there is just a thin piece of glass on the sensor itself. The Leica cover glass is like substantially thinner than either the Sony or the Nikon mirrorless camera.
Steve Spencer wrote
AcuteShadows wrote
imoretti wrote
I didn’t realize this... just did the proverbial “assumed”...I already have the 21/1.4, 28/2, 40/1.2 and 75/1.5 all in M so a little difficult to turn back now.
makes a good excuse down the road (a few years?) to pick up a Leica.Fred Miranda wrote
imoretti wrote
Nice! Since I use my VM glass on a Z7, I’m hoping that this will be useful to those with a Leica body (or adapter) that could actually read the codes. But, who knows, I may yet join those ranks!Thanks, too, for your other reminder that the profiles would only be approximations as the codes were created for Leica lenses. I also realized after I posted the links that they were from about 10 years ago, so probably missing newer lenses.
Unless you intend to use the VM version on a Leica body as well, I would go with the E-mount version for both Sony and Nikon cameras.
My experience comparing the Z7 and A7r II is quite different. The E version of the Voigtlander 21 f/1.4 performs almost identically on the two cameras. Any differences are very subtle and I don't see a color cast with either camera. Below is an example of a sunset shot with the E version with no correction for color cast. I just don't see it in this image or in any image I have shot with the lens on the Z7. The Sony and Nikon cameras have a similar set up for their cover glass with a pice of glass on the sensor itself and a piece of glass mounted with the dust shaker a bit off the sensor. The Leica has no dust shaker and there is just a thin piece of glass on the sensor itself. The Leica cover glass is like substantially thinner than either the Sony or the Nikon mirrorless camera.
Jun 26, 2020 at 11:45 AM
p.34 #12Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
Steve,
I do think the Leica M sensor stack is the thinnest we have and in general M lenses perform their best on M camera bodies (There are exceptions though). Even the SL/SL2 sensor stack is thicker than the Leica M.
The stack thickness from both Sony and Nikon Z sensors seem to be similar as you reported. (Sony manufactures sensors for Nikon)
I've seen some reports showing Loxia lenses performing a tad better on the Nikon body but I have never tested this myself. Perhaps any difference could also be attributed to mount to sensor and/or adapter tolerance.
I do think the Leica M sensor stack is the thinnest we have and in general M lenses perform their best on M camera bodies (There are exceptions though). Even the SL/SL2 sensor stack is thicker than the Leica M.
The stack thickness from both Sony and Nikon Z sensors seem to be similar as you reported. (Sony manufactures sensors for Nikon)
I've seen some reports showing Loxia lenses performing a tad better on the Nikon body but I have never tested this myself. Perhaps any difference could also be attributed to mount to sensor and/or adapter tolerance.
Jun 26, 2020 at 12:07 PM
p.34 #13Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
Steve,
I do think the Leica M sensor stack is the thinnest we have and in general M lenses perform their best on M camera bodies (There are exceptions though). Even the SL/SL2 sensor stack is thicker than the Leica M.
The stack thickness from both Sony and Nikon Z sensors seem to be similar as you reported. (Sony manufactures sensors for Nikon)
I've seen some reports showing Loxia lenses performing a tad better on the Nikon body but I have never tested this myself. Perhaps any difference could also be attributed to mount to sensor and/or adapter tolerance.
Yes, Fred, I totally agree with what you said here. Your thread on Leica M lenses that also perform well on Sony cameras has been very useful, and I think there are a number of lenses that do as well on Sony cameras as on the Leica M as you have shown (and I reported on a number of lenses as well). That said the corners of the M version of the CV 21 f/1.4 seem to be noticeably worse on a Sony than on a Leica, whereas the E mount version of the CV 21 f/1.4 has wonderful corners from pretty much wide open. So, IMO, it is a lens that benefits from getting the Sony E mount version rather than just using the M mount version on Sony. Of course, other may care less about the corners and are fine with the M version on Sony.
I also have now shot a bunch of E mount lenses (Loxia 21, Loxia, 25, Loxia 50, Loxia 85, Voigtlander 21 f/1.4, Voigtlander 40 f/1.2, Voigtlander 65 f/2 APO, Voigtlander 110 f/2.5 APO) on both the Sony A7r II and the Nikon Z7 and I have yet to see any substantial difference in how the lenses perform on the two cameras. The results have always been very very similar. This suggests to me that the Leica M version of the 21 f/1.4 would likely perform like it does on Sony sensors, (excellent in the center and even edges, but a noticeably drop in performance in the corners) on the Z7 as well. I haven't tested that so I may be wrong, but I suspect the Sony E mount version is likely noticeably better on the Z7 (I know my Sony E mount is excellent all the way to the corners on my Z7) in the corners at wider apertures (but probably only there), than the Leica M version is on the Z7.
Steve,
I do think the Leica M sensor stack is the thinnest we have and in general M lenses perform their best on M camera bodies (There are exceptions though). Even the SL/SL2 sensor stack is thicker than the Leica M.
The stack thickness from both Sony and Nikon Z sensors seem to be similar as you reported. (Sony manufactures sensors for Nikon)
I've seen some reports showing Loxia lenses performing a tad better on the Nikon body but I have never tested this myself. Perhaps any difference could also be attributed to mount to sensor and/or adapter tolerance.
Yes, Fred, I totally agree with what you said here. Your thread on Leica M lenses that also perform well on Sony cameras has been very useful, and I think there are a number of lenses that do as well on Sony cameras as on the Leica M as you have shown (and I reported on a number of lenses as well). That said the corners of the M version of the CV 21 f/1.4 seem to be noticeably worse on a Sony than on a Leica, whereas the E mount version of the CV 21 f/1.4 has wonderful corners from pretty much wide open. So, IMO, it is a lens that benefits from getting the Sony E mount version rather than just using the M mount version on Sony. Of course, other may care less about the corners and are fine with the M version on Sony.
I also have now shot a bunch of E mount lenses (Loxia 21, Loxia, 25, Loxia 50, Loxia 85, Voigtlander 21 f/1.4, Voigtlander 40 f/1.2, Voigtlander 65 f/2 APO, Voigtlander 110 f/2.5 APO) on both the Sony A7r II and the Nikon Z7 and I have yet to see any substantial difference in how the lenses perform on the two cameras. The results have always been very very similar. This suggests to me that the Leica M version of the 21 f/1.4 would likely perform like it does on Sony sensors, (excellent in the center and even edges, but a noticeably drop in performance in the corners) on the Z7 as well. I haven't tested that so I may be wrong, but I suspect the Sony E mount version is likely noticeably better on the Z7 (I know my Sony E mount is excellent all the way to the corners on my Z7) in the corners at wider apertures (but probably only there), than the Leica M version is on the Z7.
Jun 26, 2020 at 12:36 PM
p.34 #14Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
Steve Spencer wrote:
I already have the 21/1.4, 28/2, 40/1.2 and 75/1.5 all in M so a little difficult to turn back now. makes a good excuse down the road (a few years?) to pick up a Leica.
Unless you intend to use the VM version on a Leica body as well, I would go with the E-mount version for both Sony and Nikon cameras.I'm using the 21/1.4 on the Nikon Z7. It needs some color cast correction (use Capture One, for example), but probably less than other lenses with shorter exit pupil to sensor distances. The lens has some coma wide open, and any aberrations induced by the sensor stack at oblique ray angles is probably much less than the coma. My initial assumption would be that both version (VM and E) are essentially the same on the Nikon Z7. I bought the VM version because I have a couple of Leica M lenses that I'm also using on the Z7.I have the E version that I use on the Z7. I don't see any color cast that needs to be corrected. The lens does have quite a bit of coma wide open, but it clears up mostly by f/2.8 and pretty much totally be f/4. It is sharp across the frame from f/2.8 as well. The Z cover glass is a lot more like Sony cover glass than Leica cover glass, so I suspect the E version is a little better on the Z camera, but I have not seen direct comparisons.The color cast is less than on the current Summicron 28mm, but it's there. Maybe you can see it if you take a picture of a gray sky through a translucent glass or plastic, and check the color values. Otherwise, the effect can be subtle, like if you would light the centre with a small lightbulb. The main downside is that the surrounding light (towards the edges) appears to become increasingly cold, and that may introduce some claustrophic atmosphere to an image. I have no way to determine the actual thickness of the sensor stacks, and the optical properties of the layers. But the results of using the same lenses on Nikon Z and on Sony cameras are different, and - with regard to aberrations - the only plausible explanations i can give is differences in the sensor stack, including possibly the microlens array design.My experience comparing the Z7 and A7r II is quite different. The E version of the Voigtlander 21 f/1.4 performs almost identically on the two cameras. Any differences are very subtle and I don't see a color cast with either camera. Below is an example of a sunset shot with the E version with no correction for color cast. I just don't see it in this image or in any image I have shot with the lens on the Z7. The Sony and Nikon cameras have a similar set up for their cover glass with a pice of glass...Show more →
I'm not saying you necessarily see a color cast in a different picture, but you need a picture without color gradients in order to really be able to ascertain any potential color cast. Most unicolor walls, for example, are not suitable due to gradients in the ambient light. Once you determine the existence and character of the color cast, you may see it a lot of other pictures, or you just apply the color cast correction file in post, resulting usually in a more lively and evenly "lit" image.
AcuteShadows wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
AcuteShadows wrote
imoretti wrote
I didn’t realize this... just did the proverbial “assumed”...I already have the 21/1.4, 28/2, 40/1.2 and 75/1.5 all in M so a little difficult to turn back now.
makes a good excuse down the road (a few years?) to pick up a Leica.Fred Miranda wrote
The Z7 uses a Sony sensor but many say the stack is slightly thinner. Still, it's likely the 21/1.4 E-mount + adapter would perform better on the Nikon body compared to the VM version.Unless you intend to use the VM version on a Leica body as well, I would go with the E-mount version for both Sony and Nikon cameras.
I'm not saying you necessarily see a color cast in a different picture, but you need a picture without color gradients in order to really be able to ascertain any potential color cast. Most unicolor walls, for example, are not suitable due to gradients in the ambient light. Once you determine the existence and character of the color cast, you may see it a lot of other pictures, or you just apply the color cast correction file in post, resulting usually in a more lively and evenly "lit" image.
Jun 26, 2020 at 04:31 PM
p.34 #15Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
Steve Spencer wrote:
I do think the Leica M sensor stack is the thinnest we have and in general M lenses perform their best on M camera bodies (There are exceptions though). Even the SL/SL2 sensor stack is thicker than the Leica M.
The stack thickness from both Sony and Nikon Z sensors seem to be similar as you reported. (Sony manufactures sensors for Nikon)
I've seen some reports showing Loxia lenses performing a tad better on the Nikon body but I have never tested this myself. Perhaps any difference could also be attributed to mount to sensor and/or adapter tolerance.Yes, Fred, I totally agree with what you said here. Your thread on Leica M lenses that also perform well on Sony cameras has been very useful, and I think there are a number of lenses that do as well on Sony cameras as on the Leica M as you have shown (and I reported on a number of lenses as well). That said the corners of the M version of the CV 21 f/1.4 seem to be noticeably worse on a Sony than on a Leica, whereas the E mount version of the CV 21 f/1.4 has wonderful...Show more →
It's perfectly possible that the Sony sensor is closer to the Nikon Z sensor, and that E lenses may be the better choice on the Nikon Z. Yet my experience with M lenses differs from what i hear and see about the performance of M lenses on Sony bodies. Maybe it's not sensor thickness, but the microlens array. I'm not willing to do a cut-out of my Z7, but would be very interested in what actually causes the different results.
Fred Miranda wrote
Steve,I do think the Leica M sensor stack is the thinnest we have and in general M lenses perform their best on M camera bodies (There are exceptions though). Even the SL/SL2 sensor stack is thicker than the Leica M.
The stack thickness from both Sony and Nikon Z sensors seem to be similar as you reported. (Sony manufactures sensors for Nikon)
I've seen some reports showing Loxia lenses performing a tad better on the Nikon body but I have never tested this myself. Perhaps any difference could also be attributed to mount to sensor and/or adapter tolerance.
It's perfectly possible that the Sony sensor is closer to the Nikon Z sensor, and that E lenses may be the better choice on the Nikon Z. Yet my experience with M lenses differs from what i hear and see about the performance of M lenses on Sony bodies. Maybe it's not sensor thickness, but the microlens array. I'm not willing to do a cut-out of my Z7, but would be very interested in what actually causes the different results.
Jun 26, 2020 at 04:38 PM
p.34 #16Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
AcuteShadows wrote:
I do think the Leica M sensor stack is the thinnest we have and in general M lenses perform their best on M camera bodies (There are exceptions though). Even the SL/SL2 sensor stack is thicker than the Leica M.
The stack thickness from both Sony and Nikon Z sensors seem to be similar as you reported. (Sony manufactures sensors for Nikon)
I've seen some reports showing Loxia lenses performing a tad better on the Nikon body but I have never tested this myself. Perhaps any difference could also be attributed to mount to sensor and/or adapter tolerance.Yes, Fred, I totally agree with what you said here. Your thread on Leica M lenses that also perform well on Sony cameras has been very useful, and I think there are a number of lenses that do as well on Sony cameras as on the Leica M as you have shown (and I reported on a number of lenses as well). That said the corners of the M version of the CV 21 f/1.4 seem to be noticeably worse on a Sony than on a Leica, whereas the E mount version of the CV 21 f/1.4 has wonderful corners from pretty much wide open. So, IMO, it is a lens that benefits from getting the Sony E mount version rather than just using the M mount version on Sony. Of course, other may care less about the corners and are fine with the M version on Sony.
I also have now shot a bunch of E mount lenses (Loxia 21, Loxia, 25, Loxia 50, Loxia 85, Voigtlander 21 f/1.4, Voigtlander 40 f/1.2, Voigtlander 65 f/2 APO, Voigtlander 110 f/2.5 APO) on both the Sony A7r II and the Nikon Z7 and I have yet to see any substantial difference in how the lenses perform on the two cameras. The results have always been very very similar. This suggests to me that the Leica M version of the 21 f/1.4 would likely perform like it does on Sony sensors, (excellent in the center and even edges, but a noticeably drop in performance in the corners) on the Z7 as well. I haven't tested that so I may be wrong, but I suspect the Sony E mount version is likely noticeably better on the Z7 (I know my Sony E mount is excellent all the way to the corners on my Z7) in the corners at wider apertures (but probably only there), than the Leica M version is on the Z7.It's perfectly possible that the Sony sensor is closer to the Nikon Z sensor, and that E lenses may be the better choice on the Nikon Z. Yet my experience with M lenses differs from what i hear and see about the performance of M lenses on Sony bodies. Maybe it's not sensor thickness, but the microlens array. I'm not willing to do a cut-out of my Z7, but would be very interested in what actually causes the different results.
IMO the stack thickness is the major culprit. Microlenses design play a part too.
If a lens is optimized for a thin sensor and it's used on a thicker one, there will be induced field curvature. I believe the second best camera to use with M lenses is the Leica SL series but it's still not perfect. Sony and Fuji are two of the worst.
In the case of E-mount lenses, they are optimized for Sony sensors and Nikon uses Sony, so they are pretty much compatible. Perhaps not perfect with all lenses though.
Steve Spencer wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
Steve,I do think the Leica M sensor stack is the thinnest we have and in general M lenses perform their best on M camera bodies (There are exceptions though). Even the SL/SL2 sensor stack is thicker than the Leica M.
The stack thickness from both Sony and Nikon Z sensors seem to be similar as you reported. (Sony manufactures sensors for Nikon)
I've seen some reports showing Loxia lenses performing a tad better on the Nikon body but I have never tested this myself. Perhaps any difference could also be attributed to mount to sensor and/or adapter tolerance.
I also have now shot a bunch of E mount lenses (Loxia 21, Loxia, 25, Loxia 50, Loxia 85, Voigtlander 21 f/1.4, Voigtlander 40 f/1.2, Voigtlander 65 f/2 APO, Voigtlander 110 f/2.5 APO) on both the Sony A7r II and the Nikon Z7 and I have yet to see any substantial difference in how the lenses perform on the two cameras. The results have always been very very similar. This suggests to me that the Leica M version of the 21 f/1.4 would likely perform like it does on Sony sensors, (excellent in the center and even edges, but a noticeably drop in performance in the corners) on the Z7 as well. I haven't tested that so I may be wrong, but I suspect the Sony E mount version is likely noticeably better on the Z7 (I know my Sony E mount is excellent all the way to the corners on my Z7) in the corners at wider apertures (but probably only there), than the Leica M version is on the Z7.
IMO the stack thickness is the major culprit. Microlenses design play a part too.
If a lens is optimized for a thin sensor and it's used on a thicker one, there will be induced field curvature. I believe the second best camera to use with M lenses is the Leica SL series but it's still not perfect. Sony and Fuji are two of the worst.
In the case of E-mount lenses, they are optimized for Sony sensors and Nikon uses Sony, so they are pretty much compatible. Perhaps not perfect with all lenses though.
Jun 26, 2020 at 07:43 PM
p.34 #17Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
I do think the Leica M sensor stack is the thinnest we have and in general M lenses perform their best on M camera bodies (There are exceptions though). Even the SL/SL2 sensor stack is thicker than the Leica M.
The stack thickness from both Sony and Nikon Z sensors seem to be similar as you reported. (Sony manufactures sensors for Nikon)
I've seen some reports showing Loxia lenses performing a tad better on the Nikon body but I have never tested this myself. Perhaps any difference could also be attributed to mount to sensor and/or adapter tolerance.Yes, Fred, I totally agree with what you said here. Your thread on Leica M lenses that also perform well on Sony cameras has been very useful, and I think there are a number of lenses that do as well on Sony cameras as on the Leica M as you have shown (and I reported on a number of lenses as well). That said the corners of the M version of the CV 21 f/1.4 seem to be noticeably worse on a Sony than on a Leica, whereas the E mount version of the CV 21 f/1.4 has wonderful corners from pretty much wide open. So, IMO, it is a lens that benefits from getting the Sony E mount version rather than just using the M mount version on Sony. Of course, other may care less about the corners and are fine with the M version on Sony.
I also have now shot a bunch of E mount lenses (Loxia 21, Loxia, 25, Loxia 50, Loxia 85, Voigtlander 21 f/1.4, Voigtlander 40 f/1.2, Voigtlander 65 f/2 APO, Voigtlander 110 f/2.5 APO) on both the Sony A7r II and the Nikon Z7 and I have yet to see any substantial difference in how the lenses perform on the two cameras. The results have always been very very similar. This suggests to me that the Leica M version of the 21 f/1.4 would likely perform like it does on Sony sensors, (excellent in the center and even edges, but a noticeably drop in performance in the corners) on the Z7 as well. I haven't tested that so I may be wrong, but I suspect the Sony E mount version is likely noticeably better on the Z7 (I know my Sony E mount is excellent all the way to the corners on my Z7) in the corners at wider apertures (but probably only there), than the Leica M version is on the Z7.It's perfectly possible that the Sony sensor is closer to the Nikon Z sensor, and that E lenses may be the better choice on the Nikon Z. Yet my experience with M lenses differs from what i hear and see about the performance of M lenses on Sony bodies. Maybe it's not sensor thickness, but the microlens array. I'm not willing to do a cut-out of my Z7, but would be very interested in what actually causes the different results.IMO the stack thickness is the major culprit. Microlenses design play a part too.
If a lens is optimized for a thin sensor and it's used on a thicker one, there will be induced field curvature. I believe the second best camera to use with M lenses is the Leica SL series but it's still not perfect. Sony and Fuji are two of the worst.
In the case of E-mount lenses, they are optimized for Sony sensors and Nikon uses Sony, so they are pretty much compatible. Perhaps not perfect with all lenses though.
I think I ultimately need to buy a Sony camera just to find out what the actual differences between both sensors are with regard to M lenses.
AcuteShadows wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
Steve,I do think the Leica M sensor stack is the thinnest we have and in general M lenses perform their best on M camera bodies (There are exceptions though). Even the SL/SL2 sensor stack is thicker than the Leica M.
The stack thickness from both Sony and Nikon Z sensors seem to be similar as you reported. (Sony manufactures sensors for Nikon)
I've seen some reports showing Loxia lenses performing a tad better on the Nikon body but I have never tested this myself. Perhaps any difference could also be attributed to mount to sensor and/or adapter tolerance.
I also have now shot a bunch of E mount lenses (Loxia 21, Loxia, 25, Loxia 50, Loxia 85, Voigtlander 21 f/1.4, Voigtlander 40 f/1.2, Voigtlander 65 f/2 APO, Voigtlander 110 f/2.5 APO) on both the Sony A7r II and the Nikon Z7 and I have yet to see any substantial difference in how the lenses perform on the two cameras. The results have always been very very similar. This suggests to me that the Leica M version of the 21 f/1.4 would likely perform like it does on Sony sensors, (excellent in the center and even edges, but a noticeably drop in performance in the corners) on the Z7 as well. I haven't tested that so I may be wrong, but I suspect the Sony E mount version is likely noticeably better on the Z7 (I know my Sony E mount is excellent all the way to the corners on my Z7) in the corners at wider apertures (but probably only there), than the Leica M version is on the Z7.
If a lens is optimized for a thin sensor and it's used on a thicker one, there will be induced field curvature. I believe the second best camera to use with M lenses is the Leica SL series but it's still not perfect. Sony and Fuji are two of the worst.
In the case of E-mount lenses, they are optimized for Sony sensors and Nikon uses Sony, so they are pretty much compatible. Perhaps not perfect with all lenses though.
I think I ultimately need to buy a Sony camera just to find out what the actual differences between both sensors are with regard to M lenses.
Jun 26, 2020 at 07:50 PM
p.34 #18Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
AcuteShadows wrote:
I do think the Leica M sensor stack is the thinnest we have and in general M lenses perform their best on M camera bodies (There are exceptions though). Even the SL/SL2 sensor stack is thicker than the Leica M.
The stack thickness from both Sony and Nikon Z sensors seem to be similar as you reported. (Sony manufactures sensors for Nikon)
I've seen some reports showing Loxia lenses performing a tad better on the Nikon body but I have never tested this myself. Perhaps any difference could also be attributed to mount to sensor and/or adapter tolerance.Yes, Fred, I totally agree with what you said here. Your thread on Leica M lenses that also perform well on Sony cameras has been very useful, and I think there are a number of lenses that do as well on Sony cameras as on the Leica M as you have shown (and I reported on a number of lenses as well). That said the corners of the M version of the CV 21 f/1.4 seem to be noticeably worse on a Sony than on a Leica, whereas the E mount version of the CV 21 f/1.4 has wonderful corners from pretty much wide open. So, IMO, it is a lens that benefits from getting the Sony E mount version rather than just using the M mount version on Sony. Of course, other may care less about the corners and are fine with the M version on Sony.
I also have now shot a bunch of E mount lenses (Loxia 21, Loxia, 25, Loxia 50, Loxia 85, Voigtlander 21 f/1.4, Voigtlander 40 f/1.2, Voigtlander 65 f/2 APO, Voigtlander 110 f/2.5 APO) on both the Sony A7r II and the Nikon Z7 and I have yet to see any substantial difference in how the lenses perform on the two cameras. The results have always been very very similar. This suggests to me that the Leica M version of the 21 f/1.4 would likely perform like it does on Sony sensors, (excellent in the center and even edges, but a noticeably drop in performance in the corners) on the Z7 as well. I haven't tested that so I may be wrong, but I suspect the Sony E mount version is likely noticeably better on the Z7 (I know my Sony E mount is excellent all the way to the corners on my Z7) in the corners at wider apertures (but probably only there), than the Leica M version is on the Z7.It's perfectly possible that the Sony sensor is closer to the Nikon Z sensor, and that E lenses may be the better choice on the Nikon Z. Yet my experience with M lenses differs from what i hear and see about the performance of M lenses on Sony bodies. Maybe it's not sensor thickness, but the microlens array. I'm not willing to do a cut-out of my Z7, but would be very interested in what actually causes the different results.IMO the stack thickness is the major culprit. Microlenses design play a part too.
If a lens is optimized for a thin sensor and it's used on a thicker one, there will be induced field curvature. I believe the second best camera to use with M lenses is the Leica SL series but it's still not perfect. Sony and Fuji are two of the worst.
In the case of E-mount lenses, they are optimized for Sony sensors and Nikon uses Sony, so they are pretty much compatible. Perhaps not perfect with all lenses though.I think I ultimately need to buy a Sony camera just to find out what the actual differences between both sensors are with regard to M lenses.
In the meantime, I've started some tests here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1647789
Fred Miranda wrote
AcuteShadows wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
Steve,I do think the Leica M sensor stack is the thinnest we have and in general M lenses perform their best on M camera bodies (There are exceptions though). Even the SL/SL2 sensor stack is thicker than the Leica M.
The stack thickness from both Sony and Nikon Z sensors seem to be similar as you reported. (Sony manufactures sensors for Nikon)
I've seen some reports showing Loxia lenses performing a tad better on the Nikon body but I have never tested this myself. Perhaps any difference could also be attributed to mount to sensor and/or adapter tolerance.
I also have now shot a bunch of E mount lenses (Loxia 21, Loxia, 25, Loxia 50, Loxia 85, Voigtlander 21 f/1.4, Voigtlander 40 f/1.2, Voigtlander 65 f/2 APO, Voigtlander 110 f/2.5 APO) on both the Sony A7r II and the Nikon Z7 and I have yet to see any substantial difference in how the lenses perform on the two cameras. The results have always been very very similar. This suggests to me that the Leica M version of the 21 f/1.4 would likely perform like it does on Sony sensors, (excellent in the center and even edges, but a noticeably drop in performance in the corners) on the Z7 as well. I haven't tested that so I may be wrong, but I suspect the Sony E mount version is likely noticeably better on the Z7 (I know my Sony E mount is excellent all the way to the corners on my Z7) in the corners at wider apertures (but probably only there), than the Leica M version is on the Z7.
If a lens is optimized for a thin sensor and it's used on a thicker one, there will be induced field curvature. I believe the second best camera to use with M lenses is the Leica SL series but it's still not perfect. Sony and Fuji are two of the worst.
In the case of E-mount lenses, they are optimized for Sony sensors and Nikon uses Sony, so they are pretty much compatible. Perhaps not perfect with all lenses though.
In the meantime, I've started some tests here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1647789
Jun 26, 2020 at 09:05 PM
p.34 #19Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
Fred Miranda wrote:
I do think the Leica M sensor stack is the thinnest we have and in general M lenses perform their best on M camera bodies (There are exceptions though). Even the SL/SL2 sensor stack is thicker than the Leica M.
The stack thickness from both Sony and Nikon Z sensors seem to be similar as you reported. (Sony manufactures sensors for Nikon)
I've seen some reports showing Loxia lenses performing a tad better on the Nikon body but I have never tested this myself. Perhaps any difference could also be attributed to mount to sensor and/or adapter tolerance.Yes, Fred, I totally agree with what you said here. Your thread on Leica M lenses that also perform well on Sony cameras has been very useful, and I think there are a number of lenses that do as well on Sony cameras as on the Leica M as you have shown (and I reported on a number of lenses as well). That said the corners of the M version of the CV 21 f/1.4 seem to be noticeably worse on a Sony than on a Leica, whereas the E mount version of the CV 21 f/1.4 has wonderful corners from pretty much wide open. So, IMO, it is a lens that benefits from getting the Sony E mount version rather than just using the M mount version on Sony. Of course, other may care less about the corners and are fine with the M version on Sony.
I also have now shot a bunch of E mount lenses (Loxia 21, Loxia, 25, Loxia 50, Loxia 85, Voigtlander 21 f/1.4, Voigtlander 40 f/1.2, Voigtlander 65 f/2 APO, Voigtlander 110 f/2.5 APO) on both the Sony A7r II and the Nikon Z7 and I have yet to see any substantial difference in how the lenses perform on the two cameras. The results have always been very very similar. This suggests to me that the Leica M version of the 21 f/1.4 would likely perform like it does on Sony sensors, (excellent in the center and even edges, but a noticeably drop in performance in the corners) on the Z7 as well. I haven't tested that so I may be wrong, but I suspect the Sony E mount version is likely noticeably better on the Z7 (I know my Sony E mount is excellent all the way to the corners on my Z7) in the corners at wider apertures (but probably only there), than the Leica M version is on the Z7.It's perfectly possible that the Sony sensor is closer to the Nikon Z sensor, and that E lenses may be the better choice on the Nikon Z. Yet my experience with M lenses differs from what i hear and see about the performance of M lenses on Sony bodies. Maybe it's not sensor thickness, but the microlens array. I'm not willing to do a cut-out of my Z7, but would be very interested in what actually causes the different results.IMO the stack thickness is the major culprit. Microlenses design play a part too.
If a lens is optimized for a thin sensor and it's used on a thicker one, there will be induced field curvature. I believe the second best camera to use with M lenses is the Leica SL series but it's still not perfect. Sony and Fuji are two of the worst.
In the case of E-mount lenses, they are optimized for Sony sensors and Nikon uses Sony, so they are pretty much compatible. Perhaps not perfect with all lenses though.I think I ultimately need to buy a Sony camera just to find out what the actual differences between both sensors are with regard to M lenses.In the meantime, I've started some tests here:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1647789
Voigtländer 21mm f/1.4 on the Nikon Z7 at f/1.4. 100% pixel resolution, distance is 50 to 100 meters, rather than infinity. First image is from the extreme corner, second is from about 4mm up on the edge. The Leica sensor is probably still better. However, I didn't by the Voigtländer in order to shoot f/1.4 at infinity, but because it probably has one of the more distant exit pupils (i.e. virtual origin of exiting light rays) of the smaller wide-angle lenses.
Extreme corner
Edge
Edited on Jun 30, 2020 at 05:16 AM · View previous versions
AcuteShadows wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
AcuteShadows wrote
Steve Spencer wrote
Fred Miranda wrote
Steve,I do think the Leica M sensor stack is the thinnest we have and in general M lenses perform their best on M camera bodies (There are exceptions though). Even the SL/SL2 sensor stack is thicker than the Leica M.
The stack thickness from both Sony and Nikon Z sensors seem to be similar as you reported. (Sony manufactures sensors for Nikon)
I've seen some reports showing Loxia lenses performing a tad better on the Nikon body but I have never tested this myself. Perhaps any difference could also be attributed to mount to sensor and/or adapter tolerance.
I also have now shot a bunch of E mount lenses (Loxia 21, Loxia, 25, Loxia 50, Loxia 85, Voigtlander 21 f/1.4, Voigtlander 40 f/1.2, Voigtlander 65 f/2 APO, Voigtlander 110 f/2.5 APO) on both the Sony A7r II and the Nikon Z7 and I have yet to see any substantial difference in how the lenses perform on the two cameras. The results have always been very very similar. This suggests to me that the Leica M version of the 21 f/1.4 would likely perform like it does on Sony sensors, (excellent in the center and even edges, but a noticeably drop in performance in the corners) on the Z7 as well. I haven't tested that so I may be wrong, but I suspect the Sony E mount version is likely noticeably better on the Z7 (I know my Sony E mount is excellent all the way to the corners on my Z7) in the corners at wider apertures (but probably only there), than the Leica M version is on the Z7.
If a lens is optimized for a thin sensor and it's used on a thicker one, there will be induced field curvature. I believe the second best camera to use with M lenses is the Leica SL series but it's still not perfect. Sony and Fuji are two of the worst.
In the case of E-mount lenses, they are optimized for Sony sensors and Nikon uses Sony, so they are pretty much compatible. Perhaps not perfect with all lenses though.
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1647789
Voigtländer 21mm f/1.4 on the Nikon Z7 at f/1.4. 100% pixel resolution, distance is 50 to 100 meters, rather than infinity. First image is from the extreme corner, second is from about 4mm up on the edge. The Leica sensor is probably still better. However, I didn't by the Voigtländer in order to shoot f/1.4 at infinity, but because it probably has one of the more distant exit pupils (i.e. virtual origin of exiting light rays) of the smaller wide-angle lenses.
© AcuteShadows 2020
Extreme corner
© AcuteShadows 2020
Edge
Edited on Jun 30, 2020 at 05:16 AM · View previous versions
Jun 27, 2020 at 02:51 AM
p.34 #20Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton Review
Quick question for the Leica users: Are you turning off lens detection and just correcting things in post?
Have only taken a few pictures of the dog but I’m loving what I see thus far.
Have only taken a few pictures of the dog but I’m loving what I see thus far.
Jun 29, 2020 at 06:18 AM