EDIT: to answer my own question, the adapter I had bought "used" directly from Fotodiox was a lemon.
I bought another one (new) from a retailer- and that one works as expected... (-> aperture is communicated to the camera as you turn the aperture ring)
---------------
Hi everyone,
thanks for this amazing collection of info and images in this thread!
I have a question for Jman13 or anyone who is using the E-mount Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 on a Nikon Z camera (I have the Z7II and Z5II)
I bought the Fotodiox "Fusion Smart AF Adapter" (Sony E to Nikon Z) and was expecting for aperture info to be passed through to the camera - as there are electronic contacts and all.
I have some Nikon-native Voigtlanders, and when I turn the aperture ring on those, the aperture-info in the viewfinder is updated accordingly (and exposure settings are adjusted if I'm in aperture-control)
Is this what should happen with an E-Mount lens on a "smart"-adapter too?
When I turn the aperture ring on the adapted E-mount lens, no update happens on the camera side.
Do I have a defective adapter? (it was bought "used" directly from Fotodiox)
Or is this just how it works?
Sorry, this is my first time using an adapter... Just want to make sure I'm not having the wrong expectations
Jman13 wrote:
So my Voigtlander 21/1.4 is here, and as I mentioned I'm adapting it to my Nikon bodies. This lens is VERY finicky about the adapter thickness when used on Nikon. I tried with my Megadap adapter, which works great with my AF lenses, though it is slightly thinner than the perfect flange distance. And the Nokton was ABYSMAL on it. Sharp center, massive field curvature that meant the edges were utter trash if focused on the center until about f/5.6, and then they were only fairly bad.
Put it on my Fotodiox E to Z adapter, which I have but generally don't use because it isn't nearly as good at AF as the Megadaps. That adapter is thicker and with the Nokton, makes the infinity stop dead-on infinity. (and interestingly it was too thick for the Loxia, which couldn't reach infinity on that adapter, though I think a lot of that is the super-thick gasket, which meant it didn't mount well on this adapter either, due to it's slightly recessed construction).
On the Fotodiox, the 21/1.4 is great. Probably not quite as good as it would be on a Sony body, but sharp in the center wide open, reasonable edges, a bit soft in the outer midzone due to the wavy nature Fred mentioned. Stopped down to f/2.8, and it's quite good, even in the corners at 45MP, and very good on 24MP. At f/4-f/5.6 it's essentially perfect. Crazy how much very minor flange distance variations seem to make such an enormous difference in image quality with this lens.
Some snapshots from my first weekend with the Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 (on Nikon Z7II via Fotodiox Adapter).
Even though the adapter didn't communicate the correct aperture (showed as f/1.4 in camera and metadata no matter what aperture was used), the camera still adjusted shutter speed in aperture priority mode...
Took my 21mm out for a first try at astrophotography last night. I don't think it did too bad though I think there are better lenses for this. The stars weren't completely sharp but the lens still did an adequate job! Operator error may have played a big part in any perceived weaknesses.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The Voigtlander 21mm f/1.4 Nokton is one lens I genuinely regret selling. It delivered fantastic images and was incredibly useful for travel. I traded it for the 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar (size/weight trade-off) and I am happy with that lens, but the f/1.4 version is a very different beast.
Digging up Fred's old post. I love the 21mm f1.4 but it's heavy, I don't use f1.4 much. I had the Loxia 21 a couple times, ended up keeping the Voigtlander. I am considering getting the Loxia 21 again for travel for it's weight and smaller size.
I forgot about this thread. Found some shots from Ghent, Belgium taken with this lens that I haven't posted here.
ILCE-1M2Voigtlander NOKTON 21mm F1.4 Aspherical lens21mmf/10.04s100 ISO0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2Voigtlander NOKTON 21mm F1.4 Aspherical lens21mmf/10.020s100 ISO0.0 EV
ILCE-1M2Voigtlander NOKTON 21mm F1.4 Aspherical lens21mmf/10.01/3s100 ISO-1.5 EV
ILCE-1M2Voigtlander NOKTON 21mm F1.4 Aspherical lens21mmf/10.01/125s100 ISO0.0 EV
Douglas L wrote:
Digging up Fred's old post. I love the 21mm f1.4 but it's heavy, I don't use f1.4 much. I had the Loxia 21 a couple times, ended up keeping the Voigtlander. I am considering getting the Loxia 21 again for travel for it's weight and smaller size.
I have a colorskoper as well for that reason, as an in-between I picked up a used previously M modified Contax-G 21 biogen also a good lens and bigger but not heavy as my other option... all are good, but that 1.4 21 is Noct heavy like the Leica 50s and if doing landscape I am not shooting at 1.4, however.... low light it cannot be beat.
EMH2025 wrote:
I have a colorskoper as well for that reason, as an in-between I picked up a used previously M modified Contax-G 21 biogen also a good lens and bigger but not heavy as my other option... all are good, but that 1.4 21 is Noct heavy like the Leica 50s and if doing landscape I am not shooting at 1.4, however.... low light it cannot be beat.
I used to shoot a lot of sunrise/sunset, love the sunstar the Voigtlanders make. That's really the main reason I am keeping it.
johncocci wrote:
I have both the Nokton and the Colorskoper. Love them both. Keep telling myself I am going to sell one of them but just can't do it.
Both of your shot here have, at least on my display, a strong 3d-ish-ness. More so than most shots on this thread. Are you doing anything in [articular to achieve this in post?
benjimouse wrote:
Both of your shot here have, at least on my display, a strong 3d-ish-ness. More so than most shots on this thread. Are you doing anything in [articular to achieve this in post?
John can let us know, but the first one looks like a sky replacement to me. The masking is pretty abrupt.
benjimouse wrote:
Both of your shot here have, at least on my display, a strong 3d-ish-ness. More so than most shots on this thread. Are you doing anything in [articular to achieve this in post?
---------------------------------------------
highdesertmesa wrote:
John can let us know, but the first one looks like a sky replacement to me. The masking is pretty abrupt.
No sky replacement and nothing in particular that I can think of to cause what you are seeing. I will look at my edits to check. Not seeing what you see. Maybe something if the jpeg export. I don’t like the sky that much in the second photo (of the trail) but it’s not a replacement.
