GMPhotography wrote:
Fred do you like the hood. You know me just wondering
The hood comes in 2 pieces. There is an adapter ring with a 58mm thread and the actual hood that slides to the adapter ring and can be locked via knob.
The adapter ring extends the lens about 7mm so knowing you, you will probably use that as the hood.
Very nice touch, the screw-mounted hood, so thoughtful. You can add a filter and mount the hood on it for extra extension, probably without incurring a vignette (this being a 75mm) and get more protection for the rather exposed large front element, placed not far back into the lens body. These short metal hoods are great for keeping the lens up a little in a small 'lens down, camera vertical' LP AW type bag.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I'm confident on my copy since it's symmetric at f/1.5 but it's hard to be sure if it performs optimally at all distances unless comparing it to at least 2 or 3 copies.
When using the CV 75/1.5 on the Sony, field curvature could be a negative for landscapes at "wide apertures". (f/4 already masks its effect)
However, with portraits, field curvature is not as relevant with the subject off-axis because we would be focusing on that area. I still don't know for sure if the FC is a characteristic of the lens. The only way to know for sure is to test it on a Leica or modified Sony. It's also not clear if Voigtlander will produce this lens for the E-mount....Show more →
I tested my copy of the CV 75/1.5 on an infinity scene with my Leica M10-P yesterday afternoon and found it has essentially a flat field. Using the Leica Visoflex 020 external EVF, I focused on the center of the scene (which was at the hard infinity stop) and took exposures at f/1.5, f2.0, and f/2.8. I then moved the focusing point left to the mid-zone, re-focused (again the sharpest focus was at the hard stop) and made another three exposures. Finally I moved the focus point as close to the left edge as possible, refocused (hard stop once more) and made a final three exposures. Naturally, since the focus hadn’t changed, the center images wide open were identical, as were those at the mid-zone and near-edge. I just checked by focusing on a different infinity subject and best focus is achieved wide open at center, mid-zone, and near-edge at the hard infinity stop in all three cases. I’ll post the results here (if that’s appropriate) and in the First Impressions thread as soon as I’m able.
genji wrote:
I tested my copy of the CV 75/1.5 on an infinity scene with my Leica M10-P yesterday afternoon and found it has essentially a flat field. Using the Leica Visoflex 020 external EVF, I focused on the center of the scene (which was at the hard infinity stop) and took exposures at f/1.5, f2.0, and f/2.8. I then moved the focusing point left to the mid-zone, re-focused (again the sharpest focus was at the hard stop) and made another three exposures. Finally I moved the focus point as close to the left edge as possible, refocused (hard stop once more) and made a final three exposures. Naturally, since the focus hadn’t changed, the center images wide open were identical, as were those at the mid-zone and near-edge. I just checked by focusing on a different infinity subject and best focus is achieved wide open at center, mid-zone, and near-edge at the hard infinity stop in all three cases. I’ll post the results here (if that’s appropriate) and in the First Impressions thread as soon as I’m able....Show more →
Thank you for doing this!
According to your results on the M10-P, there is indeed induced field curvature when using it on a Sony. I'm actually thinking about modifying my A7R3's sensor just to use this lens and the Zeiss 35/1.4 ZM. I miss it.
On my stock A7R3, the 75/1.5 is far from flat-field...
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thank you for doing this!
According to your results on the M10-P, there is indeed induced field curvature when using it on a Sony. I'm actually thinking about modifying my A7R3's sensor just to use this lens and the Zeiss 35/1.4 ZM. I miss it.
On my stock A7R3, the 75/1.5 is far from flat-field...
I have the ZM 35/1.4 and this CV 75/1.5 is its perfect complement! If I could have only one lens for my Leica it would be the Summilux-M 50mm but, if I could have two, I think I might have to go for the ZM 35/1.4 and the CV 75/1.5.
GMPhotography wrote:
Fred do you like the hood. You know me just wondering
The hood is a redone screw in hood. It has a sleeve that screws in first, then the hood clamps to it, so that you can rotate the metal hood part without the spokes interfering with visibility. I’ll prob use a different screw in hood that’ll let me mount a circular polarizer inside it (like Overgaard style hoods).
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thank you for doing this!
According to your results on the M10-P, there is indeed induced field curvature when using it on a Sony. I'm actually thinking about modifying my A7R3's sensor just to use this lens and the Zeiss 35/1.4 ZM. I miss it.
On my stock A7R3, the 75/1.5 is far from flat-field...
I’m getting similar results, but not at infinity tests. Fred: that’s awesome to hear of your praise for the D35/1.4 ZM. According to PC Mags testing its the sharpest M Mount lens they’ve tested. It’s as sharp as the 50/2 APO, which is truly saying something (even though the 50/2 APO is better corrected in a host of other optical metrics).
philip_pj wrote:
Very nice touch, the screw-mounted hood, so thoughtful. You can add a filter and mount the hood on it for extra extension, probably without incurring a vignette (this being a 75mm) and get more protection for the rather exposed large front element, placed not far back into the lens body. These short metal hoods are great for keeping the lens up a little in a small 'lens down, camera vertical' LP AW type bag.
Unfortunately you can’t use a circular polarizer lest you rotate the entire hood to adjust polarity.
Aug 13, 2019 at 05:26 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
This new 75mm f/1.5 VM certainly does have my attention! I am very appreciative, and thankful, for the information and images posted in this thread, thus far..
And, regarding the Zeiss Distagon 1,4/35mm ZM, I certainly do love mine, to the degree that I may add another, in the silver-toned finish, for more-comfortable handling in southern Texas summers, and so I can have one, each, on an M10 and a Monochrom 246 at the same time.
Maybe a touch smaller . It’s absolutely gorgeous looking . Maybe my favorite of my 4 CVs. . I like the internal ring but not so much the screw on hood. I may just add a 58mm filter ring just to make it a little longer on the hood. But don’t go by me, I’m a hood snob. Not a big fan of these OEM hoods although Voigtlander are the best.
I’ll start with BB in the morning and get through some tests. I’m really looking forward to this
GMPhotography wrote:
Maybe a touch smaller . It’s absolutely gorgeous looking . Maybe my favorite of my 4 CVs. . I like the internal ring but not so much the screw on hood. I may just add a 58mm filter ring just to make it a little longer on the hood. But don’t go by me, I’m a hood snob. Not a big fan of these OEM hoods although Voigtlander are the best.
I’ll start with BB in the morning and get through some tests. I’m really looking forward to this
You are right. The CV 21/1.4 is a bit shorter. When I compared them, the 75/1.5's hood adapter on the lens.
Interesting lens...but I'm not sure it would win out in a battle with the original CV 75/2.5 for my love. It would be cool to do a comparison, though I'm wondering if both are rare enough that no one actually has the two.
Dave Sanders wrote:
Interesting lens...but I'm not sure it would win out in a battle with the original CV 75/2.5 for my love. It would be cool to do a comparison, though I'm wondering if both are rare enough that no one actually has the two.
I have both but exhaustive comparative testing is not really my thing.
Hah, understood, not mine either. A couple portraits with each lens would do it for me. What are your totally non-scientific, subjective thoughts on the two?
genji wrote:
I have both but exhaustive comparative testing is not really my thing.
Dave Sanders wrote:
Hah, understood, not mine either. A couple portraits with each lens would do it for me. What are your totally non-scientific, subjective thoughts on the two?
TBH, I haven't used the CV 75/2.5 much recently. It was relegated to reserve grade (or the minors, as Americans might say) once I got a great copy of the Summarit-M 75/2.5 from forum member DavidBM. But there's a plan for David and I to do a portrait distance test with my Leica for Phillip Reeve's 75/1.5 review and it wouldn't be too much trouble to do a couple of portrait pics with the 75/2.5 then.
