Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.6 #14 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors | |
rscheffler wrote:
Not directly.
I compared the CV/VM 28/2 against the ZM28/2.8 on the M9 when I first started looking into 28mm options. This was when Voigtlander lenses were IMO still more miss than hit compared to ZM and Leica M options (as opposed to the tear they're on now). My takeaway from that test was that the CV had focus shift and relatively lower contrast wide open. The ZM had more pop to the images. Neither were great in the periphery (which you can see in the ZM's MTFs). I would have gone with the ZM except for the speed. Trying to shoot everything, including indoor available light event work on the M9 at ISO 640 or slower meant f/2.8 was fairly restrictive. Even f/2 was borderline. Yes, higher ISOs on the M9 were an option, but above ISO 640 the fps rate dropped by half and the buffer dropped to roughly 3 or 4 frames, which for me was a massive annoyance. The camera just felt really laggy. The M240 improved on this somewhat, but still had a similar and annoying high ISO performance penalty, but at ISO 1250 instead. That extra stop over the M9 plus the addition of the 28 Lux bought a total of two stops, which made a difference in some previously borderline situations. The M10 seems to be an entirely different animal without that apparent hard transition point at a seemingly arbitrary high ISO value, but I have not yet made the move. TBH, for the sake of simplicity in post, I reverted a lot of my more run & gun event work back to my Canon gear.
Anyway, the results of that comparison eventually led me to the Leica 28/2 v1, which I owned for 4 or 5 years and was one of the mainstays in my kit. For me it just had all the right qualities - colour, contrast, rendering, sharpness, size, ergonomics... It had simple (rather than wavy) field curvature that was easier to work with than the Leica lenses with wavy field curvature. But it was still somewhat problematic if photographing a planar subject at apertures wider than ~f/4 (think a row of people), particularly because it curved away from the camera when moving from center to edge. But by f/5.6 I found it to be great for across-frame sharpness for landscapes or similar. Ergonomics were good, though the hood was kind of clunky.
I eventually convinced myself I should upgrade to the v2 for the better wide open flatness of field, but had bad experiences with two early production copies that both exhibited very strong field curvature and poor peripheral performance compared to my v1 copy and the CV/VM 35/1.7, so ended up moving on to the 28 Lux for the extra stop and have stayed with it for the last few years. It's relatively big, but optical performance is really nice and the extra stop does make a difference for me with the M240, as previously explained.
If I had the M10, the Cron would likely be a sufficiently fast all-rounder, but I'd have to re-test the second version to figure out if it was just me having bad luck the first time around. Another FM member I've discussed this with has had much better results with the Cron v2.
If I was just getting into Leica M now, I'd definitely start with Voigtlander glass - it's an unbeatable price/performance combination (I wonder how 7Artisans/TT Artisans will compare in a few years). In fact, I'm thinking about bringing back more Voigtlander in my bag. I started with some ZM and filled gaps with CV options, but then pretty much replaced all of it with Leica's equivalents, except for the 35/1.7. I could replace the Leica 21/3.4 with the CV 21/3.5, though I've read it's maybe not quite as sharp across the frame. Same for the CV21/1.4 vs. 21 Lux. The CV looks like a definite improvement over their 21/1.8, which at the time didn't really sway me to move from the Leica 21/1.4. The CV50/1.2 looks to be a worthy improvement over the 50/1.5 and addresses the 50 Lux ASPH's significant mid zone dip problem, while producing pleasing rendering. But it's pretty chunky... Really, as we're discussing here, the glaring gap in CV's M-mount lineup is a 'modern' fast 28. I'd also love to see a killer sharp and small 28/2.8 or 3.5. They're also missing fast and slow 90s.
My day to day kit is 21, 28, 35, 50, 90 with the most used being the middle three, for which I've 'settled' on faster all-rounders for the flexibility. For each of the 21 and 90 slots, I have fast and slow options for when I prefer small and light for daytime or fast for available darkness or when shallow DoF rendering is desired. But TBH, given how good the 28 Lux is as an all-rounder, I don't bring the 21 Lux that often. I can usually make 28 work instead, or the 21 SEM at slower shutter speeds (particularly true for non-people work). Therefore not so sure how much I'd actually use the CV21/1.4....Show more →
My Leica set is basically all Voigtlander since most of them perform similarly on both Sony and Leica. The only lens showing issues on the Sony sensor stack is the CV 28/2 Ultron but it's a very good performer on the Leica. (without breaking the bank)
My set is: CV 12/5.6 III, CV 21/3.5, CV 28/2, CV 35/1.2 III, CV 50/3.5, ZM 50/1.5C, CV 75/1.5 and Leica 135/4 TE.
I love the CV 21/1.4 Nokton on the Leica but knowing myself, I would not use it much as I prefer small/light lenses for the Leica camera. I am thinking of adding the E-mount version to go with the CV 50/2 APO for the Sony.
|
