p.7 #2 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
rscheffler wrote:
That test by Jono Slack convinced me to try the v2 after a lot of less conclusive information had previously been published by others. But I ended up with two copies of the v2 with really bad field curvature characteristics, to the point where the outer zone was worse than the v1 stopped down to f/5.6 or more....
It really turned me off from that lens (and the relatively bad experience I had with the dealer trying to validate my reasoning for the returns).
That said, it seems like all the recent results I've seen from it have been good, so maybe I was very unlucky....Show more →
That's pretty unlucky considering it's a Leica lens. I have not tested many of them (Perhaps 6 or 7 in a variety of FLs) but so far they've been 100% centered with no visible asymmetry. Very low variance from my personal experience.
p.7 #3 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
rscheffler wrote:
That's a pretty comprehensive collection!
It's a poor man's collection. My bias in the choices is IQ, price, size and compatibility with both Sony and Leica.
I have the old 12/5.6 LTM, which I kept for it's tiny size. It shows some color shift along the edges on the M240, but not as bad as on the M9. I also have the CV15/4.5 III. I haven't used either that much lately.
The main kit is 21 SEM, 28 Lux, CV35/1.7M, 50 Lux ASPH, 90/4 Macro. I'll swap out the Macro with the 90AA sometimes if I need the speed or background separation. Sometimes I'll adapt a 180/3.4 APO-Telyt. I've always been curious about the CV180/4 but it seems they're difficult to find reasonably priced.
I've been tempted by the CV50/1.2 but like the smaller size of the Lux ASPH, despite the ninja-star aperture shape between f/2.5-5.6 and the mid zone dip that becomes most apparent between f/2.8-4. Perhaps because of this, I find I use this lens mostly between f/1.4-2 and around f/8.
If Cosina releases the 50/2 APO in M mount, I would definitely get it as my 50mm all-rounder.
I'm curious your thoughts about the 50/3.5 on the M10... I think I've read that the ergonomics are somewhat annoying. Given that the block diagrams for all 4 versions, as published by Cosina, seem to be the same, I wonder if finding one of the collapsible versions would be worth it?...Show more →
The CV 50/1.2 Nokton does not have a mid dip if that's your preference. At f/2, mid-field is pretty good at mid-distance.
I much prefer lenses with gradual corner fall-off than having weaker mid-field since that's the area I usually place my subjects.
The CV 50/3.5 Heliar is one of those lenses that I don't like the ergo but love the IQ and rendering. It's a razor sharp lens from wide open (across the field) with smooth rendering and low aberration. It's the complete opposite from the Zeiss 50/1.5C and that's why I own both. Love the latter for half body portraits.
The issue I have with the ergo is that the "click-less" aperture ring is linked to the focus ring. So, once you focus, you have to be careful to only move the aperture ring without messing your focus. It's a cool looking lens though. I have no experience with the older collapsible model but there is usually small tweaks and coating upgrades within releases.
p.7 #5 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
very nice collection Fred!
You do not keep the zm 85 any longer?
Fred Miranda wrote:
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....Show more →
p.7 #8 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
hanay78 wrote:
Well weight is similar and f1.5 is more versatile than f4, but the zm seems to be sublime, isn't it?
Yes the ZM is outstanding but the extra 3 stops of light comes in handy. The Voigtlander is quite amazing starting at f/2.8 and at f/4 it's at CV 65/2 APO level of resolution and contrast.
p.7 #9 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
Interesting! Pitifully, I do not have the 65. Does it mean that, at f4 f5.6, the Voigtländer is superior to the ZM in colors and contrast?
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes the ZM is outstanding but the extra 3 stops of light comes in handy. Voigtlander is quite amazing starting at f/2.8 and at f/4 it's at CV 65/2 APO level of resolution and contrast.
p.7 #10 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
hanay78 wrote:
Interesting! Pitifully, I do not have the 65. Does it mean that, at f4 f5.6, the Voigtländer is superior to the ZM in colors and contrast?
I'm pretty sure that at f/4 the CV 75/1.5 will be sharper than the ZM (which is wide open). But I never tested them side by side.
p.7 #11 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
rscheffler wrote:
That test by Jono Slack convinced me to try the v2 after a lot of less conclusive information had previously been published by others. But I ended up with two copies of the v2 with really bad field curvature characteristics, to the point where the outer zone was worse than the v1 stopped down to f/5.6 or more....
It really turned me off from that lens (and the relatively bad experience I had with the dealer trying to validate my reasoning for the returns).
That said, it seems like all the recent results I've seen from it have been good, so maybe I was very unlucky. ...Show more → Fred Miranda wrote:
That's pretty unlucky considering it's a Leica lens. I have not tested many of them (Perhaps 6 or 7 in a variety of FLs) but so far they've been 100% centered with no visible asymmetry. Very low variance from my personal experience.
Yeah... it surprised me too. I posted about it over on the LUF (Leica User Forum) with links to full-res files and didn't get a lot of support. I managed to get full-res samples from a couple other photographers and was able to see the FC in some of their images, too.
TBH, the test by pmeheut above wouldn't show the FC issue clearly. A better subject for FC analysis would be a mid-distance subject that doesn't span the width of the frame with an area of detailed/textured ground around it, such as a lawn, gravel or stones. The FC I saw with the v2 copies curved away from the camera.
Regarding optical centering: all of the Leica lenses I've bought have been OK, too, including those 28 Crons. The problem those had was perhaps an element spacing/shimming issue. The problems I've run into most often have related to RF calibration.
I'm not sure Leica's QC is better than any of the other brands, though everyone assumes it should be for the price. If anything, with so much hand assembly (claimed by them) and increasing needs for tighter tolerances, it might actually work against them. But I have no way of knowing that for sure. Leica puts a date on product boxes and both of the lenses I received were extremely early production... in fact both were prior to the official public announcement. So I'm thinking it could have been a bad early production batch.
Where Leica may have a weakness is design problems resulting in early run recalls, like the flaring issue with the 50 Cron APO ASPH, strap lug recall for the M240, the M10 ISO dial problem. Not to say there haven't been longer term problems, like the M9 series sensor cover glass decay. But with that one it's difficult to know if the blame lies with Leica or Kodak/Truesense. On a smaller scale, I discovered the 50 Lux ASPH lens hood and filter ring assembly is held to the front of the lens with a single tiny screw and several dabs of glue. This became apparent after it fell off my copy, probably because I habitually handled the lens from the front when pulling it out of the camera bag, mounting it to the camera, etc...
p.7 #12 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
rscheffler wrote:
Yeah... it surprised me too. I posted about it over on the LUF (Leica User Forum) with links to full-res files and didn't get a lot of support. I managed to get full-res samples from a couple other photographers and was able to see the FC in some of their images, too.
TBH, the test by pmeheut above wouldn't show the FC issue clearly. A better subject for FC analysis would be a mid-distance subject that doesn't span the width of the frame with an area of detailed/textured ground around it, such as a lawn, gravel or stones. The FC I saw with the v2 copies curved away from the camera.
Regarding optical centering: all of the Leica lenses I've bought have been OK, too, including those 28 Crons. The problem those had was perhaps an element spacing/shimming issue. The problems I've run into most often have related to RF calibration.
I'm not sure Leica's QC is better than any of the other brands, though everyone assumes it should be for the price. If anything, with so much hand assembly (claimed by them) and increasing needs for tighter tolerances, it might actually work against them. But I have no way of knowing that for sure. Leica puts a date on product boxes and both of the lenses I received were extremely early production... in fact both were prior to the official public announcement. So I'm thinking it could have been a bad early production batch.
Where Leica may have a weakness is design problems resulting in early run recalls, like the flaring issue with the 50 Cron APO ASPH, strap lug recall for the M240, the M10 ISO dial problem. Not to say there haven't been longer term problems, like the M9 series sensor cover glass decay. But with that one it's difficult to know if the blame lies with Leica or Kodak/Truesense. On a smaller scale, I discovered the 50 Lux ASPH lens hood and filter ring assembly is held to the front of the lens with a single tiny screw and several dabs of glue. This became apparent after it fell off my copy, probably because I habitually handled the lens from the front when pulling it out of the camera bag, mounting it to the camera, etc......Show more →
Just to be clear, I'm not claiming Leica lenses are free of issues. Low variance is my personal limited experience. I have yet to see a Leica lens out of whack but I'm sure @RCicala at lensrentals has seen many!
What's the issue with the ISO dial on the M10? I didn't know there was an issue.
p.7 #13 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
For anyone considering the 50/3.5, what works well is choosing (unclicked) aperture first, then working the wider diameter, rough-knurled focus ring. No one else seems to work this way, but it was common in film days, in good light. Landscape people got to know where they would focus for each aperture setting, off the focus ring index.
On the Heliar today, one can distinguish the rearmost (focus) ring by feel, to then focus using EVF/magnification, knowing aperture will not move independently (it's an inch away).
Changing aperture after focusing is harder. In mine, it causes a slight drag on the focus ring, changing the focus point. The aperture index is very hard to make out in strong light, and aperture engravings disappear from top view when focusing at some distances. Once you leave infinity on the focus scale, the aperture index disappears from top view.
I feel they intended it to work as described above: aperture, then on to focus. If rehoused, it would sell in much larger numbers. But Cosina has two other more conventional world class 50s to sell (only one for M).
p.7 #14 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
I have owned and used and enjoyed the Heliar 50/3.5 for many years. I have both the version 2 (Nikon S mount) and version 3 (collapsable nickel). My favorite for the Sony body is using the S version with S -> M adapter and the close focus adapter. This way the lens does not rotate as it is focused, so the aperture remains upright. However there is no focus scale and some people do not like focusing with the close focus adapter. It is trading ergonomic issues, I think. But none of the ergonomic issues bother me. I just enjoy the lens and the images it produces. Its small size makes it a great travel lens too.
p.7 #15 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
Fred Miranda wrote:
Just to be clear, I'm not claiming Leica lenses are free of issues. Low variance is my personal limited experience. I have yet to see a Leica lens out of whack but I'm sure @RCicala@ at lensrentals has seen many!
What's the issue with the ISO dial on the M10? I didn't know there was an issue.
Yes, I understand. I've generally found the Leica lenses to be optically as expected. The 28 Cron v2 problem I had was the first exception.
IIRC, the M10 ISO dial is not physically connected to whatever mechanism makes the actual ISO settings and instead uses a magnet to relay changes on the dial to the camera. IIRC there were instances of this malfunctioning. The answer might be in this LUF thread.
The greatest disappointment of the Leica experience IMO is their service turnaround times in normal situations (i.e. not during this Covid pandemic). IIRC, they're trying to turn cameras around in two weeks, but lenses can take 1 month or more. But at least for lenses there are 3rd party options like DAG.
p.7 #16 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
Fred Miranda wrote:
It's a poor man's collection. My bias in the choices is IQ, price, size and compatibility with both Sony and Leica.
No way, not now. Going all CV 10 years ago, then yes, maybe. But given what Cosina has produced recently, this is a very logical selection of lenses.
The CV 50/1.2 Nokton does not have a mid dip if that's your preference. At f/2, mid-field is pretty good at mid-distance.
I much prefer lenses with gradual corner fall-off than having weaker mid-field since that's the area I usually place my subjects.
Yeah, I'd prefer to avoid the mid zone dip and the ninja star aperture at f/2.5-5.6. But the diameter of the 50/1.2 would present some problems with my current camera bag layout. A while back I was very tempted to buy the 21/3.5, 35/2 and 50/1.2...
Once Canon release the R5, I'll be curious to see how some of these CV lenses work with that sensor stack...
The CV 50/3.5 Heliar is one of those lenses that I don't like the ergo but love the IQ and rendering. It's a razor sharp lens from wide open (across the field) with smooth rendering and low aberration. It's the complete opposite from the Zeiss 50/1.5C and that's why I own both. Love the latter for half body portraits.
The issue I have with the ergo is that the "click-less" aperture ring is linked to the focus ring. So, once you focus, you have to be careful to only move the aperture ring without messing your focus. It's a cool looking lens though. I have no experience with the older collapsible model but there is usually small tweaks and coating upgrades within releases. ...Show more →
Thanks for the additional info. I agree there have probably been tweaks over the years, particularly with coatings. Cosina did that between the 50/1.5 LTM and M versions to improve contrast, color saturation and flare resistance. I think in my case, I'd prefer a 50/2 APO as an all-rounder, as previously mentioned.
p.7 #17 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
rscheffler wrote:
TBH, the test by pmeheut above wouldn't show the FC issue clearly. A better subject for FC analysis would be a mid-distance subject that doesn't span the width of the frame with an area of detailed/textured ground around it, such as a lawn, gravel or stones.
Can you show me an example? If so, I may try to reproduce it.
rscheffler wrote:
IIRC, the M10 ISO dial is not physically connected to whatever mechanism makes the actual ISO settings and instead uses a magnet to relay changes on the dial to the camera. IIRC there were instances of this malfunctioning.
Indeed. This was the only problem I had with the M10 so far.
p.7 #18 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
gyoung143 wrote:
Would you say the good midfield of the M version on the Sony sensor extends far enough to cover aps-c?. If so it would be useful on Fuji as well as Sony crop cameras.
Thanks, Gerry
Just to 'bump' this, I know you're all somewhat preoccupied with full frame Sony, but does no one use even Sony aps-c? Sensor related results would be similar to Fuji.
p.7 #19 · Best Voigtlander M-mount lenses for Leica and Sony sensors
philip_pj wrote:
Changing aperture after focusing is harder. In mine, it causes a slight drag on the focus ring, changing the focus point. The aperture index is very hard to make out in strong light, and aperture engravings disappear from top view when focusing at some distances. Once you leave infinity on the focus scale, the aperture index disappears from top view.
This baroque "lens board" design wants the aperture to be set first, and the focus mechanism will have an infinity lock for that purpose. Not exactly oriented to action photography! My specimen of the genre is the Elmar 50/3.5 circa 1950. Aperture control is positioned on the front face of the lens and setting is established with one's fingernail. Aperture rings are for wimps.
My bias in the choices is IQ, price, size and compatibility with both Sony and Leica.