AGeoJO wrote:
It still puzzles me why Laowa didn’t include any electronic contacts that would enable exif transmissions. Just charge a little more for that feature... , although it shouldn’t be that much more.
Unfortunate, but if I had to choose between electric contacts and the possibility of mounting standard round filters, I'll take the later without blinking.
vdo1 wrote:
Unfortunate, but if I had to choose between electric contacts and the possibility of mounting standard round filters, I'll take the later without blinking.
Being able to mount standard filters would be more a design, let’s say, compromise rather than an omission. I really could count on my hand when I need filters for my photography. I despise filters, including or especially for the so-called protection purposes while ND or a polarizer filter can be useful. I can really live without any “protection” filters, thank you! That’s why I am still hanging on dearly to my A7r II for the built-in Smooth Reflection app and the Digital Filter app. But I understand to each his/her own.
A Dremel tool can do away with the lens integrated shade. Then it might be possible to use 100mm instead of 150mm filters on the Laowa 11/4.5, which would be very practical for most.
Sorry if I'm stating the obvious, and have misunderstood the discussion / objection - but there is, in some ways, an option to use big front filters on this lens. It was described in BastianK's reviews of the 9mm and 10-18mm Laowas:
They are making in every mirrorless Mount there is. They can’t chip them all as companies other than Sony do not make it available for 3rd parties.
Cosina is a clear winner when it comes to this!
AGeoJO wrote:
It still puzzles me why Laowa didn’t include any electronic contacts that would enable exif transmissions. Just charge a little more for that feature... , although it shouldn’t be that much more.
GHarris wrote:
Sorry if I'm stating the obvious, and have misunderstood the discussion / objection - but there is, in some ways, an option to use big front filters on this lens. It was described in BastianK's reviews of the 9mm and 10-18mm Laowas:
I've probably completely misunderstood something, sorry if I have.
I think it was a misunderstanding. I saw 62mm screw filters mentioned in the description and featured in the second photo in the thread. I was actually happy about that, no objections here.
For me, the whole point is a small travel lens. I have the massive Nikon 14-24 and the gigantic Fotodiox adapter for filters. It works, but is anything but 'travel size'.
I also won't mind paying <$100 for a decent ND filter, that doesn't need it's own armored case, and fits in my pocket.
I just RMA'd the Samyang AF 12mm f/2.8 (MUCH smaller than the Nikon zoom, but still too big) and am leaning toward doing the same with the Laowa 9mm f/5.6.
Open to any recommendations on choosing between the 9mm and 11mm Laowa...
NuclearRoy wrote:
For me, the whole point is a small travel lens. I have the massive Nikon 14-24 and the gigantic Fotodiox adapter for filters. It works, but is anything but 'travel size'.
I also won't mind paying <$100 for a decent ND filter, that doesn't need it's own armored case, and fits in my pocket.
I just RMA'd the Samyang AF 12mm f/2.8 (MUCH smaller than the Nikon zoom, but still too big) and am leaning toward doing the same with the Laowa 9mm f/5.6.
Open to any recommendations on choosing between the 9mm and 11mm Laowa...
We still don't know how they compare. It looks like the worse performer is the Voigtlander 10/5.6 in terms of astigmatism off-axis and I always thought the CV 12/5.6 III was a much better performer. I currently shoot with CV 12/5.6 III and CV 15/4.5 III lenses for my ultra wide needs, but I will test the CV 12/5.6 III against the Laowa 11/4.5 soon. The Laowa 9/5.6 is in a class of its own.
Yes. This is maybe the way, but why do they make the non removable hood ? Why so complex ? And doing this, probably you will suffer a significant value lost in the used market
bjornthun wrote:
A Dremel tool can do away with the lens integrated shade. Then it might be possible to use 100mm instead of 150mm filters on the Laowa 11/4.5, which would be very practical for most.
Fred Miranda wrote:
We still don't know how they compare. It looks like the worse performer is the Voigtlander 10/5.6 in terms of astigmatism off-axis and I always thought the CV 12/5.6 III was a much better performer. I currently shoot with CV 12/5.6 III and CV 15/4.5 III lenses for my ultra wide needs, but I will test the CV 12/5.6 III against the Laowa 11/4.5 soon. The Laowa 9/5.6 is in a class of its own.
Bastian has reviewed both the 9 and 11. To his surprise I think he thought the 9 was very slightly better overall. Of course it might be that the 9 was a top sample, and the 11 a bottom sample...
I went through the links you add, to the BastianK reviews, about the filter holders.
I think they were late additions as i did not remember to have read this valuable information about the filters and they usage.
For what I read, I would say it is a very inconvenient (at least) solution. Why not being able to use Nisi or Lee or something normal.
If the 14 is the same, buy a vm 15 and shave it, probably the best uwa solution , if one does not need wider, as one can even use lee 75 filters as other members of the forum did with the convenience of the contacts.
GHarris wrote:
Sorry if I'm stating the obvious, and have misunderstood the discussion / objection - but there is, in some ways, an option to use big front filters on this lens. It was described in BastianK's reviews of the 9mm and 10-18mm Laowas:
I don't understand why they didn't make the hood removable ? Why these problems with filters? If the optical 14mm is the same as this 11mm, I will just cut off the petals of the blend )
p/s Now I use CV 21/3.5 I never take a blend because I always use filters.
grahamgibson wrote:
Also, why is the midfield sample taken so close to center??
The lens has wavy field curvature and I am showing the worst part of the frame.
grahamgibson wrote:
Those brick wall samples remind me of what my CV15 with corner smearing looked like.
Maybe, but this is an 11mm and not a 15mm so I compare it to CV10 (way worse) and CV12 (not used it personally, only reviewed by us on 24mp, as mentioned).
hanay78 wrote:
I went through the links you add, to the BastianK reviews, about the filter holders.
I think they were late additions as i did not remember to have read this valuable information about the filters and they usage.
I got the 9mm holder later, so that was one of the later additions to the review, yes.
sergun wrote:
I don't understand why they didn't make the hood removable ? Why these problems with filters? If the optical 14mm is the same as this 11mm, I will just cut off the petals of the blend )
p/s Now I use CV 21/3.5 I never take a blend because I always use filters.
hanay78 wrote:
Why not being able to use Nisi or Lee or something normal.
Please define "normal". For someone contemplating travel photography, city / street / interiors on the go, 150mm filters may look anything but "normal".
OTOH If you don't have size / weight / time restrictions for your application, then why would you be looking at this particular lens, when something like the 12-24 G(M) plus filter holders would address so much more of the wide angle end? (and most likely in a much sharper way too?)
hanay78 wrote:
I went through the links you add, to the BastianK reviews, about the filter holders.
I think they were late additions as i did not remember to have read this valuable information about the filters and they usage.
For what I read, I would say it is a very inconvenient (at least) solution. Why not being able to use Nisi or Lee or something normal.
If the 14 is the same, buy a vm 15 and shave it, probably the best uwa solution , if one does not need wider, as one can even use lee 75 filters as other members of the forum did with the convenience of the contacts.
I think Laowa decided on custom adapters in order to avoid vignetting. The downside is having to bring an extra adapter just for specific lenses.
In the case of the Voigtlander 15/4.5 III, I've removed the lens hood in order to use NDs and a polarizer. (same Seven5 set for all my lenses) https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1531160
Here is how the CV 15/4.5 III looks with the Seven5 adapter ring, making it very easy to swap lenses using the same filter.
In the case of the Voigtlander 12/5.6 III, I kept the hood since this lens is thread-less. I can still get the ND effect by doing multiple exposures and combining them in post in a mean stack but the Laowa 11/4.5's filter thread caught my interest. Hopefully it will perform similarly in resolution, contrast, flare, sunstar and distortion.
The funny thing about this crop line photo (which is shown to demonstrate how wide a lens is/AOV) is that right now you will say wow 11mm is so much more wider than 15mm...till you see another picture comparing 11mm with 10 or 9mm
nandadevieast wrote:
The funny thing about this crop line photo (which is shown to demonstrate how wide a lens is/AOV) is that right now you will say wow 11mm is so much more wider than 15mm...till you see another picture comparing 11mm with 10 or 9mm
Well, some people went the other way and dismissed the existence of any significant difference between 12 and 14 when the Sigma 14-24 came out....
As Thomas Cranmer once said, "What the heart loves, the will chooses and the mind justifies.”
, although it shouldn’t be that much more. 
