Tease: Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.5 II tested on Sony and Leica.
The Sony image was shot with a A7RIV (resized to 24MP). Same sharpening applied to both images after the Sony was resized.
There is some induced field curvature when using the Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.5 II on the Sony sensor which was expected but the results are not bad on the Sony when shooting wide open. (Very good on the Leica)
PS: The weather is not cooperating today and it looks like I will only get a sunny day next Tuesday.
Sony (LEFT) - Leica (RIGHT) - Focused at center and showing the extreme corner at f/1.5:
Extreme corner at f/1.5: Focused at center, Sony (LEFT) vs Leica (RIGHT)
Thanks for the quick preview! That is really great wide open corner performance on the Leica... I'm looking forward to the full test set once the weather cooperates.
That induced field curvature will make the out of focus corners appear sharper when using the Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.5 II on the Sony. This is more noticeable at mid-distance. It's not a big difference but it's there.
Here is a tease sample:
PS: The Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Full Review will be started on a new thread.
Sony (TOP), Leica (BOTTOM)
1:1 crop showing the corners: Sony (LEFT), Leica (RIGHT)
I've tested my review copy for tilted focus plane and the corners look equal. It could be luck or the lens has low variance. (The newer 35/1.2 and 50/1.2 Nokton have very low variance as well). The CV 40/1.2 not so much. I've requested the SC (single coating) version for comparison to the MC. It may take a few weeks though as it seems the Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II has a lot of pre-orders for both versions.
I've been testing it indoors today because of the bad weather and it seems the Voigtlander 50/1.5 II characteristics are similar to the Voigtlander 75/1.5. It's sharp enough wide open (f/1.5) with some RSA, sharp at f/2 and very sharp at f/2.4. This difference is more evident at close distances and MFD.
Juha Kannisto wrote:
Thanks very much! I'll take another shot of the camera and lens without the hood tomorrow when we have do daylight again I have an A9 as my main camera prior to A7C + older gen A7II and original A7r. The small EVF on A7C worked quite well for MF shooting for me today, peaking is very clear even without magnification and magnification is available to 5.9 and 11.7 times or something like that (if I remember right). I could frame my shots and see the focus clearly all the time and MF ease of use was pretty much the same that I'm used to, only with a smaller view. The smaller EVF view is not as good for reviewing photos etc. where my A9 is pretty good though. I've not yet shot the camera in bright daylight under the sun, that might be a bit more challenging since there is not much in terms of eyecup around the EVF. Overall I think the EVF will not make it hard to get focus and framing right and I much prefer having an EVF to using the screen. I've been frustrated with my Sigma fp having to use the screen only if I want to keep it small (the LCD viewfinder makes it a much bigger camera). ...Show more →
Thanks for the feedback on that! Good to hear some experience with manual focus on the smaller evf. as long as it sseems usable i might downgrade(upgrade) from a7r2 to make my set as compact as possible. Hmmph!
zhangyue wrote:
Thanks for the samples, very helpful.
This lens has pretty smooth bokeh. It remind me a lot of VC75 which should not be a surprise. I do see it has strong mechanic vignette lead me to believe the lens may not have generous coverage, not just for using at larger format but also to avoid corner issue at different shooting case. 50lux ASPH is quite good in this regard, which is one of the reason I like it. I have to say I sm not sure the corner issue here are from sensor stack or just the design or both. It do show slightly CA, but well controlled.
These two samples are telling about corner rendering.
I am not sure yet if I will get it or not. if not having all those 50mm, I will. I like VC75 quite a lot after using it more. The biggest selling point again is size/performance ratio just like VC75. The bokeh looks good to me.
Yes, that's what I see so far. Lens signature is reminiscent of the CV 75/1.5 Nokton, which I view as positive but it also means noticeable mid-zone dip at wider apertures. Just like with the 75mm, it looks like Cosina wanted this lens to be as compact as possible while delivering great IQ but the downside is a fairly pronounced optical vignetting (cat-eye bokeh) as expected. For those who like the sharpness, colors and rendering from the 75mm f/1.5 Nokton, this 50mm won't disappoint.
Juha Kannisto wrote:
Thanks very much! I'll take another shot of the camera and lens without the hood tomorrow when we have do daylight again I have an A9 as my main camera prior to A7C + older gen A7II and original A7r. The small EVF on A7C worked quite well for MF shooting for me today, peaking is very clear even without magnification and magnification is available to 5.9 and 11.7 times or something like that (if I remember right). I could frame my shots and see the focus clearly all the time and MF ease of use was pretty much the same that I'm used to, only with a smaller view. The smaller EVF view is not as good for reviewing photos etc. where my A9 is pretty good though. I've not yet shot the camera in bright daylight under the sun, that might be a bit more challenging since there is not much in terms of eyecup around the EVF. Overall I think the EVF will not make it hard to get focus and framing right and I much prefer having an EVF to using the screen. I've been frustrated with my Sigma fp having to use the screen only if I want to keep it small (the LCD viewfinder makes it a much bigger camera). ...Show more →
Thanks for your feedback on the A7C's finder. It seems to be very usable. Interested in how it looks with the Voigtlander 50/1.5 II without the hood.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Thanks for your feedback on the A7C's finder. It seems to be very usable. Interested in how it looks with the Voigtlander 50/1.5 II without the hood.
The whole list of lenses in the shots:
- 50/3.5 Heliar VM
- 50/2.5 Color-Skopar LTM (Chrome)
- 50/2 Heliar classic VM (Collapsible)
- 50/1.5 Nokton Vintage Line II VM
- 50/2 APO-Lanthar (E-Mount)
- 50/1.2 Nokton (E-Mount)
Always nice to visit Tokyo through your eyes Juha.
Love the backlit samples where it looks like the Voigtlander 50/1.5 II combats flare very well. I wonder how images from the SC version would look at similar scenes.
How do you like your A7C so far? Are you going to modify the sensor?
The whole list of lenses in the shots:
- 50/3.5 Heliar VM
- 50/2.5 Color-Skopar LTM (Chrome)
- 50/2 Heliar classic VM (Collapsible)
- 50/1.5 Nokton Vintage Line II VM
- 50/2 APO-Lanthar (E-Mount)
- 50/1.2 Nokton (E-Mount)
A bit of a tangent, but curious what your thoughts are about which to keep and which to sell?
My take would be that each has a niche, though the 50/3.5 IMO is the odd one out. It's not very small and I'm sure some/most of the others have similar optical performance once stopped down to f/3.5. It's also ergonomically not the greatest (based on what I've read).
I can appreciate that the 50/2 VM and 50/2.5 are quite small and will probably boil down to optical characteristics. But the 50/1.5 is not much larger and gains you at least one more stop. It's probably the most practical all-rounder: small, fast, relatively light, very good optics.
The 50 APO would be the best, optically.
The 50/1.2 has use in low light or when desiring ultra shallow DoF. It may also have calmer bokeh than the 50/1.5...
I still noticed nervousness in transition zones, but in off-axis areas. Centrally, the transition indeed looked pretty smooth. It really depended on image content. Text at the periphery definitely looked nervous. From Fred's teaser images comparing Sony and Leica sensors, I wonder how much of this can be attributed to the lens versus the sensor stack?
Distortion seemed well controlled. Nothing really jumped out at me as a problem.
Backlighting with the sun near the center of the frame looked great. Off-center seemed to suggest some flare, but nothing overwhelming. I'd like to see more with a bright light source just outside the frame. One of the night scenes had a street light outside the frame and showed some flare. From my experience, strong light sources outside the frame are definitely a problem with the 50 Lux ASPH as well as other Leica lenses (pretty much all the 90s I've had: 90AA, Macro, Summarit).
LoCA/purple fringing is evident, though how noticeable/distracting depends on the image.
Stopped down cityscape images generally looked great. I think whatever slight edge deterioration might be visible was probably due to the sensor stack. Have you tried focusing off-center to determine if edges improve? But considering how decent these already were, it will probably be a minor improvement.
Ugh... I feel like this thread is going to cost me money. Need more pics with it, but so far I am liking the oof rendering a bit more than the 1.2 Noktons.
Weight be damned, that Panda version has me drooling.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Always nice to visit Tokyo through your eyes Juha.
Love the backlit samples where it looks like the Voigtlander 50/1.5 II combats flare very well. I wonder how images from the SC version would look at similar scenes.
How do you like your A7C so far? Are you going to modify the sensor?
Thanks very much, Fred! I was also feeling that the 50/1.5 II did very nicely when shooting against the sun and in backlit scenes.
It's still very early days but I'm really happy with the A7C so far. It will probably be my main camera from now on for weekly walk-around shooting and for travel and I'll probably use my A9 for event shooting whenever events become a thing again and when I want to use my bigger AF lenses. A7C feels really nice in hand and the grip is very comfortable for me. Love the smaller size / lighter weight and the body feels very well built. I'm enjoying the shooting experience with it with small manual lenses (haven't actually mounted any other lenses on it yet besides the new Nokton). No experience of using AF lenses on it yet but I'll get around to trying that soon enough too. I prefer the shutter button feel on A7C to my A9 and I think A7C does better in low light city shooting when it comes to dynamic range at lower ISOs.
I'm not planning to get any sensor modification done for this A7C as I want to be able to use my native E-mount glass on it optimally (mainly the small lenses like CV 15/4.5, 21/3.5, 31/1.4, Sigma 45/2.8 etc.) and most of my current adapted rangefinder lenses work reasonably well on Sony sensors. If I get a sensor modification in the future, I'd probably get another dedicated body for that (could be 2nd A7c) but it's not in the plans right now.
rscheffler wrote:
A bit of a tangent, but curious what your thoughts are about which to keep and which to sell?
My take would be that each has a niche, though the 50/3.5 IMO is the odd one out. It's not very small and I'm sure some/most of the others have similar optical performance once stopped down to f/3.5. It's also ergonomically not the greatest (based on what I've read).
I can appreciate that the 50/2 VM and 50/2.5 are quite small and will probably boil down to optical characteristics. But the 50/1.5 is not much larger and gains you at least one more stop. It's probably the most practical all-rounder: small, fast, relatively light, very good optics.
The 50 APO would be the best, optically.
The 50/1.2 has use in low light or when desiring ultra shallow DoF. It may also have calmer bokeh than the 50/1.5......Show more →
I might not have enough use for all 6 but I'm not planning to sell any of them for now. Usually I trade-in lenses that I no longer have enough use for at Map Camera when buying something new from there and then it makes sense if the trade-in values are good enough. Some of these don't have so good trade-in value that it would be very appealing to trade them in that way.
50/3.5 is not getting a lot of use although I love its IQ. It's not a very practical all-rounder though and the slow aperture and usability quirks make it a trade-in candidate. I might have sold it if there was enough trade-in value, but it's not a very expensive lens and I'd rather keep it than trade it in at a low price as it has some unique capabilities.
50/2.5 LTM and 50/2 VM are rather rare in 2nd hand market now and kind of collectible. I like the small size and optical characteristics of both as well so I'm inclined to keep them from that perspective. I also think their shop trade-in value is not good enough and it would take some time and effort to sell them in other channels like auctions.
The new 50/1.5 is indeed probably the most practical all-arounder from this VM/LTM group and it will probably get most use from them going forward so I'd keep it from that perspective for sure.
Between 50/2 APO and 50/1.2 E-mount I would probably keep the 50/1.2 if I could keep only one, but they are different enough and it makes some sense to keep both. If I needed to sell any of these 6, these 2 would bring in best trade-in value.
I still noticed nervousness in transition zones, but in off-axis areas. Centrally, the transition indeed looked pretty smooth. It really depended on image content. Text at the periphery definitely looked nervous. From Fred's teaser images comparing Sony and Leica sensors, I wonder how much of this can be attributed to the lens versus the sensor stack?
Distortion seemed well controlled. Nothing really jumped out at me as a problem.
Backlighting with the sun near the center of the frame looked great. Off-center seemed to suggest some flare, but nothing overwhelming. I'd like to see more with a bright light source just outside the frame. One of the night scenes had a street light outside the frame and showed some flare. From my experience, strong light sources outside the frame are definitely a problem with the 50 Lux ASPH as well as other Leica lenses (pretty much all the 90s I've had: 90AA, Macro, Summarit).
LoCA/purple fringing is evident, though how noticeable/distracting depends on the image.
Stopped down cityscape images generally looked great. I think whatever slight edge deterioration might be visible was probably due to the sensor stack. Have you tried focusing off-center to determine if edges improve? But considering how decent these already were, it will probably be a minor improvement....Show more →
Thanks! I don't know how much the nervousness at the periphery in some shots would be related to sensor stack as I have no Leica camera to compare with, but hopefully Fred's testing on Leica vs. Sony will provide some more insights into that. I suppose it could be party related. I'm not seeing so much of that nervousness with this lens compared to e.g. 35/1.2 III VM where it was more noticeable and bothered me.
I've noticed that optimal focusing distance for infinity shots with this lens on my A9 and A7C is just very slightly different for center and for edges & corners (hard infinity seems to be best for center, while edges & corners benefit from focusing just a hair short of hard infinity. It's a rather small difference with this lens. I've been pulling back a hair from hard infinity in most of my infinity shots so far trying to balance it out between center and corners/edges. At f5.6 everything seems to be getting pretty well in focus from corner to corner that way. Some of my infinity shots were at wider apertures though (especially when light was low).
Did you stick with the black or change to the Panda version in the end? Looking forward to your review!
