p.9 #1 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
rscheffler wrote:
The swirly bokeh seems to be more noticeable at certain camera to subject to background distances/ratios. This can be said for a lot of 50s. The problem is generally when the subject is relatively far from the camera with lesser separation from the background. Of course, it's also a tradeoff of the 50/1.5's very compact design. So IMO it's really a matter of deciding what is most important for you. Stopping it down a touch might help in the bokeh department somewhat.
The TTArtisan seems to be somewhat the opposite. There's a decent review of it here, but all on digital. The tradeoff is it's quite large for a 50mm M mount lens and doesn't neatly fit the design/ergonomics philosophy of the M system (that said, Leica also makes some large lenses for the system). Another tradeoff appears to be fairly weak flare resistance.
The ZM50/1.5 being a Sonnar design will have its own style of background rendering character that can be somewhat lively wide open, but should smooth out a stop or so down. It has some focus shift, but whether that will be as noticeable on film, I'm not sure. It's a pretty compact lens. I'm a big fan of Sonnar rendering.
The ZM50/2 is a really good and safe all-rounder. It was my first 50 on digital Leica M. Background bokeh can be a bit pronounced, but shouldn't be too harsh. I don't recall if it ever went swirly, but maybe that means it didn't. It's a bit of a longer, narrower lens than the ZM Sonnar.
IMO it'll boil down to picking the lens that has the most strengths for your intended uses and the learning to live with and/or work around its weaknesses. ...Show more →
samtaha wrote:
Great summary of each option. What are your thoughts on the Voigtlander Nokton 1.5 (current version, not II) ?
Thanks! I'm not sure I follow what you mean by current version but not II because Cosina calls this one version II, though it's actually the third 50/1.5, but the second unique optical formula.
I had the LTM first version, which was optically the same as the one just replaced by the new 50/1.5, but with different coatings. It rivaled the 50 Lux ASPH for central sharpness and was very close in bokeh but slightly less Gaussian blur to the OOF specular highlights. From what I remember though, it didn't maintain sharpness across the frame as well as the Lux and likely as well as the new version. It was also susceptible to purple fringing at wider apertures in high contrast transitions, like branches against overcast sky, etc, which I suppose is also true for the new one. I haven't been a fan of Cosina's design/ergonomics. The LTM was kind of a thick/wide lens and IIRC only focused to 90cm. I don't like the previous version's 'vintage' design, based on my experience with the similarly designed 35/1.7 (which I love optically). The new version seems the best so far and I would probably just stick a focusing tab on it and be happy enough.
If you're curious, way back 7 years ago I did a mini bokeh shootout of some 50s on the M9 at 1 and 1.5m distances. Lenses were the 50 Lux ASPH, ZM50/2, Voigtlander 50/1.5 LTM, Canon 50/1.4 LTM, Zeiss Opton 50/1.5 Sonnar, Nikkor 5cm/1.4 (also a Sonnar), Leitz 5cm/1.5 Summarit and for kicks, the CV40/1.4. You can find it here and I think the download links should still work. LMK if they don't.
p.9 #2 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
rscheffler wrote:
Thanks! I'm not sure I follow what you mean by current version but not II because Cosina calls this one version II, though it's actually the third 50/1.5, but the second unique optical formula.
I had the LTM first version, which was optically the same as the one just replaced by the new 50/1.5, but with different coatings. It rivaled the 50 Lux ASPH for central sharpness and was very close in bokeh but slightly less Gaussian blur to the OOF specular highlights. From what I remember though, it didn't maintain sharpness across the frame as well as the Lux and likely as well as the new version. It was also susceptible to purple fringing at wider apertures in high contrast transitions, like branches against overcast sky, etc, which I suppose is also true for the new one. I haven't been a fan of Cosina's design/ergonomics. The LTM was kind of a thick/wide lens and IIRC only focused to 90cm. I don't like the previous version's 'vintage' design, based on my experience with the similarly designed 35/1.7 (which I love optically). The new version seems the best so far and I would probably just stick a focusing tab on it and be happy enough.
If you're curious, way back 7 years ago I did a mini bokeh shootout of some 50s on the M9 at 1 and 1.5m distances. Lenses were the 50 Lux ASPH, ZM50/2, Voigtlander 50/1.5 LTM, Canon 50/1.4 LTM, Zeiss Opton 50/1.5 Sonnar, Nikkor 5cm/1.4 (also a Sonnar), Leitz 5cm/1.5 Summarit and for kicks, the CV40/1.4. You can find it here and I think the download links should still work. LMK if they don't....Show more →
I remember burying my face face in those results a couple of times before pulling the plug on... One of them. Thanks for that.
Nov 18, 2020 at 09:46 PM
samtaha Offline • [X]
p.9 #3 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
rscheffler wrote:
Thanks! I'm not sure I follow what you mean by current version but not II because Cosina calls this one version II, though it's actually the third 50/1.5, but the second unique optical formula.
Hi Ron,
By current version I meant the one before the recently announced version II which is being reviewed in these threads.
I did find your fantastic review from 7 years ago on my own while doing my research.
I really love everything about the new VC version II, the size, weight, sharpness, looks, everything - BUT I can't get over the swirley bokeh, and it was a deal breaker for me. Ultimately, I must confess, I went ahead and purchased the TTartisan, especially after the seller sweetened the deal by offering it for just $345. I can live with the larger size, but won't have to live with ugly (to me) bokeh
p.9 #4 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
Ron, my experiences with many samples of the original VC 50mm f1.5 LTM lens matched yours but almost always found with each sample, central sharpness almost equal to the Lux asph and one side of the frame or other also very close, but the opposite side of the frame moderately/significantly less sharp. Sometimes it was the rt side, sometimes the left but regardless which side, almost always to the same degree of being significantly less sharp. It was as though for the optics and design and price of that particular lens, that this was the best they could achieve at that time.
I sort of excluded the issue being of not finding a perfectly optically aligned sample, otherwise I suspect I would have come across one that although might have not had the same high level of sharpness on each side relative to the central part of the frame, that each side (left and rt) would have been relatively equal to each other (the same). Maybe such a sample exists but after testing many samples, I've yet to come across one that displayed this level of performance.
p.9 #6 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
Took this lens on a road trip along with a ton of Portra.
Too excited to wait on the film shots because this lens is blowing me away.
Note the portraits were taken with a cheap Variable ND, so may affect clarity a bit. I'm actually dialing down the dehaze just a smidge to better match my Portra400 stuff anyways.
p.9 #7 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
Bicyclelad wrote:
Took this lens on a road trip along with a ton of Portra.
Too excited to wait on the film shots because this lens is blowing me away.
Note the portraits were taken with a cheap Variable ND, so may affect clarity a bit. I'm actually dialing down the dehaze just a smidge to better match my Portra400 stuff anyways.
Which camera was used for those shots - they look great in combination with this lens. Asking because the frame ratio looks cropped from 35 mm frame?
p.9 #8 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
retrofocus wrote:
Which camera was used for those shots - they look great in combination with this lens. Asking because the frame ratio looks cropped from 35 mm frame?
These are all from the Typ240. I don’t think I cropped too heavily if at all.
p.9 #9 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
IMHO the focus shift of this lens makes it less desirable for "quick" rangefinder focussing.
My copy RF focusses properly on the M10 wide open at F/1.5, and stopped down to e.g. F/8.0 the focussing error due to focus shift disappears in depth of field. But the shift is still noticeable in less foreground and more background sharpness.
It is of course possible to manually compensate for that by "smart" focussing a little closer, but that's a PITA.
p.9 #10 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
Edax wrote:
IMHO the focus shift of this lens makes it less desirable for "quick" rangefinder focussing.
My copy RF focusses properly on the M10 wide open at F/1.5, and stopped down to e.g. F/8.0 the focussing error due to focus shift disappears in depth of field. But the shift is still noticeable in less foreground and more background sharpness.
It is of course possible to manually compensate for that by "smart" focussing a little closer, but that's a PITA.
There is some focus shift but it's expected since the lens is under-corrected for spherical aberration.
On the M10, I am getting relatively sharp images at f/1.5, f/2, f/2.4 and f/2.8. At f/4, DOF masks any shift. I see a noticeable improvement at each aperture click which for me means it's not a big issue even on a rangefinder.
Of course this is not an issue for those adapting it to the Sony as long as you shoot at working aperture.
p.9 #11 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
@Fred at large distances I also get relatively sharp images at all apertures. It is the shift of depth of field that is bothering me a little. Through LV I recorded the optimum focus settings compared to RF focus on the distance scale, so I know how to compensate if needed.
The black version is still not available over here, got the bi-color instead. No regrets, it looks beautiful on a black M10p.
p.9 #12 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
I took this lens out with my Sigma 45/2.8C earlier today around downtown. I wanted to stop by the California Vietnam Veterans Memorial before it got too late and the sun too harsh. Unfortunately, I arrived later than I wanted too and certain shots were way too contrasty. Here are a few with the M10M.
Oh man! Trying to nail focus wide open when your target is off center is quite a challenge! This is where the VisoFlex would help if I had one.
f/2.8 - I tired this both at wide open and f/2 and liked this version better as the names become unidentifiable OOF blobs due to MFD of the lens and the super thin DOF. I felt the photo lost meaning with too shallow of a DOF Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f1.5 II Aspherical SC by Senior Frog, on Flickr
I still haven't gotten to take many real pictures with it yet, but playing with it more I've learned that it's pretty poorly optimized for landscapes but has extremely impressive corner-to-corner sharpness at closer distances.
p.9 #16 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
I'm curious where owners are with this lens in relation to other offerings. Specifically the 50mm 1.2 and 50mm f2 Voigtlander. Perhaps when the weather gets nicer out, we'll some some more side by side comparisons.
p.9 #17 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
ReleaseDrive wrote:
I'm curious where owners are with this lens in relation to other offerings. Specifically the 50mm 1.2 and 50mm f2 Voigtlander. Perhaps when the weather gets nicer out, we'll some some more side by side comparisons.
I bought this on release and have the Voigt 50 APO on preorder from Cameraquest. I find that I don't shoot the 50/1.5 II all that often - I was hoping it would be a fast lightweight 50, and it certainly fills that role, but I don't prefer the ergonomics and how it draws, so it ends up getting left at home more often than not. I have really high hopes for the APO, though!
p.9 #18 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
ReleaseDrive wrote:
I'm curious where owners are with this lens in relation to other offerings. Specifically the 50mm 1.2 and 50mm f2 Voigtlander. Perhaps when the weather gets nicer out, we'll some some more side by side comparisons.
I still have the LTM version of the Nokton 50/1.5, whose handling and rendering I very much like. I foolishly bought the first M-mount version of the 50/1.5—the one with the knurled focusing ring—and loathed it. It was uncomfortable to use and the results were underwhelming. I did think about getting the single coated version of the 50/1.5 II as a smaller, lighter alternative to the superb Nokton 50/1.2 but the announcement of the APO-Lanthar 50/2 nixed that plan. The 50/1.2 and AL 50 pair will make the 50/1.5 II irrelevant.
p.9 #19 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
heheapa wrote:
I was actually about to get a 50mm f2 Summicron V4 from the 2nd hand shop here before I saw this new lens launched and review here.
I like the panda color but end up I've picked up the silver MC version in recent here to pair with my M9 Chrome. I will adapt the lens to Canon R5 too. Can't wait for the delivery....
What made you go for the Voigtlander instead of the Summicron V4? I'm facing the same dilemma now.
I know it's a bit apple & oranges but if someone could give arguments to go for one or another, I'd appreciate it! I shoot film, that's quite relevant when deciding
p.9 #20 · Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 II Aspherical Review
hesthunderstor wrote:
What made you go for the Voigtlander instead of the Summicron V4? I'm facing the same dilemma now.
I know it's a bit apple & oranges but if someone could give arguments to go for one or another, I'd appreciate it! I shoot film, that's quite relevant when deciding
I don't have either lens but the Voigtlander looks pretty good to me. I used to have a Summicron V5, and while it was good, I seem to remember it flaring a bunch. I eventually moved up to a Summilux ASPH, as I was shooting film and wanted/needed the extra speed. I have never missed the Summicron. If I were in the same boat today and had my choice of a lens for $1k (which is around what the Summicron cost me 15 years ago), I'd get the Voigtlander no question. That extra stop can make a big difference when your ISO is limited AND you can't change on the fly like you can with digital.
I can't speak specifically to rendering of bokeh, etc.
