DavidBM wrote:
One thing about those MTFs is that they are infinity MTF. The two macro lenses are probably optimised for 1:10 magnification, though with floating groups that ensure the still excellent performance at infinity and at 1:2.
What that may mean in practice is that the 65 and 110 could perform even better than the 35 and 50 at closer - up to 1.5m? - distances.
That says a lot about the 50/2 APO (and new 35/2 APO) since the 65/2 APO is considered by many one of the sharpest lenses on the line-up. (even at infinity)
rscheffler wrote:
I don't agree with your two points above.
Which lenses looked like this in the past? The VM35/1.2 versions? Those are understandably large in diameter because they're f/1.2. This is an f/2 lens. There's a lot of dead space between the APO's front element and the filter ring. It's also a very long lens (physically) for a 35mm f/2 design. Longer even than the 50/2. No big deal for mirrorless use. Not so great for rangefinder use. Make it narrower and it will at least offset some of the length with slightly less viewfinder blockage.
May I suggest to go through this article.
Lens design is not nearly as easy as you might think.
After they had the optical formula , the task was to actually reduce the size to as little as possible while having the necessary space to adjust the elements and still have the floating element focusing system.
So yes, the assumption that they just don't care about the size is wrong.
I don't believe I said they don't care. I believe they could have worked harder at finding a more appropriate (IMO) solution for the VM design, specifically the 35 APO. If it understandably can't be made shorter for optical reasons, the front third of the lens could perhaps have been tapered to a smaller filter size, resulting in reduced viewfinder blockage. Maybe this wouldn't have looked as aesthetically pleasing, but it would have been a usability improvement. Again, IMO.
Also, my issue is less with the 50 than the 35. The 50 is about the same size as the 50 Lux ASPH and that lens results in minimal blockage of the frame lines. But because of the wider 35mm frame lines and because the 35 APO is longer in length than the 50, while retaining the same diameter, it will result in a fair amount of viewfinder blockage. And that's without the add-on hood.
FWIW, here's the viewfinder blockage of the 50 Lux ASPH at infinity without the hood extended.
Below is the VM 35/1.7 without a hood attached focused to infinity and at 70cm. Note that the dimensions of the 35/1.7 are 53mm diameter and 51mm long. The 35 APO will be 56mm diameter and 58mm long.
Will this stop me from getting the 35 APO?
It's not a deal breaker in itself when considering I've been shooting with the 28 Lux for a few years and that lens blocks about a quarter of the frame (with the hood on). But I accept that as one of the tradeoffs for an f/1.4 28mm rangefinder design that is the smallest on the market. I'm just less forgiving of Cosina when I view the front of the two VM APO lenses and observe the massive amount of space between the front element (which is the largest in diameter of the optical design) and the filter ring... It feels like a missed opportunity.
For reference, this is the 28 Lux viewfinder blockage with and without hood at infinity:
In the end, it really is nitpicking. If I get the 35 APO, it will be because of its optical quality and I'll accept the other compromises for rangefinder use. As it is, shooting with Leica is already a considerable set of compromises. What are a few more?
Cosina obviously designed these as general purpose lenses, which is a big part of their appeal, that plus their mobility. The 35mm will be my first ever lens at that focal length, RX1 excepted. From day one of the 50/2 the prospect of that resolution at any wider FL was enough to make a buy very likely.
One thing not mentioned is that you get the best of both M and SL lens form/performance factors. The new age flat fields and all-of-frame image quality at any aperture in a 300-350g M dimension lens.
And the 35s signal the end of the stop sign and cookie cutter bokeh highlights, if you can stretch between f2.8 and f4 to f5.6. And sunstars if wanted. Colour and drawing style and bokeh are highly personal but since they are often buy-in decision factors, those on the fence are best advised to wait and see.
We can expect the demand from the Leica side to be strong. They are seeing two new lenses the like of which was beyond the pockets of a high proportion of them. This will flow into greater demand for a portrait/general lens to run against the 75/90 M APOs from Leica.
That clientele has access to the deliberately fast 'Vintage' 75/1.5 so how about a pair of 90/2 APO-Lanthars with the same general characteristics as the 35/50 pair? Because it's an easier design ask, Cosina could build that one up quite quickly, having done the harder yards at 35/50. An APO set at 35/50/90 for around 1000 grams and around $3500. Yes please, many would say.
I wish smaller but it doesn’t change the fact that the lens itself is above my expectation TBH. I think modern Japanese(sigma and voigtlander design) glass is killing the Zeiss and Leica. M is more resistant but I am really not sure other Mount.
rscheffler wrote:
I don't believe I said they don't care. I believe they could have worked harder at finding a more appropriate (IMO) solution for the VM design, specifically the 35 APO. If it understandably can't be made shorter for optical reasons, the front third of the lens could perhaps have been tapered to a smaller filter size, resulting in reduced viewfinder blockage. Maybe this wouldn't have looked as aesthetically pleasing, but it would have been a usability improvement. Again, IMO.
Also, my issue is less with the 50 than the 35. The 50 is about the same size as the 50 Lux ASPH and that lens results in minimal blockage of the frame lines. But because of the wider 35mm frame lines and because the 35 APO is longer in length than the 50, while retaining the same diameter, it will result in a fair amount of viewfinder blockage. And that's without the add-on hood.
FWIW, here's the viewfinder blockage of the 50 Lux ASPH at infinity without the hood extended.
Below is the VM 35/1.7 without a hood attached focused to infinity and at 70cm. Note that the dimensions of the 35/1.7 are 53mm diameter and 51mm long. The 35 APO will be 56mm diameter and 58mm long.
It's not a deal breaker in itself when considering I've been shooting with the 28 Lux for a few years and that lens blocks about a quarter of the frame (with the hood on). But I accept that as one of the tradeoffs for an f/1.4 28mm rangefinder design that is the smallest on the market. I'm just less forgiving of Cosina when I view the front of the two VM APO lenses and observe the massive amount of space between the front element (which is the largest in diameter of the optical design) and the filter ring... It feels like a missed opportunity.
For reference, this is the 28 Lux viewfinder blockage with and without hood at infinity:
In the end, it really is nitpicking. If I get the 35 APO, it will be because of its optical quality and I'll accept the other compromises for rangefinder use. As it is, shooting with Leica is already a considerable set of compromises. What are a few more? ...Show more →
Yeah, I'd be up for a 90/2 or 90/2.5 or 90/2.8 APO. But I guess f/2.5 or f/2.8 would be too close to the Loxia in E mount (not that preexisting Loxia models at 35/2 and 50/2 dissuaded Cosina). Maybe this will happen before a 28mm...?
I’m betting on a 75/2 or 75/2.5 or 75/2.8 APO. Cosina Voigtlander have had a long love affair with the 75mm focal length while showing less interest in 90mm. Though, to be fair, a precedent has already been set with the APO-Lanthar 90/3.5 in LTM and various SLR mounts. Even so, I used to think the reason they never released an E-mount version of the Nokton VM 75/1.5 was that 75mm is seen as a rangefinder focal length but now that’s no longer true. Perhaps there was no Nokton 75/1.5 for Sony because an APO 75 was already being planned for M and E.
My next APO wish would be 180 f4 or 200 f4. I’d be interested in a light 90 or 100 APO. I have zero interest in a 75mm APO. Too close to the 50 and 65.
I usually like a 25-35-50-100-200 kit for landscape.
genji wrote:
I’m betting on a 75/2 or 75/2.5 or 75/2.8 APO. Cosina Voigtlander have had a long love affair with the 75mm focal length while showing less interest in 90mm. Though, to be fair, a precedent has already been set with the APO-Lanthar 90/3.5 in LTM and various SLR mounts. Even so, I used to think the reason they never released an E-mount version of the Nokton VM 75/1.5 was that 75mm is seen as a rangefinder focal length but now that’s no longer true. Perhaps there was no Nokton 75/1.5 for Sony because an APO 75 was already being planned for M and E. ...Show more →
I second a wish for a 75 APO.
In fact a 21-35-75 APO would be perfect for my use cases.
It is my Swiss army knife of focal lengths and could travel anywhere with it.
genji wrote:
I’m betting on a 75/2 or 75/2.5 or 75/2.8 APO. Cosina Voigtlander have had a long love affair with the 75mm focal length while showing less interest in 90mm. Though, to be fair, a precedent has already been set with the APO-Lanthar 90/3.5 in LTM and various SLR mounts. Even so, I used to think the reason they never released an E-mount version of the Nokton VM 75/1.5 was that 75mm is seen as a rangefinder focal length but now that’s no longer true. Perhaps there was no Nokton 75/1.5 for Sony because an APO 75 was already being planned for M and E. ...Show more →
It is simply because the 75/1.5 is part of the "Classic" series like 35/1.7 and older 50/1.5 with the knurled focusing ring and they don't rehouse those lenses for E-mount.
They already have the 65/2 (the 50/2 was based on that, see the interview I linked earlier), so I think yet another 75 would not very be popular.
That's why they've discontinued the other two 75mm lenses and offer the 75/1.5 as the sole option.
A 90mm is more likely, but I think it would not be f/2 as they can't use as few elements as Leica, so it would be way too big and heavy.
TakenWild wrote:
My next APO wish would be 180 f4 or 200 f4. I’d be interested in a light 90 or 100 APO. I have zero interest in a 75mm APO. Too close to the 50 and 65.
I usually like a 25-35-50-100-200 kit for landscape.
Yeah, I'd be up for a 90/2 or 90/2.5 or 90/2.8 APO. But I guess f/2.5 or f/2.8 would be too close to the Loxia in E mount (not that preexisting Loxia models at 35/2 and 50/2 dissuaded Cosina). Maybe this will happen before a 28mm...?
Ya I would also like a 90mm. I currently use a "Bokina"(Tokina AT-X 90mm 2.5 Macro) because of what I read on Phillip Reeve's site. In fact I just told my photography professor that I can do no wrong with that lens. If CV came out with a modern version, I'd be a happy man.
If the 35/50s do as well with M users as expected, the two-for-one E/M scenario makes good sense. Basic design and development can be common, and Sony MF users are not prisoners to standardised focal lengths the way the DSLR market and C/N mirrorless are.
Their sales data will tell the story. It's not out of the question that they might do a 75mm for Leica and a stretched 90mm for Sony, which would be a decent compromise.
Many Leica users, due in part to the expense of owning several lenses, go with 35/75 or 50/90 in a two lens set. And many discussions on 75mm or 90mm revolved around practical matters of frame lines and focus issues.
I like both FLs but I see a 90mm doing better on Sony and Nikon, where it may drag users in from previous experience with the large number of 100mm lenses and the near-universal 85mm FL.
75mm leaves a lot on the table for longer landscape work and accustomed portraits, whereas 90-100mm can suffice for many users. In both M and SL APOs, the 90mm is the better performing lens - they found field curvature easier to control and got stronger outer frames in the 90mm lenses.
I think that if you are shooting wide open a lot, such as street shooting, then these APO Lanthars are a godsend. The quality to price ratio is unbeatable. I rarely shoot wide open apertures, though I have a Noctilux, V4, for that Mandler "pop" when shot at F1. The tiny 35mm Sumicron ASPH is hard to beat and my V5 50mm Summicron is also hard to beat when stopped down, though the 50mm APO Lanthar might find its way into my Leica drawer.
One poor man's opinion,
Joel
