When I travel with A7Riv and three Voigtlander lenses (E-mount APO50/2, APO35/2, SWH15/4.5iii) at an altitude of more than 3500 meters, I encounter interesting things. APO35 and APO50 have obvious mechanical changes after the altitude is close to 3000 meters. The infinity position of the focal ring is different from that at low altitude, but it does not affect the optical performance. APO50 changes the most, APO35 changes less, SWH15/4.5iii has no obvious change, and the offset direction of the focus ring is the same
philip_pj wrote:
A fair amount of the character many are looking for is the almost unique cross frame look that places all objects right where they should be in image space, all registered with the same level of accuracy and resolution, and excellent colour.
The effect is so strong that it's a signature look. I see a lot of the better Contax Yashica lenses in this series, updated with more micro-contrast and lower aberration loads. Luckily it also does very acceptably what might be called 'informed bokeh'.
There are very few users or industry people who know the CV lenses better than the readers of FM. Because of manual focus and the fact that they fall between the commercial world of photography and the Leica M ecosystem, the CV lenses will remain 'fringe'. You get the feeling the Cosina people smile when they reflect on this situation....Show more →
Some thoughtful Minolta MD/MC renderings scattered throughout the CV lines as well.
philip_pj wrote:
There are very few users or industry people who know the CV lenses better than the readers of FM. Because of manual focus and the fact that they fall between the commercial world of photography and the Leica M ecosystem, the CV lenses will remain 'fringe'. You get the feeling the Cosina people smile when they reflect on this situation.
Interesting point.
I wonder how many of these lenses they sell compared to the number of owners on here. What lens has the highest FM user to lens sold ratio?! I have often wondered where lens makers get their ideas from. CV by making the aperture blades as they did - sunstars / not sunstars shows that they are watching....(us?).
I wonder how many of these lenses they sell compared to the number of owners on here. What lens has the highest FM user to lens sold ratio?! I have often wondered where lens makers get their ideas from. CV by making the aperture blades as they did - sunstars / not sunstars shows that they are watching....(us?).
CV regularly seek feedback from their distributors throughout the world regarding customer responses to existing lenses and potential interest in new designs.
In that event, I support what you posted about the hideous design of their 75 Nokton.
Not worth my cash.
genji wrote:
CV regularly seek feedback from their distributors throughout the world regarding customer responses to existing lenses and potential interest in new designs.
olalafoto those photos are amazing, makes me want to try shooting landscape with only primes. On a totally unrelated subject I wonder why Voigtlander and to a certain extent Leica lenses aren't used more for video other than for the m43 system.
They need to have excellent judgment because so many users want different things from them, all at once! They obviously please themselves to a large degree and that's fine. They just keep trying new ideas. Most have no idea about their super fast m43 lenses, like the 29mm f0.8.
We all know Sony will make a new 85mm f1.2 soon enough, to compete. But the guys at Cosina? No idea what comes next, after the June delivery of the 28/2 Ultron, that is. From a giant Otus 100/1.4 to a tiny 100 year old Heliar 50/3.5 - not your average lens maker. No one asked for that one!
How about a Sony-only CV range priced at ~$1500, 50% more than now, with even better ($$) glass and tolerances? And people talk up Zeiss doing a mirrorless Otus range - who would be making those lenses?
Minya konka ( the white snow peak in the middle，altitude: 7556 meters, there are 45 peaks more than 6000 meters around, according to statistics, so far, only 24 people have successfully reached the peak ) _DSC4577 by olalafoto, on Flickr
@olalafoto
I've been using the Zeiss UV filters with the Voigtlander APO lenses as well. For me, it removes any noticeable magenta shading. Somehow it only seems to be an issue with Sony, not Leica.
Amazing images!
Can't wait to take the new APO lenses for a landscape trip.
Seriously, some of the AL lenses are just a few minor tweaks away from being great lenses for near UV imaging. I would readily pay $1500 for such an AL 50/2 or an AL 65/2.
philip_pj wrote:
They need to have excellent judgment because so many users want different things from them, all at once! They obviously please themselves to a large degree and that's fine. They just keep trying new ideas. Most have no idea about their super fast m43 lenses, like the 29mm f0.8.
We all know Sony will make a new 85mm f1.2 soon enough, to compete. But the guys at Cosina? No idea what comes next, after the June delivery of the 28/2 Ultron, that is. From a giant Otus 100/1.4 to a tiny 100 year old Heliar 50/3.5 - not your average lens maker. No one asked for that one!
How about a Sony-only CV range priced at ~$1500, 50% more than now, with even better ($$) glass and tolerances? And people talk up Zeiss doing a mirrorless Otus range - who would be making those lenses? ...Show more →
There's something odd about the bokeh from my copy. There's a quasi-central dark spot in the specular highlights that tends to migrate towards the middle of the image, as well as another possible defect that's up towards ten o-clock. The overall effect may be too busy for my taste, even though I otherwise quite like the lens. Do you think that it's worth trying another copy?
zugzwang2 wrote:
There's something odd about the bokeh from my copy. There's a quasi-central dark spot in the specular highlights that tends to migrate towards the middle of the image, as well as another possible defect that's up towards ten o-clock. The overall effect may be too busy for my taste, even though I otherwise quite like the lens. Do you think that it's worth trying another copy?
At close magnification, the CV 35/2 APO' specular highlights may show traces of onion pattern and the inner structure also shows a small brighter 'dot'. What I saw was in my sample is not as dark though: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1695782/4#15563796
Perhaps the difference is due to lighting.
I have not seen anything noticeable in real images though.
The pattern in the specular highlights is a result of intersecting onion rings. Not much can be done about them (changing a copy will not change this).
realVivek wrote:
The pattern in the specular highlights is a result of intersecting onion rings. Not much can be done about them (changing a copy will not change this).
Vivek, I have an idea. How about calling them onion rings "annularly structured bokeh discs" when they happen to Voigtlanders? Would sound more like a feature than a defect, keeping happy the whole brigade?
Indeed, the appearance of the "annularly structured bokeh discs" does change with lighting. The lens' rendition of pinpoint specular highlights can be annoying if I look closely enough--they sometimes seem to have a small dark center surrounded by a bright ring in addition to the highlighted circumference--but that is just a small distraction from the overall package. I was used to somewhat structured bokeh from the ZM 35/1.4, but I think that my copy of the Voigtlander takes it to a new level. I was hoping that I might do better on a second try with a lens that I otherwise enjoy.
zugzwang2 wrote:
Indeed, the appearance of the "annularly structured bokeh discs" does change with lighting. The lens' rendition of pinpoint specular highlights can be annoying if I look closely enough--they sometimes seem to have a small dark center surrounded by a bright ring in addition to the highlighted circumference--but that is just a small distraction from the overall package. I was used to somewhat structured bokeh from the ZM 35/1.4, but I think that my copy of the Voigtlander takes it to a new level. I was hoping that I might do better on a second try with a lens that I otherwise enjoy.
I have not seen it in any of my images yet. I've just checked all the samples posted on this thread and can't find one example showing it. It's visible in the crops you posted above though.
'how many of these lenses they sell compared to the number of owners on here.' 'About the same'
Member Juha reports that the APOs are popular in Japan, where people have excellent taste and traditions are valued, both at the one time.
In the anglophone world, if you can't find out about a lens from the scores of very active YT and web reviewers, it does not exist in your world. And if by sheer chance you stumble across mention of it, you are likely to figure it couldn't possibly be important or any good. How could it be? 'They' would have told me!
zugzwang2 wrote:
Indeed, the appearance of the "annularly structured bokeh discs" does change with lighting. The lens' rendition of pinpoint specular highlights can be annoying if I look closely enough--they sometimes seem to have a small dark center surrounded by a bright ring in addition to the highlighted circumference--but that is just a small distraction from the overall package. I was used to somewhat structured bokeh from the ZM 35/1.4, but I think that my copy of the Voigtlander takes it to a new level. I was hoping that I might do better on a second try with a lens that I otherwise enjoy.
Apart from that dark rather centered spot, some of the discs in your examples have some off center spots that I suspect might be caused by dust. I would suggest some close inspection and some "just in case" air blowing on the rear element.
Thanks for the suggestion. I've become quite adept at provoking the bulls-eye bokeh effect. Now perhaps I can learn to avoid doing that so that I can continue to enjoy a terrific (if imperfect) lens.
