zugzwang2 wrote:
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.
I find that defect unacceptable, and would definitely try another copy just in case.
Note that I don’t own the lens, and I am judging just by my experience with other aspheric lenses.
zugzwang2 wrote:
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.
I think it's a characteristic of the lens and not a defect. Therefore, I'm pretty sure that exchanging it won't help.
Cosina has improved their aspherical molding tech lately but it's still not on par with Sony's. IMO they should try to improve this further if possible.
Having said that, I think it will be rare to see this ill-effect in images from this lens since it happens at distance and it's too small to be visible in full size images.
I found this in one of my images as well but it's only visible at pixel level (100% magnification)
Fred Miranda wrote:
@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.
This bulls-eye effect is easiest to see in specular highlights but it is sometimes visible to a lesser extent in other parts of an image such as out-of-focus foliage. I first noticed it in specular highlights through my garden fence as I was trying to confirm your suggestion that bokeh would calm down a bit at f/2.8. The effect is visible in the (very small) highlights in the fence at f/2.0 and f/2.8, but you have to zoom in to see it: https://flic.kr/p/2kZbJLz https://flic.kr/p/2kZbJLz
The effect is not prominent in the absence of bright highlights (here at f/2.8), although I suppose that it may contribute to the rendering issues that you noted in your earlier posts: https://flic.kr/p/2kZfz31
As you noted, the bulls-eye effect is likely more common in tiny distant highlights, but it can appear at closer distances, too: https://flic.kr/p/2kZ8gx8
Fred, I believe the “black dot” effect (I think the examples zugzwang2 shows are more like “floating breasts” ) is a manifestation of Coma. Many old lenses I have show this (but without the wrinkles).
I think it's a characteristic of the lens and not a defect. Therefore, I'm pretty sure that exchanging it won't help.
Cosina has improved their aspherical molding tech lately but it's still not on par with Sony. IMO they should try to improve this further if possible.
Having said that, I think it will be rare to see this ill-effect in images from this lens since it happens at distance and it's too small to be visible in the full image.
I found this in one of my images as well but it's only visible at pixel level (100% magnification)...Show more →
In the zoomed image, there's some greenish outlining on the soda can, looks like CA to me.
Hornhauer wrote:
Can't decide between the Voigtländer Apo Lanthar 35 2.0, Ultron 35 1.7 or Nokton 40 1.2
Im no expert but I have had all 3 but not at the same time.
2/35 - excellent - just get this one if you have the money and the weight is ok - this is what I now use and I regard this as the benchmark mf 35mm lens.
1,7/35 - so good and so light but on a Sony I hated the adapter / filter issue. By that I mean you need to find a 'bad' adapter that is too small to allow infinity focusing with the filter. Or you can use a Hawk Factory adapter but now you have a mutant lens - maybe you like that - I did for a week or so. Using the original hood / filters is another thing. 35 is my main lens and I really wanted it to be this lens due to weight/ quality but it's not for me. The lack of electronic contacts cannot be understated either.
1,2/40 really this is quite different than the 2/35. It is a very nice lens but the noktons and the apos seems to co-exsist not compete - the aperture, rendering, sharpness character - they are quite different. Also the focal length....
Fred Miranda wrote:
Can you post the full images?
[…]
I found this in one of my images as well but it's only visible at pixel level (100% magnification)
Fred’s copy seem to have a different, less pronounced and more tolerable onion-fingerprint.
Hello!
My first Picture with the 35mm APO Lanthar, attached on my A7RIV. Maybe the amount of sharpness of 180 in CaptureOne is too much for this Lens?
The Lens is recognized by C1 as Loxia 35mm!? I changed the Profile to Manufacturer profile, as the CA's looks better corrected with this profile.
Greetings from Switzerland. Marco
) is a manifestation of Coma. Many old lenses I have show this (but without the wrinkles).
