p.6 #1 · Official: Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F1.5 VM
Juha Kannisto wrote:
Sounds like you got it at a great price Not so many of those 135/3.5 lenses going around in Japan either. I've been keeping an eye on Tanar 35/2.8 in addition to their faster 50mm lenses but so far haven't found any great deals. All those Tanars have relatively high prices in the 2nd hand market if they are in good condition. 5cm f2s are not super rare and I paid close to $400 for my 5cm f2 and it was in better condition than any other copies I've seen. The very rare 5cm f1.8 have been going for > $1000 and I wasn't ready to pay that much although I've been trying in 3 auctions. One of their 5cm f1.5 is currently on offer in Yahoo Japan auctions in a crappy condition with a Tanack Type-SD camera body for 550 000 JPY (!). It will not sell at that price though......Show more →
Didn't know they were such rarities - but I have never come across any of them in the past either. I read the company faltered end of the 50s, but it made actually good lenses at the time. I have the black and chrome version of the 135/3.5 and supposedly only 3500 were made of it until 1959. I don't have the original hood though but purchased a cheap 43 mm metal one online which works fine, too.
p.6 #2 · Official: Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F1.5 VM
Makten wrote:
Or any oldish double Gauss lens? Can't really see anything special about it.
Very crappy samples though, like always. It's baffling how so many companies cannot find a decent photographer for their marketing.
It is, unusually for a fast fifty, not a double Gauss, but a triplet modified by adding elements to each of the three components. That’s what most things called “heliar” are. It’s a design which works well for slower lenses. I think here it has been deliberately pushed to a faster design, which will no doubt result in technically poorer performance but maybe an interesting look.
p.6 #3 · Official: Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F1.5 VM
DavidBM wrote:
It is, unusually for a fast fifty, not a double Gauss, but a triplet modified by adding elements to each of the three components. That’s what most things called “heliar” are. It’s a design which works well for slower lenses. I think here it has been deliberately pushed to a faster design, which will no doubt result in technically poorer performance but maybe an interesting look.
I know, and you would too if you read all of my comments. See below...
Makten wrote:
What I mean is that the samples don't show any special character and I think many old double Gauss lenses look similar, even if they have completely different designs. I don't think rendering is derived from the particular order or number of lens elements, and that you can't say that "a Sonnar/Planar/Distagon draws like this/that", because you can make it completely different with very small changes. :-)
p.6 #5 · Official: Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F1.5 VM
DavidBM wrote:
It is, unusually for a fast fifty, not a double Gauss, but a triplet modified by adding elements to each of the three components. That’s what most things called “heliar” are. It’s a design which works well for slower lenses. I think here it has been deliberately pushed to a faster design, which will no doubt result in technically poorer performance but maybe an interesting look.
I've read the Heliar design (triplet) works best for a slow aperture lenses -- like the amazing 50/3.5 -- and not so well with fast lenses like the 75/1.8 Heliar. Voigtlander intentionally calls these fast Heliar designs "classic", meaning color and spherical aberrations are largely uncorrected for a special character. I will test one out but I'm expecting lots of spherical aberration wide open at close distance and noticeable CA. Images should be lower in contrast, especially against the light. Classic!
"So, it's technically a Triplet-derived Hektor, or a Heliar of which the middle group consists of not one but two glued elements. Pretty legit for the Heliar name IMO, in the same fashion of the VM Color-Heliar 75/1.8, which is a good performer. Expect very similar signature too."
Note that the Heliar configuration (2-1-2) used in the 50mm f/3.5 and f/2 was changed to (2-2-2) and used in the Super Wide Heliar 15mm, 75mm f/1.8 and f/2.5 Heliar and the APO-Lanthar 90mm f/3.5
"So, it's technically a Triplet-derived Hektor, or a Heliar of which the middle group consists of not one but two glued elements. Pretty legit for the Heliar name IMO, in the same fashion of the VM Color-Heliar 75/1.8, which is a good performer. Expect very similar signature too."
Note that the Heliar configuration (2-1-2) used in the 50mm f/3.5 and f/2 was changed to (2-2-2) and used in the Super Wide Heliar 15mm, 75mm f/1.8 and f/2.5 Heliar and the APO-Lanthar 90mm f/3.5
My expectations is that the new 50/1.5 Heliar will perform similarly to the 75/1.8 Heliar in terms of rendering and resolution. They share similar optical designs...Basically a copy and paste taking into account the different focal lengths.
I had the 75/1.8. I would not recommend it for landscape applications where you want edge to edge sharpness, high micro contrast, etc. For people photos I found it to be pleasing with unobjectionable bokeh. It didn't really wow me and wasn't a good enough all-rounder to make up for its size. If I wanted a 75 for landscape use, I'd probably get the Summarit instead. Sharp, nice colors, contrast, decent bokeh. For more speed and background blur, then the VM75/1.5.
p.6 #10 · Official: Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F1.5 VM
retrofocus wrote:
I am curious how this lens compares in performance with:
a) Leica 50/1.4 Summilux version I
b) Leitz 50/1.5 Summarit
c) Canon 50/1.4 LTM
I'm guessing somewhere between b and c. I have little experience with a.
The Summarit I have results in wilder bokeh than the Heliar's official sample photos, particularly truncations at the image periphery that results in strong swirly-ness. It's also lower contrast than the Heliar examples. The Heliar's bokeh reminds me more of the Canon 35/2 LTM than the 50/1.4, though the 50 exhibits some outlining. It just doesn't seem as distinct as the Heliar.
My impression so far of the Heliar is it might have some modern refinements while carrying over vintage-y busy/active bokeh. Curious how its character looks stopped down to f/2.
p.6 #11 · Official: Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F1.5 VM
rscheffler wrote:
I had the 75/1.8. I would not recommend it for landscape applications where you want edge to edge sharpness, high micro contrast, etc. For people photos I found it to be pleasing with unobjectionable bokeh. It didn't really wow me and wasn't a good enough all-rounder to make up for its size. If I wanted a 75 for landscape use, I'd probably get the Summarit instead. Sharp, nice colors, contrast, decent bokeh. For more speed and background blur, then the VM75/1.5.
Unrelated to this thread, have you tried the 75/2 APO cron? I've read it's basically the 50/1.4 lux in 75mm but opinions on its performance are not unanimous.
p.6 #12 · Official: Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F1.5 VM
d.s. wrote:
Are there 50s from other M/LTM lens manufacturers that go to .5m?
Not sure about current offerings. The Nikkor 5cm/1.4 LTM will focus to 1.5 feet, which is technically 46cm. It's a Sonnar design and is pretty wild wide open.
rscheffler wrote:
I had the 75/1.8. I would not recommend it for landscape applications where you want edge to edge sharpness, high micro contrast, etc. For people photos I found it to be pleasing with unobjectionable bokeh. It didn't really wow me and wasn't a good enough all-rounder to make up for its size. If I wanted a 75 for landscape use, I'd probably get the Summarit instead. Sharp, nice colors, contrast, decent bokeh. For more speed and background blur, then the VM75/1.5.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Unrelated to this thread, have you tried the 75/2 APO cron? I've read it's basically the 50/1.4 lux in 75mm but opinions on its performance are not unanimous.
I haven't. Just based on images I've seen, it reminds me a lot of the 50 Lux ASPH's rendering. Yes, my understanding is the two have a shared optical design/philosophy.
If you dig back through the Leica image thread maybe to around 2012 or 2013, member 'denoir' had one and had mixed feelings about it. IIRC, at nearer distances it lost some image contrast.
p.6 #14 · Official: Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F1.5 VM
rscheffler wrote:
I'm guessing somewhere between b and c. I have little experience with a.
The Summarit I have results in wilder bokeh than the Heliar's official sample photos, particularly truncations at the image periphery that results in strong swirly-ness. It's also lower contrast than the Heliar examples. The Heliar's bokeh reminds me more of the Canon 35/2 LTM than the 50/1.4, though the 50 exhibits some outlining. It just doesn't seem as distinct as the Heliar.
My impression so far of the Heliar is it might have some modern refinements while carrying over vintage-y busy/active bokeh. Curious how its character looks stopped down to f/2. ...Show more →
+1: This is exactly what I suspect, too. I don't know the Canon 50/1.8 LTM (I think this is the one you meant with 50/2?) but I also suspect it to fall more into the Canon LTM characteristics than the Summarit one.
p.6 #15 · Official: Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F1.5 VM
Not sure I follow you. The new Heliar's bokeh reminds me of the Canon 35/2 LTM's character more than the 50/1.4 LTM, though the 50/1.4 also exhibits some milder bokeh ball outlining (soap bubble look).
I haven't tried the Canon 50/1.8 LTM, so not sure.
My expectations is that the new 50/1.5 Heliar will perform similarly to the 75/1.8 Heliar in terms of rendering and resolution. They share similar optical designs...Basically a copy and paste taking into account the different focal lengths.
Phillips review was written when we were all looking for high performance small manual lenses because of the shortage of modern mirrorless glass, and indeed he was mainly using it for landscape.
Whatever else one thinks of fast Heliars they aren't going to be high performing. They might on the other hand provide a cool look. I don't know exactly what I think about using abberations to get what seems a cool look. I was discussing this with a friend the other day, and said that sometimes I think it's great (the artefacts from aberrations are arguably part of our collective memory of the history of photography) for some images. At other times I think it's not much photographically justifiable than the sh*tty cokin effects filters which were so popular once, only much more expensive.
p.6 #17 · Official: Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F1.5 VM
rscheffler wrote:
I haven't. Just based on images I've seen, it reminds me a lot of the 50 Lux ASPH's rendering. Yes, my understanding is the two have a shared optical design/philosophy.
If you dig back through the Leica image thread maybe to around 2012 or 2013, member 'denoir' had one and had strong negative feelings about it. He was able to provoke some pretty strong bokeh from it, but I think some of that was also due to his post processing preferences. IIRC, at nearer distances it lost some image contrast.
That wasn't my experience with it. Wide open at or near MFD to general portrait distances, the contrast was high (a little too high for my liking- I much preferred the 75/1.8 and Cron 90 for those purposes). It's a fantastic landscape lens, though, stopped down to f/4 or greater. Perfect size and weight, too.
p.6 #18 · Official: Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F1.5 VM
I will defer to your hands-on experience. I could also be confusing 'denoir's' 75 Cron bokeh experience with another lens. The more I think about it, he had mixed feelings about the 75 Cron. He liked it in some situations but not others.
p.6 #19 · Official: Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F1.5 VM
DavidBM wrote:
I was discussing this with a friend the other day, and said that sometimes I think it's great (the artefacts from aberrations are arguably part of our collective memory of the history of photography) for some images. At other times I think it's not much photographically justifiable than the sh*tty cokin effects filters which were so popular once, only much more expensive.
I took a portrait workshop recently with a photographer who drew similarities between seeking these artefacts and adding distortion to a guitar: "you're degrading quality for the sake of beauty." I agree with that, although beauty is of course in the eye of the beholder.
p.6 #20 · Official: Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F1.5 VM
DavidBM wrote:
Phillips review was written when we were all looking for high performance small manual lenses because of the shortage of modern mirrorless glass, and indeed he was mainly using it for landscape.
Whatever else one thinks of fast Heliars they aren't going to be high performing. They might on the other hand provide a cool look. I don't know exactly what I think about using abberations to get what seems a cool look. I was discussing this with a friend the other day, and said that sometimes I think it's great (the artefacts from aberrations are arguably part of our collective memory of the history of photography) for some images. At other times I think it's not much photographically justifiable than the sh*tty cokin effects filters which were so popular once, only much more expensive....Show more →
It is tricky writing reviews on "character" lenses, especially new ones.
We usually test lenses for color error, spherical aberration, flare, resolution, contrast, distortion, coma, etc.. The better the merrier!
However, with lenses intentionally uncorrected, it's a different story. These lenses may not perform well on our benchmarks or when compared to other highly corrected modern designs but the ultimate goal is to achieve an unique look, reminiscent of the past, evoking emotion in real world images.
I am expecting the new CV 50/1.5 Heliar to perform below average in review tests but still be able to capture distinctive and interesting images.
Not so many of those 135/3.5 lenses going around in Japan either. I've been keeping an eye on Tanar 35/2.8 in addition to their faster 50mm lenses but so far haven't found any great deals. All those Tanars have relatively high prices in the 2nd hand market if they are in good condition. 5cm f2s are not super rare and I paid close to $400 for my 5cm f2 and it was in better condition than any other copies I've seen. The very rare 5cm f1.8 have been going
See below...
