Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 Heliar on Leica SL2. All wide open:
One image converted to Adobe Monochrome profile, otherwise all out of the camera + Adobe Color profile. I really like ability to get close at 0.5m MFD but it's only possible when using EVF or LCD (live view). Not the rangefinder.
The Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 Classic Heliar has low field curvature on the Leica M10-R and only mild on the SL2. The curvature shape is wavy where center and corners are in the same focus plane while the mid-field is slightly curved. Very minor curvature.
Although the Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 Classic Heliar in uncorrected for spherical aberration, Cosina found a way to minimize focus shift. Leica M shooters will be happy to know there is very low focus shift with this lens design.
Here is a focus shift test at infinity distance:
Center area of the frame:
LEFT crop: Lens focused at f/1.5 and aperture changed to f/2 RIGHT crop: Lens focused at f/2
Glow or halo around the focused area' edge, specially the highlights, is very apparent when shooting wide open and it's the main characteristic of the Voigtlander 50/1.5 Heliar Classic. Many will use it just to get that glow on their subjects. However, just by stopping the aperture down to f/2, most of that beauty glow goes away making this lens work well for many applications.
Although the Voigtlander 50mm f/1.5 Heliar is intentionally uncorrected for spherical aberration and coma, it behaves well regarding to color aberration. There is a hint of axial CA when shooting wide open but it's only visible in very high contrast areas. In normal lighting, axial CA is very well behaved. On the other hand, lateral CA is a bit more apparent but easily corrected in post.
Here is a sample showing the amount of lateral CA (LEFT) and the Lightroom correction next to it (RIGHT).
Extreme corner area at f/8: LEFT (uncorrected for CA) | RIGHT (corrected for CA)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Anyone got their copy? Feel free to post your thoughts and samples here.
Well, ya got me thinking!
The first portrait of the cheerleader (daughter?) rendered the subject nicely but I rather disliked the busy bokeh surrounding her head. However the rest of the exposures didn’t seem to have any of that and I was rather taken with the rendering when shot wide open. Like I said, you’ve got me thinking….
I shot some comparison shots between the new Heliar classic 50/1.5 and the older Heliar classic 50/2 yesterday as well at equal apertures but I haven't had time to go through those yet.
Some more with my Sony A7C (including some PP) added on 12/31:
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I shot some comparison shots between the new Heliar classic 50/1.5 and the older Heliar classic 50/2 yesterday as well at equal apertures but I haven't had time to go through those yet.
Juha, comparison shots at same aperture with 50mm Heliar F/1.5 and F/2.0 would be of major interest to me. Thanks in advance for whatever you can provide.
I shot some comparison shots between the new Heliar classic 50/1.5 and the older Heliar classic 50/2 yesterday as well at equal apertures but I haven't had time to go through those yet.
Bertrick wrote:
Juha, comparison shots at same aperture with 50mm Heliar F/1.5 and F/2.0 would be of major interest to me. Thanks in advance for whatever you can provide.
Hi @Bertrick and @tunisia who also asked for comparison shots:
I did a walk on Thursday with my Heliar classic 50/1.5 on my Sigma fp and the Heliar classic 50/2 on my Sony A7C and I tried to take very similar shots with both cameras back to back at f2 and some at f5.6. Since Heliar classic 50/2 has 1m minimum focus distance all shots were focused at least 1m from subject (mostly much more than that). All were shot handheld and the viewfinder placement on these cameras (using EVF-11 on my Sigma fp) is not identical so framing came out a bit differently as I mostly framed the shots looking through the viewfinder. The new Heliar classic 50/1.5 seems to have a wider field of view and old one seems tighter which also affected framing. I exported all shots through Capture One Pro and adjusted exposure and white balance on some shots to make them closer in cases where they were quite different.
The older Heliar classic 50/2 has 11 aperture blades so it produces 22 point sunstars whereas the new Heliar classic 50/1.5 has 10 blades and produces 10 point sunstars. The 27th shot in both albums shows an example of sunstar for both.
I couldn't notice any huge differences in rendering otherwise... I didn't compare in deep detail so far but the rendering feels similar between the lenses. The color differences were probably mostly attributable to different cameras.
Think I might have to rent one of these. The foreground bokeh on this lens looks awesome.
Love the shot pier!
One of those lenses that makes everything look interesting.
Juha Kannisto wrote:
Hi @Bertrick@ and @tunisia@ who also asked for comparison shots:
I did a walk on Thursday with my Heliar classic 50/1.5 on my Sigma fp and the Heliar classic 50/2 on my Sony A7C and I tried to take very similar shots with both cameras back to back at f2 and some at f5.6. Since Heliar classic 50/2 has 1m minimum focus distance all shots were focused at least 1m from subject (mostly much more than that). All were shot handheld and the viewfinder placement on these cameras (using EVF-11 on my Sigma fp) is not identical so framing came out a bit differently as I mostly framed the shots looking through the viewfinder. The new Heliar classic 50/1.5 seems to have a wider field of view and old one seems tighter which also affected framing. I exported all shots through Capture One Pro and adjusted exposure and white balance on some shots to make them closer in cases where they were quite different.
The older Heliar classic 50/2 has 11 aperture blades so it produces 22 point sunstars whereas the new Heliar classic 50/1.5 has 10 blades and produces 10 point sunstars. The 27th shot in both albums shows an example of sunstar for both.
I couldn't notice any huge differences in rendering otherwise... I didn't compare in deep detail so far but the rendering feels similar between the lenses. The color differences were probably mostly attributable to different cameras....Show more →
Juha, Thank you SO much! This was a tremendous amount of work and provides a great deal of information. I also did not do pixel-is comparisons because that is not the way I view images. From what I see here, the new 1.5 delivers images VERY similar to the older 2.0 at same aperture and same conditions. So the advantages of the newer lens are options to use at wider aperture and options to use at closer distances. (Though the older lens could be use on a close focus adapter to maybe achieve similar focus range.)
Judicious choice of aperture on the new lens allows bokeh ranging from mostly creamy to mostly bubbly - a fascinating lens. I have been of the opinion for some time that I have somewhere between enough and too many 50mm lenses. But maybe Ii wrong about that. I might need one more.
