p.15 #1 · Voigtländer Nokton Vintage Line 35/1.5 VM I & II and Nikon Z Apo-Lanthar 65/2
Here's a dump of some screen shot crops from Juha's photos. I believe these were all wide open examples and are all at farther focusing distances. I really feel there's strong astigmatism at play. Not sure how much of it is sensor related, but given that these crops were generally in the midfield, shouldn't IMO be entirely sensor related.
Note the 'hook' effect in some of the bokeh. Where you might expect circular OOF specular highlights, instead it's a crescent.
In the second crop you can see at the top right blank white area that the horizontally running line is more blurred than the vertically running line with has a 'sharp' element to it, as well as the expected blur.
The third crop is not that far off center yet the background foliage bokeh is pretty wild.
I don't entirely dislike this. Rather, it's not what I was expecting to see and just trying to better understand what's going on so that whenever I get this lens, I know what to expect.
p.15 #4 · Voigtländer Nokton Vintage Line 35/1.5 VM I & II and Nikon Z Apo-Lanthar 65/2
These look great! For a 3.5cm long 35/1.5 lens I'll take it any day of the week. For those who don't care about size, the 35/1.7, ZM 35/1.4 and 35/2 APO still exist. There's no free lunch but the set of compromises Voigtlander have chosen for a highly portable fast 35 seem appropriate to me.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
On LoCal: It’s just with acceptable limits to me for it being considered a decently corrected optic. Images #7 and #10 are absolute worse case scenario, and with the defringe tool in LR at 7 for both purple and green, it’s completely fixed. A weakness but manageable IMO in real world shooting. Given the similarity in the optical formula to the 35 1.2, I was not expecting good LoCal control. I think as you said, most of us are not surprised given Voight lander seems to favor lots of optical vignetting, so bokeh is what it is. The other 35/40/50 1.2 I could get busier bokeh at longer distance, esp in the corners.
The coma thing I am interested in and have a question for you as you will probably know better. I also noticed a type of blooming/oddity with OOF lights. But, when I did a more traditional coma test with stars, stars looked pretty good WO from corner to center on a modded sensor. If I get clearer skies tonight, I will shoot again but I feel like for astrophotography this one is usable (vignetting aside) like the 28/2ii. But if stars are fairly pinpoint, but out of focus lights are “bloomed,” is that coma or a different type of aberration? Or is it a specific type of coma (if there are types)? In photo #7, the loss of detail/clarity I assumed to be a little bit more of veiling issue.
p.15 #5 · Voigtländer Nokton Vintage Line 35/1.5 VM I & II and Nikon Z Apo-Lanthar 65/2
These look great! For a 3.5cm long 35/1.5 lens I'll take it any day of the week. For those who don't care about size, the 35/1.7, ZM 35/1.4 and 35/2 APO still exist.
I suspect the artefacts will be reduced on a digital M anyway. Out of interest, what keeps you from the CV 35/14, which is smaller and lighter?
p.15 #8 · Voigtländer Nokton Vintage Line 35/1.5 VM I & II and Nikon Z Apo-Lanthar 65/2
Just received the Leica M10-R loan so I can start the review.
My personal copy is currently at Leica for repair.
Spoiler alert: The new Voigtlander 35/1.5 Nokton is a much better performer on the Leica sensor. It's sharp to the very edges from wide open. Optimal at f/2.8. On the Sony it needs f/8 for the corners.
p.15 #10 · Voigtländer Nokton Vintage Line 35/1.5 VM I & II and Nikon Z Apo-Lanthar 65/2
Fred Miranda wrote:
It's definitely SA. If we get the 35/1.2 III and stop it down to f/1.5, we'd have a very similar look. I think the glow is pretty in the sample images though.
Maybe I am very mistaken, but this lens has a much more crisp feel--the SA is very minor, and much less than the 35/40/50 1.2 I've shot. And at all distances. Below are crops from a modded a7--I took a series at 1.5, f2 and 2.8. One with dark subjects, and one with brights that SA shows up on more in my experience a bit.
Then I included 3 actual photos, at different distances, all WO. You'll see there's very very minimal SA. Now that you have your review copy, I'll be curious to see what you think. If it is SA, I am confused why I see so little on axis, but the affect is very noticeable with OOF lights. What Bastian said makes sense more to me.
p.15 #11 · Voigtländer Nokton Vintage Line 35/1.5 VM I & II and Nikon Z Apo-Lanthar 65/2
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Maybe I am very mistaken, but this lens has a much more crisp feel--the SA is very minor, and much less than the 35/40/50 1.2 I've shot. And at all distances. Below are crops from a modded a7--I took a series at 1.5, f2 and 2.8. One with dark subjects, and one with brights that SA shows up on more in my experience a bit.
Then I included 3 actual photos, at different distances, all WO. You'll see there's very very minimal SA. Now that you have your review copy, I'll be curious to see what you think. If it is SA, I am confused why I see so little on axis, but the affect is very noticeable with OOF lights. What Bastian said makes sense more to me....Show more →
It's not the same as shooting with the CV 35/1.2 III wide open which would yield even stronger SA. The spherical aberration is better corrected on the new f/1.5 lens but it depends heavily on distance. The closer the more SA.
I've tested it side by side to the Leica 35/1.4 FLE and the Voigtlander is softer at closer distance. All this is expected though.
p.15 #12 · Voigtländer Nokton Vintage Line 35/1.5 VM I & II and Nikon Z Apo-Lanthar 65/2
Fred Miranda wrote:
It's not the same as shooting with the CV 35/1.2 III wide open which would yield even stronger SA. The spherical aberration is better corrected on the new f/1.5 lens but it depends heavily on distance. The closer the more SA.
I've tested it side by side to the Leica 35/1.4 FLE and the Voigtlander is noticeably softer at closer distance. All this is expected though.
Yes, that's why I included different distances as I know that the distance can vary the SA, though from .7 to about 20 feet (and I assume infinite, I don't see any change) I am sure at absolute MFD I would see increased SA. I am curious to see your review and findings. And still curious about the affect!
Are you saying you tested the new 1.5, or the 35/1.2iii against the Lux FLE? I found the 35/1.2iii to have much more than this lens throughout the range.
p.15 #14 · Voigtländer Nokton Vintage Line 35/1.5 VM I & II and Nikon Z Apo-Lanthar 65/2
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Yes, that's why I included different distances as I know that the distance can vary the SA, though from .7 to about 20 feet (and I assume infinite, I don't see any change) I am sure at absolute MFD I would see increased SA. I am curious to see your review and findings. And still curious about the affect!
Are you saying you tested the new 1.5, or the 35/1.2iii against the Lux FLE? I found the 35/1.2iii to have much more than this lens throughout the range.
My observations are based on this thread's samples so far. I have not yet tested the lens on the M body.
I did compare the CV 35/1.5 to the Leica 35/1.4 FLE briefly on the Sony A74. The Leica is sharper wide open (away from center) and the Voigtlander has smoother rendering + narrower field of view.
p.15 #15 · Voigtländer Nokton Vintage Line 35/1.5 VM I & II and Nikon Z Apo-Lanthar 65/2
Personally when I look at an image, I look at the whole image and not zoom into specific areas to pixel analyse. The images by nehemiahphoto look really good (photo of man). The bokeh is creamy (I think better than the FLE comparison photo by Fred Miranda. Looking at the dog photos, at 1.5 it's quite sharp. Looks like a good portraiture lens. Would how it will improve on a M.
I'm getting heavy deja vu to the other nokton-summilux comparison I did: the 50 lux ASPH and the 50/1.5 Nokton II. In both cases, the Nokton has more longitudinal CA and transition zones are perhaps uglier, whereas the Summilux has a beautiful clean snap from sharpness to blur. Also, in both cases the Nokton suffers at close distances whereas the Summilux has a floating group. But also in both cases, the Nokton is significantly smaller than the Summilux (not to mention cheaper) and the combination of bokeh, sharpness, and compactness is pretty incredible.
Very excited to see Fred's side-by-side of the 35/1.5 and the FLE on his M10-R. I could be mis-remembering how clean the 35 Summilux FLE was.
p.15 #18 · Voigtländer Nokton Vintage Line 35/1.5 VM I & II and Nikon Z Apo-Lanthar 65/2
Fred's quick comparison looks promising. Is it typical for other VM lenses to have a narrower field of view? I think I remember that about the VM 35 1.4 as well.
p.15 #19 · Voigtländer Nokton Vintage Line 35/1.5 VM I & II and Nikon Z Apo-Lanthar 65/2
thrice wrote:
These look great! For a 3.5cm long 35/1.5 lens I'll take it any day of the week. For those who don't care about size, the 35/1.7, ZM 35/1.4 and 35/2 APO still exist. There's no free lunch but the set of compromises Voigtlander have chosen for a highly portable fast 35 seem appropriate to me.
I agree. Life is about embracing reasonable compromises
