rramesh wrote:
Also do note that the LH-4N hood has 3 tiny screws, if when removed, allows the separation of the flared hood from the base which still can be used to cover the chrome rim.
---------------------------------------------
thrice wrote:
This is interesting... No pressure, but do you have a pic of that?
I didn't know this was possible and just tried it out.
The Voigtlander 35/1.5 Nokton with just the base of the LH-4N hood looks like this:
thrice wrote:
My silver painted lens arrived. Nice and dense feeling. Good looking lens, great ergonomics. Mine has a paint imperfection on the aperture ring and the paint job on the focusing tab is honestly worse than I couldn't have done in my garage.
If it ever stops raining I'll compare it to the distagon. Excuse the rushed smartphone pics of the lenses.
Yep half the length which is wild but Zeiss did say the distagon was an uncompromising design.
Voigtlander should offer twist on bayonet caps for when their lenses aren't being used. Would make for an even smaller package in the bag and cover the silver filter ring but I guess the lens is still a little ugly when you take off the cap then.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Very charming in silver on the silver M.
It's so small next to the ZM. Would yo say half the length?
lensfan wrote:
Have you seen reflections from the steel rim in real photography?
Yes, for those rare times when it was necessary to shoot through glass. Such as perhaps the window of a train or bus, etc. Would end up with a bright circular reflection in the image. Size and brightness depended on how close to the glass. This is particularly what annoyed me many years ago about the chrome rings on the ZM and now also VM lenses. A black step-ring is a quick fix, or a filter, but I don't normally use clear 'protective' filters.
Finally got mine (type I). Incredibly light and small. The paint looks very nice but it seems to attract finger prints. The rangefinder coupling is perfect.
Aperture ring has a more muted click feel compared to previous voigtlander lenses like 50mm f1.5, 28mm f2, and 35mm f2.
Focus is smooth but there is some damping to it. I'd prefer the damping to be lighter so I can focus faster
Damn they should have launched this lens a few years earlier, before the 35/1.2 Nokton III and the 35/2 Ultron Classic. Now I have these two already (plus the Ultron VM 35/1.7)!
But from the pictures here I think it pretty much performs like the former mentioned, right?
Did some quick shots after I received the lens, I didn't do any controlled test, but I got the impression wide open at f1.5, this lens is not as sharp as 35mm f2 Ultron at f2 or Sony 35mm 1.4GM at 1.4
I noticed a lot of people here complain about that chrome ring on VM lens.
Is it a problem? I have to be honest, I did not like it initially, but now, when I tried out VM lens for a first time (40/1.2) I have to say it adds a character to the lens. I actually prefer it compared to E versions.
Do you guys don't like it for aesthetic reasons, or practical, like does it always produce flares or something like that?
phinix wrote:
I noticed a lot of people here complain about that chrome ring on VM lens.
Is it a problem? I have to be honest, I did not like it initially, but now, when I tried out VM lens for a first time (40/1.2) I have to say it adds a character to the lens. I actually prefer it compared to E versions.
Do you guys don't like it for aesthetic reasons, or practical, like does it always produce flares or something like that?
The silver ring does cause unnecessary flare. I have found it happen when light is reflected up from below the lens - sunlight reflected off a puddle. When it happens it is really annoying and hard to deal with. So I have to use a filter, which id prefer not, to cover the silver thread - a bayonet mounted hood did not stop it. All of my lenses happen to have a silver filter thread and it sucks...
My understanding is that the silver ring does not show wear as much as a black ring would when using a metal bayonet hood. The current Nokton 50/1 has a black ring but the bayonet part on the hood is plastic to stop unsightly wear...
I don't have the lens but a step up ring would probably solve this. It's much more discret than a hood and adds some banging protection to boot.
phinix wrote:
I noticed a lot of people here complain about that chrome ring on VM lens.
Is it a problem? I have to be honest, I did not like it initially, but now, when I tried out VM lens for a first time (40/1.2) I have to say it adds a character to the lens. I actually prefer it compared to E versions.
Do you guys don't like it for aesthetic reasons, or practical, like does it always produce flares or something like that?
Desmolicious wrote:
But what will hide that step up ring?
I am not sure, that's why it would be great to see picture. By looking at it, I don't think a step up ring would hide the holes in front of the hood base as shown in this picture:
