rscheffler wrote:
Sounds like the 90 is a good match in respect to optical characteristics with the 35/1.5.
But is a realistic everyday use of the lens. Just wanted to understand. To me it implies if mid zone focus is important, then focus and recompose may not be ideal and might be improved by using live view, if possible and practical, assuming the lens actually improves in that zone with careful focus (if this has been determined, I need a reminder).
The 90 f/2.8 APO Skopar handles CA a lot better and has a bit more of a mid zone dip, but otherwise does has a lot in common with this new CV 35 f/1.5. To me the big difference is that if I cary a 35mm with a Leica M camera it is going to get a lot of use. In contrast a 90 on a Leica M is only going to get occasional use, so I really like the 90 f/2.8 APO being very small and being a pretty good jack of all trades type of lens. It makes it a great extra lens for the bag that I only use occasionally.
bjhurley wrote:
It looks identical to me; what are the differences?
May look the same, but most certainly does not feel the same. Maybe it was my copy, but the Ultron f/2 II did not have the same uniform smooth movement and resistance in both directions.
rramesh wrote:
May look the same, but most certainly does not feel the same. Maybe it was my copy, but the Ultron f/2 II did not have the same uniform smooth movement and resistance in both directions.
Yes, I've noticed that as well, and have seen it mentioned in reviews. Mine's pretty smooth, but it came with what I considered an excess of grease inside; I was worried it might end up on the mount or in the camera so I removed some of it.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The 'OLLUX' style Voigtlander LH-12 hood attaches perfectly on the new CV 35/1.5 Nokton. I have not tested for hard vignetting though.
This hood is also compatible with the CV 35/2 Ultron and CV 28/2 Ultron II.
Wouldn’t worry too much about vignetting as it works well on the Ultron 35 f/2 which also has a 39 filter. There could be some finder blockage. This costs more than the Voigtlander vented hood. A cheaper option is available from Haoge.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The 'OLLUX' style Voigtlander LH-12 hood attaches perfectly on the new CV 35/1.5 Nokton. I have not tested for hard vignetting though.
This hood is also compatible with the CV 35/2 Ultron and CV 28/2 Ultron II.
LH-4N and LH-12 are both official accessory hoods for the 35/1.5 so both should work perfectly.
Was this tested with the type II brass version as well as the type I? I'm wondering if it will balance just as well on the camera. The type I is definitely in my cart right now.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The 'OLLUX' style Voigtlander LH-12 hood attaches perfectly on the new CV 35/1.5 Nokton. I have not tested for hard vignetting though.
This hood is also compatible with the CV 35/2 Ultron and CV 28/2 Ultron II.
Do not get the Haoge version/copy. It sits askew. Just returned mine.
“Sir, do you know you have a steering wheel in your pants?”
Desmolicious wrote:
Do not get the Haoge version/copy. It sits askew. Just returned mine.
Maybe you got a bad number. I have both Haoge hoods (vented and not) for the 28 and 35 Ultrons and they are as good as the Voigtländers I also have. The paint finish is just a little less luxurious though good enough compared to other hoods.
Thury wrote:
Maybe you got a bad number. I have both Haoge hoods (vented and not) for the 28 and 35 Ultrons and they are as good as the Voigtländers I also have. The paint finish is just a little less luxurious though good enough compared to other hoods.
So many reviews on Amazon mention the same thing I just experienced. So I'm definitely not a one-off. If I keep the lens - the 28mm (not sure yet) - I'll be getting the round version.
I was using the lens w hood on an M. It is hard to see that the angle is off just looking at it, but through the VF it is very noticeable.
