I know Voightlander has a history of making good lenses and all, and I can see how a 27mm f/2 lens has its appeal (despite lacking AF capability?), but as I look through this threads photographs I'm having a bit of an "Emperor's New Clothes" reaction.
There are, of course, some very nice photographs in the mix. However, to an observer who has no skin in the game it is pretty hard, going on impossible, to see any photographic evidence of the optical better-ness of this lens compared to, say, the Fujifilm 27mm f/2.8.
End contrarian alert.
I use the CV 27/2 primarily for street photography and my point is not the image quality - i.e. the image quality is good or completely sufficient for my images, but many lenses provide good image quality today. My points are as follows: extremely small and light and most importantly: fully manual focusing. If you shoot manually with zone focusing, the AF lenses are far inferior. That makes all the difference. The wonderful build quality and electronic contacts are a welcome addition, but not the point. Therefore - no, they are not “the emperor's new clothes” - quite the opposite. I don't want to have all the AF lenses as a gift for my street photography...
f you combine a small rangefinder camera like the X-E4 with the CV 27/2, you get a camera that is unmatched by any manufacturer on the market for street photography. Even popular (and very good) cameras such as the X100 series, Ricoh GR series or Leica M series do not offer this combination: it is extremely small, compact and light. The smaller APS-C sensor has advantages in zone focusing (compared to the full frame Leica-M). The 26MP Fujifilm sensor has a very fast sensor readout - very good if you work with an electronic shutter. And you have an electronic viewfinder, which I personally prefer to the OVF of the X-Pro body and Leica-M. And, above all, like with a Leica-M, I have full manual control on the body itself without going into the menus at all, including real manual focusing. That's what makes this combination so unique. And that's why I also hope that Cosina will soon come out with a CV 18/2 für Fuji-X. After that, we just have to hope that Fujifilm revives the X-E series...
mabra wrote:
f you combine a small rangefinder camera like the X-E4 with the CV 27/2, you get a camera that is unmatched by any manufacturer on the market for street photography. Even popular (and very good) cameras such as the X100 series, Ricoh GR series or Leica M series do not offer this combination: it is extremely small, compact and light.
The X100 would be the same size and weight of this kit (or at least so similar as to be indistinguishable).
The GRIII would be noticeably smaller and lighter, though the field of view is wider and 18mm on an APS-C sensor is not for everyone (though it would be greater for the "slightly wider" crowd).
mdude85 wrote:
The X100 would be the same size and weight of this kit (or at least so similar as to be indistinguishable).
The GRIII would be noticeably smaller and lighter, though the field of view is wider and 18mm on an APS-C sensor is not for everyone (though it would be greater for the "slightly wider" crowd).
That's not my point. I know both cameras (X100 and GR3) very well. I think that the combination of the mentioned properties is unique. The X100 series is similar in many ways, but ultimately has an autofocus lens that is not ideal for manual zone focusing. The GR3 and GR3X are great cameras, but they don't have an EVF or a fully manual lens. I also appreciate the direct settings for shutter speed and exposure compensation on the body of the Fuji cameras. The Leica M11, for example, is certainly a great camera, but it is very expensive and has a full-format sensor with a comparatively slow sensor readout - not ideal for shooting with electronic shutter. And it doesn't have an EVF, which I personally don't find ideal. It's certainly just my personal opinion, but I find the combination of the X-E4 and CV 27/2 to be better suited for street photography than the other cameras mentioned.
I ended up buying the CV 27/2 Ultron after the review. It's my favorite lens on the X-E4.
Love the lens performance and rendering for such compact size.
mabra wrote:
That's not my point. I know both cameras (X100 and GR3) very well. I think that the combination of the mentioned properties is unique. The X100 series is similar in many ways, but ultimately has an autofocus lens that is not ideal for manual zone focusing. The GR3 and GR3X are great cameras, but they don't have an EVF or a fully manual lens. I also appreciate the direct settings for shutter speed and exposure compensation on the body of the Fuji cameras. The Leica M11, for example, is certainly a great camera, but it is very expensive and has a full-format sensor with a comparatively slow sensor readout - not ideal for shooting with electronic shutter. And it doesn't have an EVF, which I personally don't find ideal. It's certainly just my personal opinion, but I find the combination of the X-E4 and CV 27/2 to be better suited for street photography than the other cameras mentioned.
mdude85 wrote:
Hmmm... you said that the "X100 series, Ricoh GR series or Leica M series do not offer this combination: it is extremely small, compact and light."
I was simply responding to that point by noting that all 3 cameras you listed are small, compact and light (even the M11 is not that big).
Yes, we misunderstood each other. I meant that specific combination of characteristics, not just the size and weight.
mabra wrote:
f you combine a small rangefinder camera like the X-E4 with the CV 27/2, you get a camera that is unmatched by any manufacturer on the market for street photography. Even popular (and very good) cameras such as the X100 series, Ricoh GR series or Leica M series do not offer this combination: it is extremely small, compact and light. The smaller APS-C sensor has advantages in zone focusing (compared to the full frame Leica-M). The 26MP Fujifilm sensor has a very fast sensor readout - very good if you work with an electronic shutter. And you have an electronic viewfinder, which I personally prefer to the OVF of the X-Pro body and Leica-M. And, above all, like with a Leica-M, I have full manual control on the body itself without going into the menus at all, including real manual focusing. That's what makes this combination so unique. And that's why I also hope that Cosina will soon come out with a CV 18/2 für Fuji-X. After that, we just have to hope that Fujifilm revives the X-E series......Show more →
There are other options that are essentially as small and light — for example, put the Fujifilm 27mm f/2.8 pancake on that XE4 and it is smaller and lighter than the X100v. You lose one stop (f/2.8 max instead of f/2) but you get auto-focus.
I do enough street photography to understand that AF is very, very useful in quickly-evolving street situations, where it is more likely to give me a critically focused image than a manual-focus lens using either memory focus or hyper focus approaches... and way faster than visually estimating the distance and moving the focus right or than using the camera's manual focus aids.
There's this "common wisdom" that I no longer accept that MF is better (or more authentic or something...) than AF for shooting street. I was brought up on MF-only cameras, and I beg to differ.
Admittedly, this is a matter of preference. My preferences for a variety of situations:
1. XE4* plus 27mm f/2.8 if I'm going th shoot Fujifilm and want the smallest possible package plus the ability to use other lenses.
2. X100v* if I only want to shoot 35mm equivalent at f/2.
3. XT5 with the 27mm f/2.8 for a very small system that gives up no functionality and can work with other lenses. (That's the system I currently use, after using the XPro2 until a bit less than a year ago.)
If I could actually see something in the Voightlander images that struck me as an image quality advantage significant enough to over come the loss of AF and I felt that a one stop increase in maximum aperture was critical (and I didn't actually want to get to f/1.4...) I might see the value.
None of this is to suggest that it isn't a fine lens with good optics. I'm just not seeing how it would put me ahead of other available options for street and travel photography.
YMMV.
* I recognize that neither of these bodies is realistically available right now, but I expect them to be replaced with newer models at some point.
Fine, if you prefer auto focus, you have plenty of quality options today. I use auto focus in many situations and I love it, but for my street photography, I prefer manual focus with zone focusing. And I think I’m not alone - there are many street photographers who prefer manual focus over auto focus. But of course this is a matter of personal preference and shooting style.
In my case - when you don’t use Leica-M, you normally have to adapt manual lenses. This can be great - I adapted many manual focus lenses to many different digital bodys - but the adapters add bulk to the overall package. So if you prefer a true manual focus lens AND you want an overall small and light package, I think the combination X-E4 (or maybe X-Pro3) + CV27/2 is unmatched.
I also prefer manual focus lenses for most of my photography but I'm not really shooting people centric street photography, more like street scenery where people are not the main focus and snapshots of anything that catches my eye, as well as travel photography (when I have a chance to travel). I don't really use zone focusing techniques, I either focus carefully at an object/target usually at wider apertures or I utilize hard infinity or pick any other optimal focusing position to maximize overall sharpness for long distance scenery shots (stopped down). I find it much more engaging to shoot with manual focus with proper mechnically coupled focus rings (rather than focus by wire).
Only when I shoot events I definitely prefer AF and then I usually use my Sony A9 & some fast E-mount primes. I may also use AF lenses for convenience when traveling, e.g. if I want to use zooms for flexibility to avoid changing lenses. I also use AF lenses occasionally for my general walk-around photography but I'm more and more sticking to MF lenses for that these days as it's just more enjoyable and engaging overall.
I got a Fuji X camera only for the purpose of acquiring some of the CV MF lenses for it and I ended up with 5 of those lenses so far (just missing 35/0.9 which is a bit too expensive and bulky for me). 27/2 and 50/1.2 are perhaps my 2 top favorites, and I also like 23/1.2, 35/1.2 and 35/2 a lot too. I wanted to get an X-E4 but it turned out to be too difficult to find them after I started looking. There has been only highly overpriced 2nd hand supply left and I didn't want to pay twice the original price, so I ended up with X-S10 which I've been very happy with. It has IBIS and a nice grip that X-E4 doesn't have and it's still pretty small and light so it might have been the best option for me after all even though I mainly went for it due to better availability. I find it to work very nice with the small CV primes and usability is very good. The grip also helps with vertical shooting which I do a lot. I was never keen on having dedicated ISO or Shutter Speed dials so X-S10 is also better match for me in terms of controls. I shoot mostly still subjects in daylight with this camera utilizing Electronic Shutter and ISO stays at 160 base (except in the dark) and Shutter Speed doesn't matter most of the time except if it's getting too slow for stable photos with IBIS or on the rare cases that I shoot something that moves fast with this camera.
For adapting manual focus rangefinder and SLR lenses I prefer to use FF cameras to keep the original field of view, so now I mostly use my Sony A7CII for that. I also have several native E-mount CV lenses that I now use on A7CII.
I see the advantage of the CV 27/2 over the Fujinon 27/2.8 in its durability. The Voigtlander will surely work for many years. Unfortunately, the reliability of Fuji products and the 27/2.8 lens in particular is dismal.
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I also prefer manual focus lenses for most of my photography but I'm not really shooting people centric street photography, more like street scenery where people are not the main focus and snapshots of anything that catches my eye, as well as travel photography (when I have a chance to travel). I don't really use zone focusing techniques, I either focus carefully at an object/target usually at wider apertures or I utilize hard infinity or pick any other optimal focusing position to maximize overall sharpness for long distance scenery shots (stopped down). I find it much more engaging to shoot with manual focus with proper mechnically coupled focus rings (rather than focus by wire).
Only when I shoot events I definitely prefer AF and then I usually use my Sony A9 & some fast E-mount primes. I may also use AF lenses for convenience when traveling, e.g. if I want to use zooms for flexibility to avoid changing lenses. I also use AF lenses occasionally for my general walk-around photography but I'm more and more sticking to MF lenses for that these days as it's just more enjoyable and engaging overall.
....Show more →
I handle it similarly. I have a Lumix S5ii with a set of autofocus lenses. I also adapt manual Leica and Voigtländer M and Leica R lenses to the Lumix for street and travel photography and video. I did a lot of street photography with the Lumix and various manual lenses, but the overall package was always a bit too big and heavy for me. So I was looking for something small and light with true manual focus. That's why I bought the X-E4 solely for paring it with the CV 27/2 and I'm very happy with it. I was lucky and got an affordable copy. But of course, the X-S10/X-S20 will be equally suitable for these purposes.
Plzenaak wrote:
I see the advantage of the CV 27/2 over the Fujinon 27/2.8 in its durability. The Voigtlander will surely work for many years. Unfortunately, the reliability of Fuji products and the 27/2.8 lens in particular is dismal.
As a person who has extensively used two* of the Fujifilm 27mm f/2.8 lens without any technical issues, including carting them around for "many years" while doing street photography and traveling... I'm wondering what your source is for the surprising notion that t the "reliability [of this] lens in particular is dismal."
Perhaps you can share some legitimate, reliable sources for that claim?
I haven't experienced anything like this, and I haven't seen reported trend like that.
This is not to say that Voightlander doesn't make fine, solidly constructed lenses. From all reports they do, and those I used decades ago seemed pretty good.
Dan
* Why two 27mm f/2.8 lenses? I used the original version for years, but lamented its omission of an aperture ring. When the newer version with the aperture ring arrived I bought one and gave the older lens to one of my sons. Both continue to perform flawlessly.
gdanmitchell wrote:
As a person who has extensively used two* of the Fujifilm 27mm f/2.8 lens without any technical issues, including carting them around for "many years" while doing street photography and traveling... I'm wondering what your source is for the surprising notion that t the "reliability [of this] lens in particular is dismal."
Perhaps you can share some legitimate, reliable sources for that claim?
I haven't experienced anything like this, and I haven't seen reported trend like that.
This is not to say that Voightlander doesn't make fine, solidly constructed lenses. From all reports they do, and those I used decades ago seemed pretty good.
Dan
* Why two 27mm f/2.8 lenses? I used the original version for years, but lamented its omission of an aperture ring. When the newer version with the aperture ring arrived I bought one and gave the older lens to one of my sons. Both continue to perform flawlessly....Show more →
While both lenses share the same focal length, they don't directly compete. The Voigtlander 27/2 Ultron appeals to manual focus enthusiasts who appreciate the extra stop for improved low-light capability and depth of field. On the other hand, the Fuji 27/2.8 is a slower lens with autofocus. Performance-wise, neither lens stands out as they make compromises for a more compact size. That being said, I personally lean towards the Voigtlander for its rendering.
It's fantastic to have more options for our Fuji cameras!
Hi Fred, thanks for the excellent review. I’ve just bought the Voigtlander 27mm myself a few days ago and enjoy using the lens a lot (just got back from a trip to Tokyo). What I noticed however, is there seems to be quite a lot of coma in the nighttime shots. I’ve uploaded an example taken at f2 where this can be seen best: Rainbow Bridge. Would this be normal with the Voigtlander, or could there be an issue with my lens? Kind regards, Ward
