Hi Luka. These were based on RAW files. Used the camera Lightroom profiles
akul wrote:
I am really digging the BW shots, especially the first one. It captures the atmosphere beautifully. Was it out of camera JPG, or your processing? Either way, it is right on the money, I am curious to know.
RoamingScott wrote:
Just ordered the F mount CV 28/2.8 to compliment my 40/2 Ultron
More photos for this thread soon!
This lens is on my wish list, but I'm not convinced about its border performance at intermediate apertures. I'm rather skeptical about close-up performance (15 cm minimum focus distance, 0.43 X) too, due to the lack of floating elements.
Therefore I'm very curious to have feedbacks from FM fellows.
Today, an old asylums anonymous graveyard. Nikon Zf with Voigtländer Super Wide Heliar 15mm, SOOC, Resized. Second with Zfc & Voigtländer Nokton D23mm F1.2.
I was curious how the 28/2.8 would handle small objects getting harsh backlight in the 2.8 bokeh...some examples I've seen are extremely bubbly. Some typical smearing at the edges, but overall the bubbles, while present, are still handled to a large degree. It's not as busy and distracting as I feared. I'm sure some situations will be worse than others.
Couple more 28/2 pics from today, I was curious how the 2.8 vignetting would be...not terrible, but not totally correctable via the profile in LR either. It's sharp as tacks wide open, though!
RoamingScott wrote:
Couple more 28/2 pics from today, I was curious how the 2.8 vignetting would be...not terrible, but not totally correctable via the profile in LR either. It's sharp as tacks wide open, though!
Congrats on the 28/2.8. It looks like lens has more resolution than I expected while keeping the Voigtlander rendering even at close distance. Love your cat shot. Very lovely.
akul wrote:
It looks like lens has more resolution than I expected while keeping the Voigtlander rendering even at close distance.
Honestly, high resolution figures in the frame center have been reported in published MTF tests and come as no surprise to me. The main problem with the lens seems to be the uneven sharpness across the frame, even at intermediate apertures (see Lenstip.com: https://www.lenstip.com/upload3/3838_roz.jpg).
P.S.: the cat picture was taken at magnification significantly lower than 0.43 X.
Ripolini wrote:
Honestly, high resolution figures in the frame center have been reported in published MTF tests and come as no surprise to me. The main problem with the lens seems to be the uneven sharpness across the frame, even at intermediate apertures (see Lenstip.com: https://www.lenstip.com/upload3/3838_roz.jpg).
P.S.: the cat picture was taken at magnification significantly lower than 0.43 X.
I'm bored to death over discussions like that. Put the lens on, shoot pics. Do you like the results? Keep the lens.
I don't buy CV lenses for edge to edge sharpness, I buy them because they are a delight in hand and create vintage looking images. The small flaws are usually a plus.
RoamingScott wrote:
I'm bored to death over discussions like that. Put the lens on, shoot pics. Do you like the results? Keep the lens.
I don't buy CV lenses for edge to edge sharpness, I buy them because they are a delight in hand and create vintage looking images. The small flaws are usually a plus.
And I'm bored to death to read comments on "vintage look" in a technical section of the forum; it's hot air.
I read the technical sessions of the forum to get technical information on gear I could be interested in.
The look of images comes from photographer's skills mostly.
I understand that I can't get any additional meaningful info from your posts concerning the CV 28/2.8 SL II s.
I'll look elsewhere.
And what is meant by 'vintage', 20yrs old? 30, 40, 60?
I own or have access to lenses bought new from 60s on, some secondhand that are older. There is a world of difference between a 50s Summicron and a 60s Nikkor, and my modern Fujis are closer to the Summicron than the Nikon.
The lens I have that shows very large rendering difference is a 1938 5cm Elmar which I had left uncoated when it was overhauled a few years back.
All of them produce excellent photos, which I can process to look like almost anything I want, except its hard to fill the empty shadows you get with 60s Japanese lens designs. And I cant get shatp edges if the lens doesnt do it without looking artificial.
I don't see anything in this Voigtlander 28mm that I cant do with my 20 yr old 28/1.9 Ultron, which continues to serve me well.
Well you’re in an image thread, pal. If you want to read up on MTF charts and look at a 100 diagonal images of a brick wall all while wringing your hands over a $500 lens, they are VERY good at that in the Sony forum
Ripolini wrote:
And I'm bored to death to read comments on "vintage look" in a technical section of the forum; it's hot air.
I read the technical sessions of the forum to get technical information on gear I could be interested in.
The look of images comes from photographer's skills mostly.
I understand that I can't get any additional meaningful info from your posts concerning the CV 28/2.8 SL II s.
I'll look elsewhere.
RoamingScott wrote:
Well you’re in an image thread, pal. If you want to read up on MTF charts and look at a 100 diagonal images of a brick wall all while wringing your hands over a $500 lens, they are VERY good at that in the Sony forum
You are in gear-talk forum section. Pictures in "image threads" should be functional to understand how a lens performs, all technical aspects included, and not only those that are of interest to who puts always the subject in the frame center.
It's not that difficult to understand.
Are you able to share information on how the lens performs in term of even sharpness across te frame? or its perfomance in true close-ups? If you are, I'll be glad to hear your comments. If you aren't, and if you are bothered to death by my posts, why don't you use the Hide Me button, instead of confirming your ugliness?
Just stop, bud. This is not a thread for technical lens discussions. Make a dedicated thread if you want specific questions answered about a particular lens.
I’ll be happy to report your posts if the personal attacks continue. Your choice.
Ripolini wrote:
You are in gear-talk forum section. Pictures in "image threads" should be functional to understand how a lens performs, all technical aspects included, and not only those that are of interest to who puts always the subject in the frame center.
It's not that difficult to understand.
Are you able to share information on how the lens performs in term of even sharpness across te frame? or its perfomance in true close-ups? If you are, I'll be glad to hear your comments. If you aren't, and if you are bothered to death by my posts, why don't you use the Hide Me button, instead of confirming your ugliness?...Show more →
RoamingScott wrote:
Just stop, bud. This is not a thread for technical lens discussions. Make a dedicated thread if you want specific questions answered about a particular lens.
I’ll be happy to report your posts if the personal attacks continue. Your choice.
YOU started personal attacks commenting my post: "I'm bored to death over discussions like that".
This is a gear-talk session of the Forum. Stop. It's fully legitimate to ask information on lens performance in a lens image thread in a gear-talk session of the forum. Are you bored? Who minds?
Quit harassing fellows whose opinions differ from yours.
Report whatever you want to whoever you like.
This lens looks like a winner for those of us liking the CV ‘look’ on 28mm. Have been wondering how well the F mount versions render when adapted to Zcams. Looking at what you’ve posted here and subsequently so far- looks damn good in color and fit B&W. Am curious how well it performs at MFD, looks like you were pretty close with the cat.
RoamingScott wrote:
28/2.8 arrived! Deliciously sharp, ridiculous MFD (feels like the lens is touching the subject), easy to focus...gonna be a keeper for many years.
Ripolini wrote:
It's fully legitimate to ask information on lens performance in a lens image thread in a gear-talk session of the forum.
They're showing you the lens "performance" through the photos!
Thanks to all who have posted and especially to those who have posted larger (pixel dimension-wise) files.
