lifeandmylens wrote:
2) While MFD is .5M, it's actually coupled to the RF on my M10-R and MP @ ~.61M, where my lux is .7M. Here is an example of the rangefinder coupled minimum focus distance on both lenses.
Shawn,
Most of my Voigtlander lenses focus down to around 0.6 meters using the rangefinder, but this is specifically on the M10/M11 bodies. If you test it on your MP, you'll notice that the rangefinder disengages at an earlier point.
You make a great point about the rangefinder going further down for Voigtlander compared to Leica. It would be great if Cosina could incorporate some sort of tactile feedback for when the rangefinder is no longer focusing. Well, it was not this time...maybe in a future lens.
lifeandmylens wrote:
A couple observations so far.
1) Focusing action is smoother/lighter than the lux. Not as light as the Elmarit.
2) While MFD is .5M, it's actually coupled to the RF on my M10-R and MP @ ~.61M, where my lux is .7M. Here is an example of the rangefinder coupled minimum focus distance on both lenses.
Focusing action sounds good. I thought my Elmarit was super light. It was great for quick focusing, but it was kinda easy to lose its place when zone focusing if you weren't careful with handling.
The Lux, uses two helicoids (iirc), since it has to move the FLE group independently. Wondering how much the focusing action played into Voigt's decision to NOT use an FLE arrangement. Size / weight probably reflects the "lack of" a second helicoid for an FLE group, too.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Shawn,
Most of my Voigtlander lenses focus down to around 0.6 meters using the rangefinder, but this is specifically on the M10/M11 bodies. If you test it on your MP, you'll notice that the rangefinder disengages at an earlier point.
You make a great point about the rangefinder going further down for Voigtlander compared to Leica. It would be great if Cosina could incorporate some sort of tactile feedback for when the rangefinder is no longer focusing. Well, it was not this time...maybe in a future lens.
Thanks Fred. I tested it on the M10-R, MP and M2. My MP disengages right around .6 just like the M10-R. The M2 disengages closer to .7.
And yes a detent would be nice. If this lens is good, I’ll be very happy with the .6m MFD on the MP as it’s a .58 finder which is a joy to use with 28mm.
A few more pics at night, just to give people a sense of character in night/specular highlight/city scaple shots in the rain...Still in testing mode, but this is seeminly a great lens to use
A few more pics at night, just to give people a sense of character in night/specular highlight/city scaple shots in the rain...Still in testing mode, but this is seeminly a great lens to use
Impressive night shots! I've added your Voigtlander 28/1.5 Nokton lens photos to the collection of sample shots contributed by FM members on the review's front page. Let's hope more members share their shots too!
RustyBug wrote:
The Lux, uses two helicoids (iirc), since it has to move the FLE group independently. Wondering how much the focusing action played into Voigt's decision to NOT use an FLE arrangement. Size / weight probably reflects the "lack of" a second helicoid for an FLE group, too.
Based on Juha's collection of photos, it looks like the VM can be pretty sharp at near distances (thinking of his burger joint food photos where the text on a cup seemed very sharp for that distance). It could be that Cosina determined that near distance performance was competitive and by avoiding FLE they were able to keep the design simpler and less expensive, thus better able to hit a certain price point. While I think this lens would still be popular if it was more expensive, it would widen the gap between it and the Thypoch 28/1.4 for $700, 7A ~$450, Laowa 28/1.2 ~$600. While only two of those are M mount and not as small or as ergonomically refined as the VM, they're also pretty decent lenses in their own rights (as is the Laowa on mirrorless systems where the adapted VM suffers somewhat). The VM benefits from dramatically undercutting the Lux on price without sacrificing much, if any, performance. But likewise, the other fast 28 options could be realistic alternatives to the VM. Suddenly the 28/1.4 M-mount field has become somewhat crowded.
RustyBug wrote:
For some folks, they notice ... others, not so much.
I do think this phrase sums up the whole thing, if one can't tell the difference (or make a difference), the voigtlander is definitely a no brainer choice.
jeffersoncasey wrote:
I do think this phrase sums up the whole thing, if one can't tell the difference (or make a difference), the voigtlander is definitely a no brainer choice.
I bet if I posted pictures taken with the Voigtlander 28/1.5 and claimed they were from the Leica 28/1.4 Lux, hardly anyone would question it -- especially when considering some post-processing.. But, when we closely compare these two lenses with their distinct designs (which I enjoy doing), it's logical to expect variations in many aspects. Determining which is better or worse becomes subjective based on the viewer's perspective and needs.
I've always been a fan of the Leica 28 Lux, and that won't change. However, I must acknowledge that Voigtlander has created something truly special and, in some ways, unique. While I appreciate the many similarities between them, I wouldn't want the Voigtlander to replicate the Leica completely. I enjoy that they share many characteristics, but the new CV 28/1.5 still maintains its own distinct personality.
The best part is that this excellent performance and rendering will now be appreciated by many more photographers, as the lens is much more affordable. Also, we can't overlook the fact that the Voigtlander is significantly lighter (especially Type I), has the ability to focus at 0.5m (using LV) and 0.6m (using the rangefinder). The less intrusion in the viewfinder due to its more compact size could be invaluable for many. I noticed this while composing images for this review.
lifeandmylens wrote:
Thanks Fred. I tested it on the M10-R, MP and M2. My MP disengages right around .6 just like the M10-R. The M2 disengages closer to .7.
And yes a detent would be nice. If this lens is good, I’ll be very happy with the .6m MFD on the MP as it’s a .58 finder which is a joy to use with 28mm.
That's interesting. Can you really focus all the way to 0.6 meters on your Leica MP? I attempted it on mine, and it stops focusing at 0.65 meters and 0.7 meters on the M2.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I bet if I posted pictures taken with the Voigtlander 28/1.5 and claimed they were from the Leica 28/1.4 Lux, hardly anyone would question it -- especially when considering some post-processing.. But, when we closely compare these two lenses with their distinct designs (which I enjoy doing), it's logical to expect variations in many aspects. Determining which is better or worse becomes subjective based on the viewer's perspective and needs.
I've always been a fan of the Leica 28 Lux, and that won't change. However, I must acknowledge that Voigtlander has created something truly special and, in some ways, unique. While I appreciate the many similarities between them, I wouldn't want the Voigtlander to replicate the Leica completely. I enjoy that they share many characteristics, but the new CV 28/1.5 still maintains its own distinct personality.
The best part is that this excellent performance and rendering will now be appreciated by many more photographers, as the lens is much more affordable. Also, we can't overlook the fact that the Voigtlander is significantly lighter (especially Type I), has the ability to focus at 0.5m (using LV) and 0.6m (using the rangefinder). The less intrusion in the viewfinder due to its more compact size could be invaluable for many. I noticed this while composing images for this review....Show more →
Absolutely Fred, I don't disagree about all the good things to say about 28/1.5, but sometimes when GAS hits that extra 3% is what makes people (I have to admit me being one) pay for one 😳
We will see what Leica will come up with the new updated 28lux with close focus (not that I have news about it but it'll eventually come).
By the way thanks for the informative review as always!
I'm still old school enough to limit myself to prints to be viewed at a distance more or less equal to the diagonal of the image so that 24 Mpx (M240/M246/Z6) are enough and the finest points of pixel peeping are lost on me even though I understand that people have different uses and views. I like small lenses and often need wide apertures so at this level of performance I ordered one that will be more than enough for my needs.
Fred Miranda wrote:
That's interesting. Can you really focus all the way to 0.6 meters on your Leica MP? I attempted it on mine, and it stops focusing at 0.65 meters and 0.7 meters on the M2.
Raining out but I snuck out and hid under a pergola for a few quick shots in bad lighting. The handling, size and black paint finish on the CV are all fantastic.
The lux has a slightly warmer rendition (~100 on the color temperature slider to match them).
The CV is narrower, maybe something like 29mm.
The lux has a more "cinematic" softness wide open.
The lux has slightly smoother OOF areas.
I'd be curious to compare them again in good lighting. The fact that the CV can even come close to the lux is quite the feat.
A few images below. The lux is first, CV second. Last image is a 100% crop of the middle set (lux left, CV right).
Fred Miranda wrote:
I bet if I posted pictures taken with the Voigtlander 28/1.5 and claimed they were from the Leica 28/1.4 Lux, hardly anyone would question it -- especially when considering some post-processing.. But, when we closely compare these two lenses with their distinct designs (which I enjoy doing), it's logical to expect variations in many aspects. Determining which is better or worse becomes subjective based on the viewer's perspective and needs.
+1 that side by sides make comparatives much easier to denote the differences.
Which, I never like the "better or worse" terminology, when it comes to optics. There are so many attributes in optics that are quid pro quo ... it's a bit of a sliding scale, You want it to render smooth, it can only be so sharp. You want it to render sharper, it can only be so smooth. (You get the gist.)
That always winds up being a "better" at what? kind of thing. I mean, even if we compare a Lux to a Cron we get different rendering attributes. Is that to say a Cron is better than a Lux, or a Lux is better than a Cron. Kinda depends on the "what" a person is keying in on, in the "better at what" consideration. I learned long ago (hmmm, here in the Alt Forum actually) to think in terms of different, not better / worse ... because without the "what" being defined ... there's usually the other end of the "what" that pays the price in the realm of quid pro quo. Things like focus shift, size, weight, SA, CA, Onion Rings, et al. There are just so many pieces to the puzzle that are quid pro quo, it is really hard to ISOLATE a single attribute in the realm of being "better", when it may very well be an issue of preference of attribute A vs. attribute B.
In the end, it gets down to horses for courses ... and how hard are you gonna try and run your horse. For many things, the diff's aren't consequential, until you start really pushing things. That's when the diff's reveal themselves the most, imo.
Anyway, too long ... but, simply that there is never a perfect lens ... just lenses that we really LIKE A LOT (for whatever attributes trip our trigger), and are willing to live with the (lesser) things about it that we don't like so much.
lifeandmylens wrote:
The CV is narrower, maybe something like 29mm.
Considering the specifications provided by Voigtlander and Leica, it seems more accurate to say that the Leica has a 27mm focal length, based on its 75° angle of view, while the Voigtlander has a 28mm focal length, from its 74.5° angle of view.
A few images below. The lux is first, CV second. Last image is a 100% crop of the middle set (lux left, CV right).
This week we had lot of sunny and clear days so I've been shooting with my A7CII and the 28/1.5 VM on many days (weekday lunch breaks + Saturday). Lot of stopped down (f8) scenery shots and also a handful wide open and at intermediate apertures.
