Previously I have been using the VM 15mm as my 18mm/28mm. Using the 5:4 crop mode works out to be 18/27mm like this lens. The Sports Mode brings up frame lines that work out to be 28mm equivalent with enough megapixels on the X-H2.
Despite also having the TTArtisans 28mm F5.6 and the moving from the XF27mm to Nikon's 26mm F2.8, I'm yet to own a full-frame body, so Fred and Juha's samples convinced me to give this one a try.
I suspect the 15mm produces better edges; being oversized and not needing corrections for distortion. However, the size and versatility of this lens, has (for me) made it the most appealing of the XF Voigtlander lenses.
As mentioned previously, from 2m to infinity has such a short throw. I might be 1mm off zone focusing here at F2.8 but still happy with this result. Easy shooting from F5.6.
Paul Z wrote:
Previously I have been using the VM 15mm as my 18mm/28mm. Using the 5:4 crop mode works out to be 18/27mm like this lens. The Sports Mode brings up frame lines that work out to be 28mm equivalent with enough megapixels on the X-H2.
Despite also having the TTArtisans 28mm F5.6 and the moving from the XF27mm to Nikon's 26mm F2.8, I'm yet to own a full-frame body, so Fred and Juha's samples convinced me to give this one a try.
I suspect the 15mm produces better edges; being oversized and not needing corrections for distortion. However, the size and versatility of this lens, has (for me) made it the most appealing of the XF Voigtlander lenses.
As mentioned previously, from 2m to infinity has such a short throw. I might be 1mm off zone focusing here at F2.8 but still happy with this result. Easy shooting from F5.6.
Gabe13 wrote:
I've never seen that color before, looks slick...a sort of dark graphite. Does Dura imply it is a more durable finish? Was that a limited release?
So I see that CV has announced an RF version of the 75mm/1.5 I've been wanting. Got my fingers crossed its eventually coming to X-mount
---------------------------------------------
Good to hear! And that works for me. Any display model whether used or open box is just fine...as Fred mentioned even a silver 27/2.0 is fine since they have the same finish. Yeah no one would expect them, or anyone really, to open up a brand new box just for that. I know that I can't go wrong with black...but I'm just wondering how that silver looks in person. I have 3 silver lenses in my stable and even though they're not a perfect match to the X-T5 silver, they look nice mounted on it regardless...except for that PK to FX adapter but that's the price of adapting sometimes....Show more →
I got mine in black from Map Camera two weeks ago. It's just $450 tax free, unbeatable. They had display lenses both in black and silver so you could try them on your camera. And the staff there were very nice, the guy serving me could speak a bit English so the purchase and tax-free process was super smooth. One thing to note is that I actually visited them twice - despite their website was showing in stock, they just had to get the lens from warehouse so I had to go to the shop again two days later to pick up my lens. So if time allows I would suggest you to visit them once you land Tokyo. Good luck with your shopping and enjoy Tokyo!
quicksong wrote:
Very curious how it compares with the Fuji 18mm f/2. Currently torn between these two lenses.
I owned the XF 18mm f/2 previously with an X-E4. I feel they have a similar amount of distortion that corrects well enough. The Fuji lens is f/2 but I always shot from f/2.8 as there was quite a noticeable improvement there. Both have pretty smooth rendering when shot close to a subject.
Zooming in on the Voigtlander images, you can still see CA on high contrast edges even when stopped down. I think the Fuji does better in this regard but the Voigtlander offers more detail and better contrast across the frame stopped down.
The Fuji lens is an old lens and the autofocus is a bit clunky and noisy, and the aperture ring is very loose and easy to bump, and I appreciate the smooth manual focus and firm aperture ring clicks of the Voigtlander. However, autofocus might still be the way to go if shooting wide open at subjects that don't keep still at 2 to 3m as the short focus throw can make this a little finicky.
Both 18mm (I just rediscovered) can work well for selfies
Fred Miranda wrote:
I haven't tested the CV 15/4.5 III on the Fuji for around a 21mm equivalent focal length yet, but that sounds like a great idea.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts and images from the CV 18/2.8. I've linked them to the review.
I think it works well on a crop body as you have cropped most of the heavy vignetting out. The XF14mm I feel is just a bit too wide for aps-c. I shoot the CV mostly 1 stop down (6.4 or 6.8?) at hard infinity. Mine might not be reaching true infinity like a distant cityscape (need f/11 to reach it), but for shooting across the street everything is in focus. The sports finder mode is a handy thing, and switching from 21mm to 28mm with a touch of a button is pretty great but the idea of a crop of a crop made me think I was missing out on something a bit.
Anyway, can own the 15mm and 18mm, and a Fuji body for less than a 21mm SEM.
From my somewhat short testing I can tell this:
- x-h2 is much better than x-t5 and by extension better than all previous cameras for manual lens focusing. A better EVF made dramatic difference in number of technically good pictures.
- skip Voigtlander if you want sharpness and just get xf18/1.4. XF is on another level at all apertures comparing to 18/2.8. (at least for my copies of these lens)
My keepers most likely will be x-h2 + 18/1.4, despite the fact that original goal was to get a camera to fit into my small EDC bag. x-t5 + 18/2.8 did it, but quality of images are just not there for me. Kind of interesting x-t5 + 18/2.8 is slightly smaller than OM-1+17/1.8.
olegkin wrote:
From my somewhat short testing I can tell this:
- x-h2 is much better than x-t5 and by extension better than all previous cameras for manual lens focusing. A better EVF made dramatic difference in number of technically good pictures.
- skip Voigtlander if you want sharpness and just get xf18/1.4. XF is on another level at all apertures comparing to 18/2.8. (at least for my copies of these lens)
My keepers most likely will be x-h2 + 18/1.4, despite the fact that original goal was to get a camera to fit into my small EDC bag. x-t5 + 18/2.8 did it, but quality of images are just not there for me. Kind of interesting x-t5 + 18/2.8 is slightly smaller than OM-1+17/1.8....Show more →
I wouldn't be surprised if the XF 18/1.4 produces higher resolution because it has 15 elements, more than twice as many as the Voigtlander, which means the Fuji lens corrects aberrations better.Perhaps a fairer comparison would involve a smaller lens with a similar number of elements. However, I don't think there's an 18mm lens for the X-mount as compact as the Voigtlander. It's a true pancake lens, which means there are compromises to achieve that size.
Plus, there's a noticeable size difference - the XF 18/1.4 is about 3.5 times longer just in length. Even the older and also compact XF 18/2 is about twice its size!.
That said, it would be fantastic to see some of your tests if you're willing to share them with us.
I did not try to do any kind of "scientific" testing, but here is my best efforts. Every shot is taken handheld from the same place, at least three times, and the best of three is chosen. IBIS was on for all pictures. There are some minor adjustments in C1, no lens corrections for Voigtlander.
Outside of this topic, but there were 2 out of 20 (in the same scene) auto-focused images that did not focus anywhere. I made sure there is a green focus confirmation before taking a shot. Is this repetition of the problem I had before with x100v and x-t4 Also a few images missed focus, which I do not consider a problem. EDIT: Camera was not on the latest firmware, and release notes mentioned fixes to autofocus. So, it is possible this issue will be gone in the future.
This shot was from the closest distance, about 1meter away. Since it is handheld, it is probably not the best sharpness considering somewhat thin DoF. But if I test on tripod, what is the point in having a small lens The rest of wide open shots show this fuzziness as well. It clears at f/4.0.
"Tree by pond deck" focus point is 5+ meters away. "Trees by the bridge" is about 3 meters away. "Wooden structure" is about 1 meter away.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I wouldn't be surprised if the XF 18/1.4 produces higher resolution because it has 15 elements, more than twice as many as the Voigtlander, which means the Fuji lens corrects aberrations better.Perhaps a fairer comparison would involve a smaller lens with a similar number of elements. However, I don't think there's an 18mm lens for the X-mount as compact as the Voigtlander. It's a true pancake lens, which means there are compromises to achieve that size.
Plus, there's a noticeable size difference - the XF 18/1.4 is about 3.5 times longer just in length. Even the older and also compact XF 18/2 is about twice its size!.
That said, it would be fantastic to see some of your tests if you're willing to share them with us....Show more →
Thanks for those tests Oleg, really helpful. As an 18 1.4 owner, I was hoping for a lot better from the voigtlander. It’s not a fair comparison, different goals obviously, but it’s really great to see how it compares against something I know.
What is that white "rainbow" thing It is not on the pictures with other lenses.
This image has undergone heavy post-processing, especially noticeable in the foliage against the sky. Is this evident in the original, unprocessed image? It might be flare, but I can't confirm for certain.
Fred Miranda wrote:
This image has undergone heavy post-processing, especially noticeable in the foliage against the sky. Is this evident in the original, unprocessed image? It might be flare, but I can't confirm for certain.
You are partially right. It is the same minimal processing as the rest of the images, but it is overexposed, and blue channel got almost clipped. When I added -1 stop exposure adjustment halo and defects went away. Never seen anything like this before!
I looked at images from other lenses, they also are similarly "overexposed", but images look fine. The only difference is that Voigtlander does not have any lens corrections in C1 yet, but other lenses have their own profiles.
Also a few images missed focus, which I do not consider a problem. EDIT: Camera was not on the latest firmware, and release notes mentioned fixes to autofocus. So, it is possible this issue will be gone in the future. 
