Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              16              end
  

Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review

  
 
Henning
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: On
p.17 #1 · p.17 #1 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


Here are the last two lenses in my comparison.

I intend to do some more comparisons, but I started this to see how the Elmar and the C-Skopar compared, as it seemed to me that the nominal difference in speed of the lenses is largely lost in practice. As it turns out, it could be argued that the Elmar is actually faster; whether it matters is dependent on other factors. But the S-Skopar is still the higher resolution and contrastier lens; at least between my copies.






Apo-Lanthar 50mm/2 at f/2







Apo-Lanthar 50mm/2 at f/2.8







Apo-Lanthar 50mm/2 at f/4







Apo-Lanthar 50mm/2 at f/5.6







Summilux ASPH vI 50mm/1.4 at f/1.4







Summilux ASPH vI 50mm/1.4 at f/2







Summilux ASPH vI 50mm/1.4 at f/2.8







Summilux ASPH vI 50mm/1.4 at f/4







Summilux ASPH vI 50mm/1.4 at f/5.6




Sep 03, 2024 at 07:08 PM
gammarART
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.17 #2 · p.17 #2 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


Did anyone compare the 50mm 2.2 with the Summarit 2.4?


Sep 04, 2024 at 03:02 PM
Desmolicious
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.17 #3 · p.17 #3 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


M7, CV 50 2.2, C200





Sep 07, 2024 at 05:10 PM
serhan_
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.17 #4 · p.17 #4 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


gammarART wrote:
Did anyone compare the 50mm 2.2 with the Summarit 2.4?


In comparison to Summicron and Summarit:






Sep 07, 2024 at 07:55 PM
Desmolicious
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.17 #5 · p.17 #5 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


M7, CV 50 2.2, C200





Sep 07, 2024 at 10:59 PM
rsolti13
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.17 #6 · p.17 #6 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


What is the reasoning behind such a big difference between vignetting with digital M bodies vs film?


Sep 16, 2024 at 06:12 AM
RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.17 #7 · p.17 #7 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


rsolti13 wrote:
What is the reasoning behind such a big difference between vignetting with digital M bodies vs film?


Film is a flat plane.

Digital uses microlenses to redirect the light path. Leica M's in particular, use elliptical microleneses, in an effort to contend with the angle of incidence.

Since light is energy, moving in a direction, it is a vector force. The trigonometry of vector forces makes the difference. The steeper the angle, the lower the vector force. Sin of 90 degrees = 1, Sin of 30 degrees = 0.5, Sin of 20 degrees = 0.34 ... a "glancing" blow delivers less energy than a direct impact. Changing the angle of incidence, changes the amount of force being transferred.

I don't know the actual angles involved, but if the angle of incidence was changed (via the elliptical microlenses) to provide a more direct impact from say 20 (above) to 30, the resulting change from 0.34 > 0.5 would be approximately a 50% improvement in force of applied energy to the sensor plane (in principle).

Kinda like when we were kids, taking a magnifying glass and tilting the angle "just right" to get enough energy concentrated to start paper / leaves on fire.

Note the steep angle of the incoming light ... and the redirection of the light path by the microlenses, to make the light path better collimated (i.e. more convergent, less divergent) for energy transfer.

https://gmpphoto.blogspot.com/2016/01/the-future-of-sensor-technology-at-leica.html


https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1666426/8



Sep 16, 2024 at 06:32 AM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.17 #8 · p.17 #8 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


rsolti13 wrote:
What is the reasoning behind such a big difference between vignetting with digital M bodies vs film?


To elaborate on what Kent wrote: while film is 'flat', the emulsion has thickness, is not opaque to light and the silver grains are three dimensional. Strongly non-perpendicular light rays in the peripheral image area penetrate the emulsion at an angle and still register an exposure on the silver grain within it, though not as strongly as on-axis light rays. If you were to overlay a pixel grid on a piece of film, a peripheral light ray might enter the emulsion in one grid coordinate but ultimately 'register' by striking a silver grain located under a neighboring grid coordinate.

With a digital sensor, the actual light sensitive parts of each pixel are typically fairly deep within a pixel well. Strongly non-perpendicular light at the image periphery may not make it directly down to the pixel and instead hits the pixel walls and perhaps is scattered from there down to the light sensitive area. Here micro lenses at the top of the wells help to redirect the light down, but apparently are not 100% effective, which is also dependent on optimal micro lens shape to redirect light to the pixels.

Think of it this way, light from the far edge of the wide open exit pupil travels at a 'steeper' angle to reach a pixel at the opposite edge/corner of the sensor array. Meanwhile light from the near side of the exit pupil travels more directly/perpendicular to the same side of the exit pupil, but this won't offset the effect because pixels in the center of the array more or less see all of the light from the exit pupil. In film there aren't pixel wells constricting light flow to the silver grains and peripheral light rays are more effectively captured by the emulsion.

As the lens is stopped down, light from the exit pupil is seen more consistently from all pixel coordinates across the sensor. The light is seen more from the optical center, whereas when the lens is at a wider aperture, a greater portion of the light travels through areas of the exit pupil that are increasingly masked by the pixel walls as one moves away from the center of the sensor array.


Edited on Sep 16, 2024 at 03:53 PM · View previous versions



Sep 16, 2024 at 09:12 AM
rsolti13
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.17 #9 · p.17 #9 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


RustyBug wrote:
Film is a flat plane.

Digital uses microlenses to redirect the light path. Leica M's in particular, use elliptical microleneses, in an effort to contend with the angle of incidence.

Since light is energy, moving in a direction, it is a vector force. The trigonometry of vector forces makes the difference. The steeper the angle, the lower the vector force. Sin of 90 degrees = 1, Sin of 30 degrees = 0.5, Sin of 20 degrees = 0.34 ... a "glancing" blow delivers less energy than a direct impact. Changing the angle of incidence, changes the amount of force being transferred.

I don't
...Show more

awesome explanation, so what about M body vs regular? Is there any difference in angle because of the removal of the color array?



Sep 16, 2024 at 09:14 AM
rsolti13
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.17 #10 · p.17 #10 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


rscheffler wrote:
To elaborate on what Kent wrote: while film is 'flat', the emulsion has thickness, is not opaque to light and the silver grains are three dimensional. Strongly non-perpendicular light rays in the peripheral image area penetrate the emulsion at an angle and sill register an exposure on the silver grain within it, though not as strongly as on-axis light rays. If you were to overlay a pixel grid on a piece of film, a peripheral light ray might enter the emulsion in one grid coordinate but ultimately 'register' by striking a silver grain located under a neighboring grid coordinate.

With
...Show more

Thanks Ron, so you pretty much answered my question above...should be no discernable difference between monochrom vs color digital camera



Sep 16, 2024 at 09:17 AM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.17 #11 · p.17 #11 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


rsolti13 wrote:
What is the reasoning behind such a big difference between vignetting with digital M bodies vs film?

rscheffler wrote:
To elaborate on what Kent wrote: while film is 'flat', the emulsion has thickness, is not opaque to light and the silver grains are three dimensional. Strongly non-perpendicular light rays in the peripheral image area penetrate the emulsion at an angle and sill register an exposure on the silver grain within it, though not as strongly as on-axis light rays. If you were to overlay a pixel grid on a piece of film, a peripheral light ray might enter the emulsion in one grid coordinate but ultimately 'register' by striking a silver grain located under a neighboring grid coordinate.

With
...Show more
rsolti13 wrote:
Thanks Ron, so you pretty much answered my question above...should be no discernable difference between monochrom vs color digital camera


That is my layman's understanding of the phenomena. It's possible that sensor toppings can also have some effect, such as removal of the CFA for the Monochrom model. But I can't recall seeing side by side comparisons of vignetting characteristics made on the same color and monochrome versions of past M cameras, so can't say whether this has been the case. Perhaps this is an opportunity for someone with both the M11 and Monochrom to do a quick comparison?

I'd be surprised if it isn't very similar.



Sep 16, 2024 at 09:22 AM
MAubrey
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.17 #12 · p.17 #12 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


Another element here is development and film stock. B&W films show less vignetting than color negative films, which show less vignetting than positive slide films. With ultra wide, high vignetting lenses for large format, you'll often get recommended to use a center filter to correct vignetting on color film, but then turn around and use the same lens with black & white film and not need the filter at all.

Then with development. A compensating developer will obscure vignetting more than a noncompensating developer because compensating developers tend to regularize contrast: the developer is exhausted in the highlights, which in turn reduces the development reaction rate in the highlight areas, so if you expose for the shadows, you'll balance out the vignetting relative to the highlights, too.

Wish I could say something about the actual chemistry involved, but...

Edited on Sep 16, 2024 at 06:06 PM · View previous versions



Sep 16, 2024 at 09:51 AM
Desmolicious
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.17 #13 · p.17 #13 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


To sum up, what the kids are saying in the above posts is film is superior to digital.




Sep 16, 2024 at 03:48 PM
rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.17 #14 · p.17 #14 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


There are some aspects to film that are certainly better than digital. This might be one. I also greatly prefer how film handles extreme highlights, such as sunsets with the sun in the photo, fire/flames (such as candles), street lights or other light sources that are significantly brighter than ambient, etc.

MAubrey wrote:
Another element here is development and film stock. B&W films show less vignetting than color negative films, which show less vignetting than positive slide films. With ultra wide, high vignetting lenses for large format, you'll often get recommended to use a center filter to correct vignetting on color film, but then turn around and use the same lens with black & white film and not need the filter at all.

Then with development. A compensating developer will obscure vignetting more than a noncompensating developer because compensating developers tend to regularize contrast because the developer is exhausted in the highlights, which in
...Show more

That's interesting. I wonder if color film is more sensitive to vignetting due to multiple emulsion layers and the weaker/fewer peripheral light rays not penetrating as far into the emulsion. With respect to color negative vs. positive, perhaps it's the higher contrast nature of positive film that enhances the vignetting effect more.



Sep 16, 2024 at 04:11 PM
Desmolicious
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.17 #15 · p.17 #15 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


I’ve shot this lens on b&w film and on colour film and there is no difference in vignetting. It only vignettes on digital.

















Sep 16, 2024 at 06:37 PM
Desmolicious
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.17 #16 · p.17 #16 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


And this shows why I am NOT going to buy the new APO 50 3.5.
The 2.2 is smaller, lighter, cheaper, faster. I don’t need super close focusing - especially not on a film M! And if I do, I’ll just use an SLR.

Full image, then 100% crop. Why would I want the more expensive, slower and larger APO if the 50 2.2 is this good on film?











Sep 16, 2024 at 06:42 PM
spendychucky
Offline

Upload & Sell: Off
p.17 #17 · p.17 #17 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


I wonder how this tiny color skopar compares when stopped down to around 3.5 vs the apo3.5.

Desmolicious wrote:
And this shows why I am NOT going to buy the new APO 50 3.5.
The 2.2 is smaller, lighter, cheaper, faster. I don’t need super close focusing - especially not on a film M! And if I do, I’ll just use an SLR.

Full image, then 100% crop. Why would I want the more expensive, slower and larger APO if the 50 2.2 is this good on film?

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53905546878_7338af9e74_b.jpg

https://live.staticflickr.com/65535/53905643929_aa7e96b6ef_b.jpg





Sep 20, 2024 at 09:14 PM
Desmolicious
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.17 #18 · p.17 #18 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


spendychucky wrote:
I wonder how this tiny color skopar compares when stopped down to around 3.5 vs the apo3.5.



One thing I know for sure is the Color Skopar blows the APO away, every time, at 2.2...




Sep 20, 2024 at 10:23 PM
catacore
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.17 #19 · p.17 #19 · Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color-Skopar Review


Not intending to hijack this thread, but I was wondering how this lens would compare (rendering-wise) to some other very small 50mm f/2 lenses like the Elcan or the Thypoch Eureka, or even the Leica 50mm f2 collapsible lenses (I have seen there are Summicron and Summitar designations for 50/2 collapsible design).

This thread got me wishing for a very small 50/2 lens for my A7Cr, and I don't know of any native E-mount lenses, so I'll have to adapt from M-mount, I guess. I got the Canon 50/0.95 lens and the APO lens, but both are too big for an all-day carry, hence I tend to leave the camera at home. Only recently, since I got the 40/2.8 Heliar and the 35/1.4 Nokton Classic (in E mount) I really started to carry my A7Cr with me all day, everywhere. Hence, I am looking now for a small 50mm lens.



Sep 25, 2024 at 11:30 AM
1       2       3              16              end






FM Forums | Leica & Alternative Gear | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              16              end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.