Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda

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 … 8

10 … 19 20 end

Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

philip_pj
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #1 · p.9 #1 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

As you scan the aperture infinity results, it's easy to see the first minor signs of image deterioration as damaging diffraction, forgetting that f11 is often no worse than the earlier apertures that we readily use, f2-f2.4 or so. The Batis 85mm is better distributed across the frame at f11 than f2.8, where the outers fall away fast from a stronger centre:

https://diglloyd.com/blog/2015/20150429_1044-ZeissBatis-85f1_8-MTF.html

'a lens that shows little effect from diffraction is not very good to begin with! In other words, the better the lens, the more diffraction throws a wet blanket onto performance.' (from above linked page)

I agree with the second sentence, not the first. ;-)
Lenses have very different aperture performance profiles. The better modern ones are best at/near wide open, then come back to the field by f8, so they fall further, faster. Others, like Leica's older APOs, bloom later to their peak and fall less in proportion to their still very good peaks. Many zooms peak at f8, which is wonderful.

https://www.lenstip.com/610.4-Lens_review-Voigtlander_Apo_Lanthar_35_mm_f_2_Aspherical__Image_resolution.html

Aug 22, 2024 at 02:24 AM

Paul.S
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #2 · p.9 #2 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Wow,
I see the biggest difference in the midfield (f2 apo vs 3.5), the f2 has the advantage, but, also has greater CA.
The question is, which one, Type 1 or 2?

@Fred Miranda amazing photo of your daughter.

Aug 22, 2024 at 03:02 AM

Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #3 · p.9 #3 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Fred Miranda wrote:
Great analogy! People often say that diffraction 'increases' with higher megapixels or smaller sensors. In reality, diffraction is always present and constant; what changes is our perception of it as sensor resolution increases. For example, with sensors approaching 100 or 200MP, we may begin to notice diffraction effects at wider apertures, like f/5.6, depending on the specific sensor, lens, and other factors..

It's also important to remember that we don't always need to use a lens's optimal aperture -- it depends on the specific requirements of the scene. While stopping down beyond f/8 can reduce image quality due to diffraction,...Show more →

Another factor people don't consider is that output size also matters for diffraction. With a 60MP sensor, you might see diffraction effects at the pixel level at f/8 or even a bit wider, but if you downsize that file to 30 MP, then you may not see the diffraction with the very same image any more even at the pixel level. So, knowing how big you want your output to be diffraction may or may not be an issue even on a high MP sensor.

This is part of the benefit of a bigger sensor or using more of the sensor rather than cropping. A 26 MP file from a smaller sensor (or a cropped section of a bigger sensor) will show more diffraction at wider apertures than a 26MP file downsized from a 60MP sensor. So say you want a 26 MP image with a field of view a 50mm FF lens. You will have less diffraction using a FF sensor with 50mm lens at f/8 (and using the whole sensor and downsizing to 26MP) than using a 35mm lens cropping the image by 1.5X or using a 26MP APS-C sensor and shooting at f/8. Now you can shoot the smaller sensor (or crop the larger sensor) at f/5.6 and get a similar amount of depth of field and diffraction, but we should keep in mind that when diffraction affects an image it is not merely aperture that affects diffraction but also magnification of the image, so cropping (i.e., sensor size) and output size also make a big difference. Ultimately it is the size of the pixels and the size of the magnification that determines diffraction.

Aug 22, 2024 at 06:20 AM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #4 · p.9 #4 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Steve Spencer wrote:
Ultimately it is the size of the pixels and the size of the magnification that determines how much of the diffraction is seen by the viewer.

Aug 22, 2024 at 08:09 AM

Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #5 · p.9 #5 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

rscheffler wrote:
how much of the is seen by the viewer.

Totally agree that is much more accurately said.

Aug 22, 2024 at 08:19 AM

Deathchant
Offline
•
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #6 · p.9 #6 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Guys, I'm not a member for that long here on the forums, but I follow a lot of Zeiss/Voigtlander related stuff. Although I am a Canon shooter (shooting only with Zeiss glass since 2014), I am also intrigued by E-mount and Leica mount Voigtlanders/Zeiss'es just to check the (technical) stories behind it.

I've been craving the 65/2 AL for a very long time, hoping they will "port" their stunning E/VM mount APO-line towards Canon EF/RF, but it doesn't seem they are going to do that (I wonder why....).
The 100MP is another stunning lens I own, but I keep being drawn to the 110/2.5 AL, which is considered to be the 100MP without the heavy CA....But I am not ready to ditch all my Canon stuff and exchange it for Sony...I love Canon body ergonomics and intuitiveness...

Anyway, now I read there is a 50/3.5 AL next to the 50/2 AL and I was wondering for what reason anyone would go for the 50/3.5L over the already near-prefect 50/2L?

Anyway, I just want to tell you that I really appreciate all the good in depth analysis and discussions you write here (Fred Miranda, philip_pj, Rustybug, rscheffler and others). I don't know if philip_pj is the owner of philipreeve, but I really like the reviews on that website!
I've written reviews about the 50MP, 100MP, 135APO (in Dutch), so if you ever need help reviewing Zeiss classic lenses (35/2 distagon, 50/2MP, 85/1.4 Planar, 100MP, 135APO) on Canon R6, let me know
https://www.andyswonderings.com/reviews

Aug 22, 2024 at 08:23 AM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #7 · p.9 #7 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

rscheffler wrote:
IMO end use is a critical factor (size, media type, viewing distances, etc.). But I think for most of us it's an unknown, therefore the preference is to aim as high as possible for best image quality (pixel level sharpness) to address as wide a range of end uses as possible.

-----------

Steve Spencer wrote:
Another factor people don't consider is that output size also matters for diffraction. With a 60MP sensor, you might see diffraction effects at the pixel level at f/8 or even a bit wider, but if you downsize that file to 30 MP, then you may not see the diffraction with the very same image any more even at the pixel level. So, knowing how big you want your output to be diffraction may or may not be an issue even on a high MP sensor.

This is part of the benefit of a bigger sensor or using more of...Show more →

Yes, the output medium and size can sometimes be unpredictable or change over time, but the goal is to stay as close as possible to the optimal settings. However, achieving this isn't always possible in a single shot. In such cases, using 'extreme' aperture settings can be valuable and may be essential for achieving the desired depth of field in a scene.

As RustyBug mentioned, while it's rare, I'm not hesitant to use f/11 or even smaller apertures if necessary. I understand there will be compromises, but I'm willing to make them to achieve the desired composition.

The same applies to using wider apertures than the optimal to achieve the desired effect. While we know there is some degradation in image quality due to aberrations, it's a compromise we're often willing to accept.

Returning to the APO-Lanthar lenses, the transition from the optimal aperture to one where aberrations increase or diffraction becomes more noticeable is even more pronounced compared to lenses with lower image quality.

Aug 22, 2024 at 09:29 AM

Ripolini
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #8 · p.9 #8 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Deathchant wrote:
... Anyway, now I read there is a 50/3.5 AL next to the 50/2 AL and I was wondering for what reason anyone would go for the 50/3.5L over the already near-prefect 50/2L?

Size and weight. Anyway, I'll still continue to use my CV Z 50/2 AL (and the Nikkor AI 50/1.4, which is rather good from f/4 onwards)

Aug 22, 2024 at 10:12 AM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #9 · p.9 #9 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Ripolini wrote:
Size and weight. Anyway, I'll still continue to use my CV Z 50/2 AL (and the Nikkor AI 50/1.4, which is rather good from f/4 onwards)

Another advantage is the much shorter minimum focus distance and zero distortion. They are very comparable in terms of IQ.

Aug 22, 2024 at 10:32 AM

Steve Spencer
Online
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #10 · p.9 #10 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Ripolini wrote:
Size and weight. Anyway, I'll still continue to use my CV Z 50/2 AL (and the Nikkor AI 50/1.4, which is rather good from f/4 onwards)

Let me add on a Leica M camera a big factor is blocking the rangefinder view. The CV 50 f/2 APO blocks the view of the 50mm frame lines quite a bit, whereas the CV 50 f/3.5 APO doesn't block the 50mm frame lines in the viewfinder at all without the hood as Fred reports. There is also a big difference in minimum focus distance on a Leica M camera. On Leica M the 50 f/2 APO has a .7M MFD, whereas the 50 f/3.5 APO has either a .35M or .45M MFD depending on whether it is type 1 or type 2. That can be a big deal if you are shooting close focus and in those instances can completely make up for the narrower aperture in creating shallow depth of field. Remember the 50 f/3.5 APO is designed for Leica M mount cameras and IMO Voigtlander does a really good job of designing lenses for those cameras and this lens is a great example of that.

Aug 22, 2024 at 10:33 AM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #11 · p.9 #11 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Steve Spencer wrote:
Let me add on a Leica M camera a big factor is blocking the rangefinder view. The CV 50 f/2 APO blocks the view of the 50mm frame lines quite a bit, whereas the CV 50 f/3.5 APO doesn't block the 50mm frame lines in the viewfinder at all without the hood as Fred reports. There is also a big difference in minimum focus distance on a Leica M camera. On Leica M the 50 f/2 APO has a .7M MFD, whereas the 50 f/3.5 APO has either a .35M or .45M MFD depending on whether it is type...Show more →

That's a great point Steve.

The Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar was designed specifically for the Leica M body, while the Voigtlander 50mm f/2 APO-Lanthar was initially made for the E-mount nearly five years ago before being adapted for the M-mount. This new version takes framelines into account and achieves nearly the same compactness as the previous Heliar, with improved image quality and color correction. With Leica emphasizing shorter minimum focusing distances for live view in their recent releases, Cosina may have seen an opportunity to set their lens apart by offering a significantly closer minimum focusing distance as well.

Aug 22, 2024 at 11:16 AM

philip_pj
Offline
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #12 · p.9 #12 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Seeing this one next to the little Heliar really brings home how diminutive it really is. Scale can be hard to visualize from images seen online. Once we see a range of how it works in a variety of uses and locations, that will help those interested to decide if it's for them.

For example, it is a great choice for much of travel, where you generally want plenty of detail in a non-fussy lens, and 150-175g means you have more trouble finding it in your bag than taking it along in the first place.

I feel it will more useful than the aperture suggests, but my background bias is for f3.5 lenses which like this one lack any aspherics, a surprise in itself. Not many of them exist, the only other one from Leica or Cosina I'm aware of configured that way is the CV 110/2.5.

Nevertheless, at any focal length (or working aperture) they offer a sweetness sometimes not seen in faster lenses with higher specs. It could be a trend in the making. The biggest surprise so far for me is the out of focus rendering, and the 'immediacy' of images.

Aug 22, 2024 at 03:15 PM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #13 · p.9 #13 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

philip_pj wrote:
The biggest surprise so far for me is the out of focus rendering, and the 'immediacy' of images.

I'll be sharing the rendering part of this review next, as I was waiting for the Heliar to arrive for a comparison. From what I recall from owning this lens in the past, the Heliar always had a pleasant rendering -- smooth in the transition zones without feeling overly modern or lifeless. When I first tested the f/3.5 APO-Lanthar, I noticed many similarities to the f/2 APO-Lanthar when stopped down to f/3.5..

However, the biggest surprise was discovering that its rendering is even more similar to the Heliar's, which is fantastic news for this lens and likely one of the reasons Cosina discontinued the Heliar. We now have a higher-performing, better-corrected lens with the same rendering and color output, and as you noted, some versions are even lighter.

Aug 22, 2024 at 04:00 PM

rscheffler
Offline
• • • • • •
Upload & Sell: Off

p.9 #14 · p.9 #14 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Deathchant wrote:
Guys, I'm not a member for that long here on the forums, but I follow a lot of Zeiss/Voigtlander related stuff. Although I am a Canon shooter (shooting only with Zeiss glass since 2014), I am also intrigued by E-mount and Leica mount Voigtlanders/Zeiss'es just to check the (technical) stories behind it.

I've been craving the 65/2 AL for a very long time, hoping they will "port" their stunning E/VM mount APO-line towards Canon EF/RF, but it doesn't seem they are going to do that (I wonder why....).

Not sure if you're being rhetorical about why more Voigtlander has not appeared for Canon. As you may know, since the RF mount release, Canon has been much more restrictive about allowing third party lenses with any kind of electronic interface. It seems that Cosina is interested in remaining above board with Canon and therefore licenses each RF mount lens it releases (only two so far). I agree, as another Canon user, it would be great to see the APO Lanthar lenses in RF, but it appears Cosina is first pursuing wider aperture lens releases in RF mount. I suspect with the 110, 65 and 50 being initially release for Sony FE, it's extremely unlikely they'd be released in EF mount as it would require significant optical redesign for a lens system that is no longer being developed by the OEM.

Anyway, I just want to tell you that I really appreciate all the good in depth analysis and discussions you write here (Fred Miranda, philip_pj, Rustybug, rscheffler and others). I don't know if philip_pj is the owner of philipreeve, but I really like the reviews on that website!

Different Philip/Phillip: one L vs two Ls and one is in Australia and the other in Germany.

(thanks for the kind words!)

Aug 22, 2024 at 05:36 PM

Juha Kannisto
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #15 · p.9 #15 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Map Camera published an introduction video for the new 50/3.5 today. They are using Type I two-tone version as well as Type II in the video. It's in Japanese but auto-translation is available.

Aug 23, 2024 at 12:54 AM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #16 · p.9 #16 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Juha Kannisto wrote:
Map Camera published an introduction video for the new 50/3.5 today. They are using Type I two-tone version as well as Type II in the video. It's in Japanese but auto-translation is available.

Great comparison between the 0.45m and 0.35m minimum focusing distances. The Type II is more appealing to me because the higher magnification brings it closer to macro territory.

Aug 23, 2024 at 03:24 PM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #17 · p.9 #17 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Back to Quick Links

Rendering compared to Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 Heliar and Voigtlander 50mm f/2 APO-Lanthar

I've been shooting with the Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar for some time now and have developed a good sense of how the lens renders subjects at different focusing distances, from very close to far away. It's also beneficial to compare how different lenses render the same subject under identical lighting conditions. In this rendering section, I'll share several comparisons with the Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 Heliar and Voigtlander 50mm f/2 APO-Lanthar lenses.

First, it's important to note that the CV 50/3.5 APO-Lanthar has a narrower angle of view compared to the other lenses tested. The widest angle is offered by the CV 50/2 APO, with the Heliar falling in between. For this comparison, all lenses were tested at the same aperture value of f/3.5 to allow for a detailed analysis of their rendering qualities up close under equal conditions. From these comparisons and others I've done, I've learned that the Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar renders almost as smoothly as the CV 50/2 APO-Lanthar in the transition zones, but with slightly more character.

The crop comparisons clearly show that the CV 50/2 APO's specular highlights are very rounded towards the corners due to the aperture being stopped down from f/2 to f/3.5. However, when both lenses are compared wide open, the Voigtlander 50/3.5 APO-Lanthar shows slightly less optical vignetting, resulting in slightly more rounded bokeh towards the edges. In terms of outlining, the Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO is closer in rendering to the Heliar, while the CV 50/2 APO shows less outlining, which contributes to its smoother rendering, particularly noticeable at mid to long distances.

I'm very pleased with the rendering of both the CV 50/3.5 APO and Heliar lenses. They deliver smooth focus transitions, especially at closer distances, with a subtle draw while still maintaining some character. In contrast, the CV 50/2 APO offers a more modern rendering with fewer flaws, but the overall rendering is still quite similar, as you can see in the comparison. In real-world images, without closely scrutinizing their rendering, all three lenses produce a similar look when shot at an f/3.5 aperture.

Sample 1: At 3.5m

TOP: CV 50/3.5 APO-Lanthar | MID: CV 50/3.5 Heliar | BOTTOM: CV 50/2 APO-Lanthar

100% magnification (pixel level) displaying the focused area.

LEFT: CV 50/3.5 APO-Lanthar | Right: CV 50/3.5 Heliar

LEFT: CV 50/3.5 APO-Lanthar | Right: CV 50/2 APO-Lanthar

Aug 23, 2024 at 03:51 PM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #18 · p.9 #18 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Sample 2: At 1.3m

TOP: CV 50/2 APO-Lanthar| MID: CV 50/3.5 APO-Lanthar | BOTTOM: CV 50/3.5 Heliar

100% magnification (pixel level) displaying the focused area.

Aug 23, 2024 at 03:53 PM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #19 · p.9 #19 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Sample 3: At 2.5m

TOP: CV 50/3.5 Heliar | MID: CV 50/2 APO-Lanthar | BOTTOM: CV 50/3.5 APO-Lanthar

100% magnification (pixel level) displaying the focused area.

Aug 23, 2024 at 03:58 PM

Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On

p.9 #20 · p.9 #20 · Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Review

Sample 4: At 1.5m

TOP: CV 50/3.5 APO-Lanthar | MID: CV 50/3.5 Heliar | BOTTOM: CV 50/2 APO-Lanthar

100% magnification (pixel level) displaying the focused area.

Aug 23, 2024 at 04:00 PM

1 2 3 … 8 9 10 … 19 20 end
FM Forums \| Leica & Alternative Gear \| Join Upload & Sell 1 2 3 … 8 9 10 … 19 20 end

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