p.1 #1 · LLL Elcan or Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color Skopar
Opinions on which one is preferred for a light-weight f/2 50mm? Particularly anyone who has shot with both?
Of course they're different tools with different characters. I know I prefer how the Elcan looks to the eye, but haven't shot with the Color Skopar 2.2
I do love the look of Elcan files- It's the character that often makes the images. Perhaps the unique glass.
p.1 #3 · LLL Elcan or Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color Skopar
Yes I did check the thread, thanks. Learned a lot there, but now looking for comparison of experience between shooting with the 2.2 vs. the Elcan. Thanks for the message.
p.1 #4 · LLL Elcan or Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color Skopar
JohnKraus wrote:
Yes I did check the thread, thanks. Learned a lot there, but now looking for comparison of experience between shooting with the 2.2 vs. the Elcan. Thanks for the message.
Check backward in the LLL thread for Elcan testing.
I've had the Elcan but not the Voigtlander, but judging by Fred's tests with the CV, they're completely different lenses. CV is sharp and modern, Elcan is vintage. Biggest drawback for me with the Elcan is when shot wide open, it's sharp nowhere outside of the very center of the frame.
p.1 #5 · LLL Elcan or Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color Skopar
I find the Elcan sharp in a largish center wide open, soft in the corners wide open. Don't like reading it... but shooting with the Elcan I love the look, including the corners. Except at the rare times when the subject is indeed in a corner- at which point focusing stopped down a bit is fine.
The Elcan to me and others is quite modern in the center. So it's a wonderful oddball- both modern and vintage.
The question for me is.. if I sold the Elcan would I miss it. And my guess is... yes. Thus the growing understanding of why so many of us have multiple 50s.
p.1 #6 · LLL Elcan or Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color Skopar
I have both (and a number of other 50's at the moment) and as mentioned, they're completely different. The Color-Skopar is a modern, high performance lens with essentially no focus shift and very little resolution difference center to corner, VERY light weight but relatively high vignetting. It also focuses to 0.5m. The Elcan is more like a lower performance Summar with better coatings. The center area is reasonably sharp wide open, but then gets distinctly softer towards the edges. It's decent at f/8, but not as good as the CS at f/2.8. It has focus shift that you have to be aware of, as at mid and shorter distances what you focus on will not be sharp at f/4. You have to use it a while to get used to that so you can compensate.
The two lenses are the same size for all practical purposes. I use the Elcan with a Heliopan short 39mm hood, so even with lenshoods the lenses are the same size. My Elcan is brass and weighs approx. twice as much as the CS.
The CS is 'transparent', producing a clear, modern result and while having pleasing rendering (to my eyes) does not lead with the rendering. The Elcan is much more about rendering, and if you like it, you like it and live with its foibles. Otherwise....?
The CS is the easier choice. It delivers, in a tiny package. No excuses necessary. The Elcan demands practice, understanding, patience and acceptance. Even more so probably than a Zeiss Sonnar. The latter has a more 'in your face' character which is in many ways allows easier justification of its excentricities.
p.1 #7 · LLL Elcan or Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color Skopar
Thank you very much Henning for this post. Very clear and very useful!
The problems with the Elcan lead it, for me, to be a terrific portrait lens, when I want things sharp but not as super sharp, as well as more introspective imagery- and welcome softer corners at wide apertures. But yes.. at other times it can be bothersome.
I am one who loves the rendering... so looks like it'll be adding yet another 50 at some point! Cheers-
p.1 #8 · LLL Elcan or Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color Skopar
I did have the opportunity to test out the VM 50mm f/2.2. Size and lightness is lovely. I found the vignetting acceptable from 2.8 on. It's very heavy at 2.2 - and I often like to shoot wide open. Too dark for my taste.
Colors are punchy and biased towards the warm side.
For my use I prefer the character and look of the Elcan at this point.
p.1 #9 · LLL Elcan or Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color Skopar
I own the Elcan, the lens renders lovely images, it’s really its strength, the center I find is very sharp. The Colors are warm and the overall output, very pleasing. I must admit that for corner to corner sharpness, it won’t do.
I have not tried the Voigtlander Skopar 2.2 but for what I have seen I’m not fond of the rendering.
Apart from the compactness and the fact that they do well in their own style, it really comes down to what you like better when looking at pictures taken with them.
p.1 #11 · LLL Elcan or Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color Skopar
'I know I prefer how the Elcan looks to the eye'
This is reason enough. Unless the lens has some dreadful drawbacks, 'beauty first' is the primary criterion - if both lenses meet your main usage needs. You won't be disturbed about ring rotation or a little more weight or lens appearance if the images measure up in 5-10 years time. Trust your judgment, is my suggestion.
p.1 #12 · LLL Elcan or Voigtlander 50mm f/2.2 Color Skopar
I wish the LLL 50/2 Elcan performed a bit better in the mid-field, similar to the Leica 50/2 Rigid, but its advantage lies in its much more compact size. The CV 50/2.2 offers a more modern look, and it's even smaller and lighter. However, they differ significantly in their performance and rendering. The Voigtlander has a more modern rendering style, while the Elcan, like the Rigid, provides a classic draw.
If I could only have one, the Elcan would be my choice because of value its unique and imperfect rendering.
