TakenWild wrote:
Cosina should do Kickstarter for lenses. They already have a cult following and could help make more lenses that don’t sell as well in Japan.
Juha Kannisto wrote:
Cosina of course has distributors outside of Japan too but I think they continue to sell most of their volumes in Japan market. I'm not sure if using Kickstarter would make a lot more people in other markets go for lenses that wouldn't otherwise sell in big enough volumes to be financially viable?
For example their flagship GA lenses 50/1 in M/E/Z/RF and 35/0.9 in X mount don't seem to be volume sellers in any market perhaps due to relatively high pricing and competition from native fast AF lenses in E, Z and RF mounts etc. so it probably doesn't encourage them to do multiple other super high speed GA lenses at different focal lengths, even though they would have the technical capabilities. It's always the more medium priced lenses that have the potential to sell much more, such as different variants of the 40/1.2 etc. I think they are doing the best they can to optimize their offerings considering the business side of it. ...Show more →
The problem for a lens like the 50/1 is once it's in a native mirrorless mount, it's automatically compared against the OEM equivalents. For example, why would I buy it when I can get a 50/1.2 with autofocus and as good, or even better optical performance for maybe 20-25% more from Canon, or Sony, or Nikon?
But if it's initially targeted at Leica M, where logically everything is manual focus, and where an equivalent lens from Leica is extremely expensive, maybe worldwide there is a niche within the Leica M niche that can be exploited.
Plzenaak wrote:
It would be nice if Voigtlander came out with lenses for L mount and Fuji G mount.
That would be interesting, but to come out with L mount lenses they would have to join the L mount alliance and I am not sure what Leica would think of that. Maybe Leica would be fine with that, but maybe they would not want to give them the credibility. Fuji G mount would require a completely different set of lenses with a larger image circle. I think that could be interesting, but I have used the Leica M mount 75 f/1.5 on Fuji GFX and it does not come close to covering the image circle.
mojoh wrote:
I was thinking (hoping) Voigtlander make zooms as well, short ones. Sony's 16-25/2.8 & 24-50/2.8 seems to have caused a stir recently..
That would be a big change for the Voigtlander lenses, and I don't think it is going to happen, but I would welcome a 10-14mm f/5.6 and a 15-21mm f/4 (which has a precedent with the Leica WATE). Personally, I would be very likely to purchase the 15-21 f/4, but I don't shoot ultra wide ever so I wouldn't get the wider one.
Seems like they are planning something for the 1.2 Nokton range, if they discontinued the 35 & 50. Maybe a 50 1.2 vII and a 35 F/1?
Laowa has released many good lenses from 9 to 15, including an excellent 12-24 zoom. Cosina really needs to catch up in that segment. They can start anywhere, because all of their ultra wide offerings are due for an update.
I would personally like to see a 180 F/4.5 APO, made as small as possible with excellent performance. A small 18 in the vein of the 21 F/3.5 would be my second request.
I would welcome for two tele-lanthars, in VM mound and no electronics, to keep if for landscape for loooong time:
- 135 Tele-Lanthar f4 under 400 grams, black aluminum
- 180 Tele-Lanthar f5.6 under 500 grams, black aluminum
philip_pj wrote:
If you believe that the recent past is the best predictor of the near future, you might see more Noktons in the Cosina comfort zone of 35<-->50mm lenses. They like the ease of the outside lane these days. They can make a living out there and still do well on price point by churning them out, one after another.
They have a boutique bling mentality. They want to stay small, so they think small; and cheap. They are in the box seat to do some great lenses - they have the talent, the expertise, the plant, the glass - but not the will (management). It could include:
. a lightweight 'Otus' range (charge $2000 each lens);
. several landscape friendly, high spec slow lenses at 15mm, 18mm, 21mm, 25mm and 35mm (why not?);
. a 90mm APO-Lanthar (very welcome in this currently bland and moribund niche);
. a 35/1 GA; a 75/1.25 GA to join the 50/1 (why do the tech and not use it?);
. two or three manual focus zooms (big underlying demand for these).
It won't happen, none of it. I'm starting to think they enjoy not doing these things. When does the boss reach retirement age? I'd almost contribute to his super fund to speed up the process. This is what happened at Sony by the way, they got a great guy in at the top around a decade back and the rest is history. You have to move forward. Stasis in a fast-moving industry is going backwards. ...Show more →
philip_pj wrote:
. two or three manual focus zooms (big underlying demand for these).
mojoh wrote:
I was thinking (hoping) Voigtlander make zooms as well, short ones. Sony's 16-25/2.8 & 24-50/2.8 seems to have caused a stir recently..
It's curious what comes around again after a while. Back in the early 90s one of my favorite wide zooms was the Tamron SP 24-48. Would be interesting to see a modern variation. For me, starting at 20mm would be wide enough. I'd probably use this on mirrorless and wouldn't care much about lack of AF for an UWA that is very infrequently used. It could be as short a range as 20-28, or 18-28. From 28mm I'm covered with decent native AF options. It would be nice though for it to be full electronic native mount to take advantage of the camera's manual focus assist feature, in my case, Canon's.
Unrelated, I have a ton of questions for you about adapting lenses to a Gfx 50R. I was googling a lenghty question about it and saw you had a similar impulse as I have now about getting one as I stumbled on a topic from you in the forums.
RoamingScott wrote:
A digital Bessa would set the world on fire, especially if they undercut Leica
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I don’t think CV’s new 35/40/50 1.2 need FLEs— their most recent lenses have shown excellent performance at MFD. So maybe it helps in the midzone?
My feelings is the faster the lens, the more FLE helps control SA at closer focusing distances. I haven't used any of the latest version VM f/1.2s but I believe they are all fairly 'glowy' wide open at near distances. FLE wouldn't necessarily eliminate it, but rather control it better. The 50 Lux ASPH IMO is a pretty good example of an FLE where wide open there is still some (pleasant) residual SA at near distances.
Within the VM stable of lenses this is demonstrated by the much lower SA of the 50/1 at near distances compared to the 50/1.2.
The SA from the 50mm 1.2 wide open was not ill regarded by owners I believe. It was a nice feat.
rscheffler wrote:
My feelings is the faster the lens, the more FLE helps control SA at closer focusing distances. I haven't used any of the latest version VM f/1.2s but I believe they are all fairly 'glowy' wide open at near distances. FLE wouldn't necessarily eliminate it, but rather control it better. The 50 Lux ASPH IMO is a pretty good example of an FLE where wide open there is still some (pleasant) residual SA at near distances.
Within the VM stable of lenses this is demonstrated by the much lower SA of the 50/1 at near distances compared to the 50/1.2.
rscheffler wrote:
My feelings is the faster the lens, the more FLE helps control SA at closer focusing distances. I haven't used any of the latest version VM f/1.2s but I believe they are all fairly 'glowy' wide open at near distances. FLE wouldn't necessarily eliminate it, but rather control it better. The 50 Lux ASPH IMO is a pretty good example of an FLE where wide open there is still some (pleasant) residual SA at near distances.
Within the VM stable of lenses this is demonstrated by the much lower SA of the 50/1 at near distances compared to the 50/1.2.
Interesting. The new 35/1.5 and 28/1.5 are quite high contrast and resolving WO at MFD, but like you say, maybe once you get to larger f-stops, it s needed. The MFD of the CV 50/1 is long at 0.9–be curious to see it at less MFD. I see the Canon CV 50/1 focus down to 0.45–not sure how it performs though.
I also wonder if you can achieve high contrast at MFD but are limited to strong central performance without FLE’s.
Do we know if lenses like the GM 35/1.4 incorporate some FLE type optics?
Dec 18, 2024 at 01:14 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Sonnar-7 wrote:
The SA from the 50mm 1.2 wide open was not ill regarded by owners I believe. It was a nice feat.
I find the residual SA a nice feature at focal distances of 1M or longer. I find the increase SA above that at closer distances not welcome, but that is just me. Perhaps others feel differently.
I also agree with Nehemiah that the recent f/1.5 lenses do really quite well at fairly short MFDs without a floating element design, but I also agree with Ron that might not work at f/1.2. I too would love to see an FLE in revised 35, 40, and 50 f/1.2 lenses from Cosina. In fact, I am skeptical they can have the kind of close up performance I would like to see without it. And while they are at it, I don't want them to clean up all the SA just the extra from focussing closely and if I can ask for even more I would love to see a few more APD elements to lower axial CA.
I am excited to see what they release, but for m-mount, my guess is a new 40mm f/1.2 Nokton.
The 40/1.2 was momentous lens for Cosina - it introduced the design concept that they would adapt and expand on for a collection of their best modern offerings. I'd argue that these lenses are all derivative of the optical design of the 40/1.2 (some in an obvious way, others less so): the 50/1.2, the 35/1.2, the 50/1, the 35/1.5, the 28/1.5, and both APO-Lanthars.
Cosina has a history of doing cosmetic refreshes, but I'm hoping that won't just be the case here. They also have a history of offering complete redesigns. And...a history of totally abandoning lenses, all-together. What a fun, wild company! In an era of businesses run by committee/investors, it's great to see somebody just kinda doing whatever they want.
This is what happened at Sony by the way, they got a great guy in at the top around a decade back and the rest is history. You have to move forward. Stasis in a fast-moving industry is going backwards. 