p.2 #1 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
mdude85 wrote:
On the other hand, an M-mount lens still needs an adapter to be used on non-M-mount body, so the pool of buyers is limited to people who have those adapters. I think it would be rather niche, but you make a valid point.
It's not niche at all. Plenty of people are using their M mount glass between various systems, and some adapters even make the lenses autofocus, which is pretty fun. M glass is special because it's small, doesn't need a thick adapter in most cases, many lenses actually focus to infinity at the hard stop, they cover every full frame sensor (and of course more than cover APS-C sensors), and there is 100 years worth of M glass floating around.
There's a 1200 post thread on the Nikon forum of people doing just that.
p.2 #2 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
RoamingScott wrote:
Let me give you another perspective. I somewhat hesitate to recommend buying native Voigts for Fuji simply because you are very limited in their mount flexiblity.
I would suggest instead to find M mount Voigts that interest you. They adapt without penalty and can be used on virtually every camera these days. If you're considering your glass as an investment, this is the smarter way to go, and you get access to a vastly larger catalog of lenses.
The M mount lenses are sometimes much larger than the Fuji mount lenses providing the desired focal length. My VL lens for Fuji is tiny compared to my M mount VL lenses.
p.2 #3 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
RoamingScott wrote:
It's not niche at all. Plenty of people are using their M mount glass between various systems, and some adapters even make the lenses autofocus, which is pretty fun. M glass is special because it's small, doesn't need a thick adapter in most cases, many lenses actually focus to infinity at the hard stop, they cover every full frame sensor (and of course more than cover APS-C sensors), and there is 100 years worth of M glass floating around.
There's a 1200 post thread on the Nikon forum of people doing just that.
I do agree with that in general. I have a bunch of M mount lenses and adapters to use them on five different systems.
p.2 #4 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
RoamingScott wrote:
It's not niche at all. Plenty of people are using their M mount glass between various systems, and some adapters even make the lenses autofocus, which is pretty fun. M glass is special because it's small, doesn't need a thick adapter in most cases, many lenses actually focus to infinity at the hard stop, they cover every full frame sensor (and of course more than cover APS-C sensors), and there is 100 years worth of M glass floating around.
There's a 1200 post thread on the Nikon forum of people doing just that.
I see what you mean -- I just meant niche in relation to the number of people looking for a lens that natively mounts to the camera they have.
Jan 07, 2026 at 03:41 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #5 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
RoamingScott wrote:
Let me give you another perspective. I somewhat hesitate to recommend buying native Voigts for Fuji simply because you are very limited in their mount flexiblity.
I would suggest instead to find M mount Voigts that interest you. They adapt without penalty and can be used on virtually every camera these days. If you're considering your glass as an investment, this is the smarter way to go, and you get access to a vastly larger catalog of lenses.
One of the reasons to use Voigtlanders made for Fuji X mount on Fuji X mount cameras is that the Voigtlanders made for X mount are smaller than lenses with the same aperture and focal length for M mount. Let's look the X mount lenses for Fuji X mount and comparable M mount lenses:
CV 18 f/2.8 - weighs just 115g; there is no 18mm f/2.8 lens for Leica M mount and all 18mm lenses for Leica M mount are significantly bigger
CV 23 f/1.2 - weighs just 220g: there is no comparable Leica M lens. The closest you can get is 21 f/1.4 lenses that are much bigger
CV 27 f/2 - weighs just 110g: There are 28 f/2 lenses all of which weigh about double and are twice as long as this lens. As an example the CV 28 f/2 ultron, which is a small Leica M lens weighs 250g with an adapter and is about 41mm long as opposed to the 23.5mm length of the lens for X mount
CV 35 f/0.9 - this one isn't small weighing 492g, but if you go for something like the Laowa 35 f/0.95 to match the ultra fast aperture in an M mount lens then you will still end up with a much larger lens
CV 35 f/1.2 - 196g and just 40mm long. You can get a small 35 f/1.2 for Leica M mount (Voigtlander makes one) but it is still noticeably bigger weighing 365g and over 60mm long with the adapter.
CV 35 f/2 APO Ultron Macro - 262g and 55mm long. There is no Leica M mount macro lens anything like this lens. If you don't want macro even the uber expensive Leica 35 f/2 APO is quite a bit bigger at 380g with the adapter and it doesn't focus nearly as close. It is about the same length, however.
CV 50 f/1.2 - 287g 49mm long. Voigtlander does make a nice 50 f/1.2 for Leica M, but again it is quite a bit bigger at 372g and 60mm long with the adapter. In my testing the lens for Fuji X mount performs just at well as the Leica M mount lens.
Simply put all the CV lenses for Fuji X offer either an option that simply isn't available as a Leica M lenses or they are quite a big smaller than what is available as a Leica M lens. That matters to me and especially when I travel and want to keep my kit small.
p.2 #6 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
mivadep wrote:
While I have and do use VM lenses on Fuji, there is one pretty big penalty: you don't get aperture info in the viewfinder. So if you are focusing wide(r) open and then stop down you either have to count the clicks or take a look which can slow you down. Ultimately it comes down to how you shoot, what you shoot, and what you value.
p.2 #7 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
SGinNorcal wrote:
Is that the case with all adapters?
For M mount lenses, I would imagine so since they don't have electrical contacts to communicate any information. If you're adapting F mount or EF mount glass, there are adapters with contacts, but those aren't the lenses we're talking about in this thread.
p.2 #8 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
mdude85 wrote:
I see what you mean -- I just meant niche in relation to the number of people looking for a lens that natively mounts to the camera they have.
I don't pretend to know the stats on this, nor does anyone here know them. Either way, a large part of internet discussions in the last year have been how to adapt M lenses to Fuji, Nikon and Sony.
p.2 #9 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
Thanks for the discussion, everybody. I can see that this is very much a ‘value in the eye of the beholder’ situation and comes down to how one prefers to take photos. I do see the attraction of small, fast primes.
For those of you interested in more of my pondering, I decided to take manual focus on my XT3 yesterday a bit more seriously and got some acceptably sharp shots wide open of my daughter by using the focus peaking and zoom. I am a bit sad that the AF can’t reliably achieve the same and I do think that if I am going to go into manual focus more often with this lens, something like the Voigtländer 50/1.2 with its purpose-built manual focus controls might come out on par in terms of pros and cons. On the other hand, as she grows up, I’m not sure I’d be able to keep up with her! We’ll have to see.
p.2 #10 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
shinyobject wrote:
Thanks for the discussion, everybody. I can see that this is very much a ‘value in the eye of the beholder’ situation and comes down to how one prefers to take photos. I do see the attraction of small, fast primes.
For those of you interested in more of my pondering, I decided to take manual focus on my XT3 yesterday a bit more seriously and got some acceptably sharp shots wide open of my daughter by using the focus peaking and zoom. I am a bit sad that the AF can’t reliably achieve the same and I do think that if I am going to go into manual focus more often with this lens, something like the Voigtländer 50/1.2 with its purpose-built manual focus controls might come out on par in terms of pros and cons. On the other hand, as she grows up, I’m not sure I’d be able to keep up with her! We’ll have to see. ...Show more →
There is a reason I moved over to the Nikon Zf for my manual focus work. Having focus confirmation with a chipped lens is such a game changer and I never want to see dumb focus aids again in my life.
Having a combination of eye tracking and focus confirmation has opened a world of possibilities even with moving subjects.
p.2 #11 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
Honest answer. I've never owned a Voigtlander for Fuji that I was totally happy with. The Noktons suck wide open, the Ultrons have better overall IQ, but price-wise they're similar if not more expensive than the Fuji counterpart and they lack AF. The only reason to buy an X mount Voigtlander is if you want an all metal, smooth manual focusing lens. That's it. Value wise, it's a poor decision vs. an XF lens.
It's a different story for Leica M mount though. They're a tremendous value, often matching or exceeding Leica M glass IQ at a fraction of the price.
p.2 #12 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
RoamingScott wrote:
There is a reason I moved over to the Nikon Zf for my manual focus work. Having focus confirmation with a chipped lens is such a game changer and I never want to see dumb focus aids again in my life.
Having a combination of eye tracking and focus confirmation has opened a world of possibilities even with moving subjects.
Yes — having been out of the photography GAS game for a while (music GAS is just as bad!), I only found out about Nikon’s manual focusing aids today. They look cool! I would love it if Fuji could do the same with a future camera, as I’ve always preferred Fuji’s UI and jpegs to other brands.
p.2 #13 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
Joseph. wrote:
It's a different story for Leica M mount though. They're a tremendous value, often matching or exceeding Leica M glass IQ at a fraction of the price.
Yep, this last thought is why I’m a little surprised that they aren’t attempting to beat Fuji’s prices with their own lenses, as it seems that part of what they do with Leica is compete as a very good alternative for a very fair price. It puts them in a bit of a tough spot vs Chinese lens makers who offer similar products for a cheaper price.
I’m also a bit surprised that they are conservative with their Fuji lenses, as when I was at university I was GASing hard for their 0.95 range of M4/3 lenses. If I’d not been a poor student I would have gone out and purchased one. If someone made a 23 or 27 mm manual focus lens at 0.95 for Fuji X I’d definitely make purchasing it a priority! Alas, I’d want the electric communication, which I understand that the Laowa doesn’t have, and the Viltrox 27 is just so large.
p.2 #14 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
RoamingScott wrote:
Having focus confirmation with a chipped lens is such a game changer and I never want to see dumb focus aids again in my life.
I'm not familiar with how Nikon does focus confirmation. Can you explain what you mean?
Jan 07, 2026 at 09:18 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.2 #15 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
SGinNorcal wrote:
I'm not familiar with how Nikon does focus confirmation. Can you explain what you mean?
The focus box turns green when the AF system indicates that what is under the focus box is in focus. You can also use the AF system to initiate the focus box. For example, you can use the eye AF system to put the focus box on what the AF system identifies as an eye. This can be quite useful for portraits.
p.2 #16 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
shinyobject wrote:
Thanks for the discussion, everybody. I can see that this is very much a ‘value in the eye of the beholder’ situation and comes down to how one prefers to take photos. I do see the attraction of small, fast primes.
For those of you interested in more of my pondering, I decided to take manual focus on my XT3 yesterday a bit more seriously and got some acceptably sharp shots wide open of my daughter by using the focus peaking and zoom. I am a bit sad that the AF can’t reliably achieve the same and I do think that if I am going to go into manual focus more often with this lens, something like the Voigtländer 50/1.2 with its purpose-built manual focus controls might come out on par in terms of pros and cons. On the other hand, as she grows up, I’m not sure I’d be able to keep up with her! We’ll have to see. ...Show more →
The latest generation Fujis have way better AF. Not as good as Sony et al. but I get a pretty good hit rate tracking my 2 year old.
p.2 #17 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
shinyobject wrote:
I am a bit sad that the AF can’t reliably achieve the same and I do think that if I am going to go into manual focus more often with this lens, something like the Voigtländer 50/1.2 with its purpose-built manual focus controls might come out on par in terms of pros and cons. On the other hand, as she grows up, I’m not sure I’d be able to keep up with her! We’ll have to see.
I’m shocked that you can’t get good enough AF in photos of your daughter. I wonder how your camera’s AF is set up and/or whether there is some other challenge related to technique, lighting, etc. (And if the issue is Fujifilm’s AF — which I doubt, read on — then maybe a different brand would make sense rather than giving up AF on Fujifilm.)
There’s a lot of nonsense on the web about Fujifilm AF. The truth, to generalize, is that it works just fine, though the best AF from Sony, Nikon, Canon can be faster and more consistent with more challenging subjects. (No, your daughter is extremely unlikely to be in that category.)
What does that mean in the real world?
For example, if you are photographing moving wildlife (thnk birds, which can be quite challenging even with the best gear) the increment of improvement over Fujifilm from the other brands can be meaningful, particularly in challenging light. Shooting active sports might be another example.
On the other hand, if you are shooting more typical subjects (landscapes, people posing for photos, vacation photos, family events, etc.) Fujifilm AF is typically just fine — plenty fast and plenty accurate.
Some people who are prone to hyperbole will try to frame the difference between Fujifilm and that others as “Sony/Canon/Nikon are great! Fujifilm sucks!” That’s inaccurate and misleading.
More accurate would be something like, “Fujifilm AF is good and effective, but Sony/Nikon/Canon are still a bit ahead.”
Heck, I do street photography, some of it at night, with Fujifilm and the AF works fine.
p.2 #18 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
Steve Spencer wrote:
The focus box turns green when the AF system indicates that what is under the focus box is in focus. You can also use the AF system to initiate the focus box. For example, you can use the eye AF system to put the focus box on what the AF system identifies as an eye. This can be quite useful for portraits.
Thanks, that sounds useful and easy to implement. Seems like it essentially uses part of the AF system to confirm focus, just the actual movement of the lens is manual. Interesting that it only works with some lenses, would be super cool if it worked with adapted lenses.
p.2 #19 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
SGinNorcal wrote:
Thanks, that sounds useful and easy to implement. Seems like it essentially uses part of the AF system to confirm focus, just the actual movement of the lens is manual. Interesting that it only works with some lenses, would be super cool if it worked with adapted lenses.
Yeah, I don't really understand why you need chipped lenses for the green box. Especially when you can have a smart adapter programmed at an arbitrary focal length (that can be dramatically different from the one of the attached lens) and it still works (maybe not as accurate? I don't know...). Not sure why Nikon imposes this limitation... but I do wish Fuji and others would follow suit with this idea.
p.2 #20 · Value proposition of Voigtländer for Fuji?
gdanmitchell wrote:
I’m shocked that you can’t get good enough AF in photos of your daughter. I wonder how your camera’s AF is set up and/or whether there is some other challenge related to technique, lighting, etc. (And if the issue is Fujifilm’s AF — which I doubt, read on — then maybe a different brand would make sense rather than giving up AF on Fujifilm.)
There’s a lot of nonsense on the web about Fujifilm AF. The truth, to generalize, is that it works just fine, though the best AF from Sony, Nikon, Canon can be faster and more consistent with more challenging subjects. (No, your daughter is extremely unlikely to be in that category.)
What does that mean in the real world?
For example, if you are photographing moving wildlife (thnk birds, which can be quite challenging even with the best gear) the increment of improvement over Fujifilm from the other brands can be meaningful, particularly in challenging light. Shooting active sports might be another example.
On the other hand, if you are shooting more typical subjects (landscapes, people posing for photos, vacation photos, family events, etc.) Fujifilm AF is typically just fine — plenty fast and plenty accurate.
Some people who are prone to hyperbole will try to frame the difference between Fujifilm and that others as “Sony/Canon/Nikon are great! Fujifilm sucks!” That’s inaccurate and misleading.
More accurate would be something like, “Fujifilm AF is good and effective, but Sony/Nikon/Canon are still a bit ahead.”
Heck, I do street photography, some of it at night, with Fujifilm and the AF works fine....Show more →
Yeah, I don't get it. Fuji's current AF is better than any brand had a decade ago and its not as though photographers have only just started to be able to get sharp photos. Heck, photographers have been able to nail focus for decades with any brand with way more primitive focus systems.
