Fred Miranda wrote:
All images were taken wide open at f/2 under harsh lighting and at a mix of close and mid-range distances. I used the Sony A7R II for every shot in this set. This was just an initial walk around the neighborhood to get a feel for how the lens renders and performs wide open at both near focus and typical street distances.
Overall some rather attractive rendering indeed, but the harsh outlining in the bokeh circles does surprise me. Thanks for the testing so far Fred, it's been a very interesting read!
Fred Miranda wrote:
The same hood fits the TTArtisan 40/2.
Very similar to the hood supplied with my 40mm f/2 SLII for Nikon years ago. It's still in the box! I put a 'normal' hood on it for efficiency and aesthetics.
Alan Parker wrote:
Overall some rather attractive rendering indeed, but the harsh outlining in the bokeh circles does surprise me. Thanks for the testing so far Fred, it's been a very interesting read!
The more I shoot with this lens, the more I feel its look is reminiscent of the CV 27mm f/2 (Fuji X-mount), which is also a recent compact pancake design from Cosina. The rendering is quite similar, and even the optical formulas share a lot in common.
The main difference is that the 27mm f2 Ultron uses 6 elements instead of Septon's seven. Still, if you check the optical layouts, the Septon and the Ultron clearly have a lot of DNA in common. https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1813648/
Fred Miranda wrote: Samples 1: At various distances and lighting (Sony A7R II)
All images were taken wide open at f/2 under harsh lighting and at a mix of close and mid-range distances. I used the Sony A7R II for every shot in this set. This was just an initial walk around the neighborhood to get a feel for how the lens renders and performs wide open at both near focus and typical street distances.
At first glance, contrast and resolution are very good, and the rendering is quite pleasing. It is not overly smooth like many modern lenses, which suits my taste. Axial CA is well controlled, though vignetting is noticeable. The last image shows some veiling flare, but that was intentional to see how the lens reacts when pushed.
So far I am seeing very low distortion, low CA, minimal flare even when shooting directly into the sun, and great resolution and contrast throughout these images.
Vignetting and distortion were not corrected in any of the samples....Show more →
They mention in their video that the septon name was given because they added 1 element to the ultron design. It looks like a modification of the ultron for mirrorless lenses.
I don't mind the busy bokeh at close range, but the fact that it gets worse farther away makes it a no-go for me. Which is good because I already enjoy the 35/1.4 Nokton for walkaround use. The only thing I don't like with the Nokton is the pronounced barrel distortion.
Edit: Also, to me there is not much point with an even smaller lens when there are no really small Sony camera bodies (no-go for the fully articulating screen on the a7C models). I still use my old a7 II because of this, even though it drives me nuts with many of its quirks.
fotografur wrote:
I like the look of these. May have to get one!
Same here. I already have the 27/2 Ultron for Fujifilm, and the 35/1.4 Nokton Classic for Sony.
So my initial stance was a strong and brave "Looks nice, but I'm good".
wolfloid wrote:
I’m not sure what you mean here. Do you mean the CV 40mm f2 Ultron for DSLRs? What do you mean by clean?
I'm not interested in discussing it in detail in this thread, and yes, I'm talking about the F 40/2. I'll have my own thread comparing these two lenses (among others) in April.
Today Cosina announced the official release date for the E-mount version of Septon 40/2.
It's going to be released on 3/19, which is about 1 week earlier than I expected
The “character” of the Ultron can be summarized under these points (imo):
-Sharp and contrasty but with subtle optical character.
-Images often have a bit of “pop” or micro-contrast.
-Photographers often say it strikes a perfect balance between modern clinical lenses and vintage character lenses.
- Voigtlander colors and a strong balanced color saturation
The weaknesses were:
- Bokeh especially at further distances
- Vignetting at wide apertures (not significant and goes by f2.8/4)
- corner softness at wide apertures (gone by F4)
Would be interesting to see if the Septon has the same character as the Ultron
Having seen the TTArtisan nearly Disqualified at the corners and sides, if it is not too late, maybe the new 7Artisans 40 would provide a better comparison, closer in size and since in this case AF speed doesn't matter. Even if it is f2.5, as in the old song, "cheap is small and not too steep, but best of all, cheap is cheap."
It's a compact lens in the only-one-lens 40mm slot, great for smaller cameras and lightweight toting in the field. Fred confirms that it doesn't have any significant flaws (or magical performance improvement over bigger, more complex lenses). It's good enough that no viewer is going to know that you used a compact lens.
The only knock is that Nikon doesn't make a small, light body to match with it.
taildraggin wrote:
Are we overthinking this thing?
It's a compact lens in the only-one-lens 40mm slot, great for smaller cameras and lightweight toting in the field. Fred confirms that it doesn't have any significant flaws (or magical performance improvement over bigger, more complex lenses). It's good enough that no viewer is going to know that you used a compact lens.
The only knock is that Nikon doesn't make a small, light body to match with it.
Forgive us; we obsess. Though I always like to know the strengths and weaknesses of my tools, I think it is a fair assessment. The other takeaway from Fred's wonderful testing is that the price is a fair indicator of how the lens overall performs in comparison to other Voigts.
I keep hoping (true faith as it is in the absence of any tangible proof) that Nikon will provide an A7CR competitor . . . with a better viewfinder!
You mean Nikon is designing a compact system camera so that third-party manufacturers can sell more compact lenses? Or do you seriously intend to attach a 50mm f/1.8 S lens to it? I think it would be smarter for Nikon to first release a lens series that is optically compatible with the ZF camera, because the thing is out there in the world.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
You mean Nikon is designing a compact system camera so that third-party manufacturers can sell more compact lenses? Or do you seriously intend to attach a 50mm f/1.8 S lens to it? I think it would be smarter for Nikon to first release a lens series that is optically compatible with the ZF camera, because the thing is out there in the world.
If Nikon didn't want third party manufacturers to sell lenses, they wouldn't license them.
Nikon has a number of compact 'muffin' lenses (40, 28, 26 . . .) which, while not optical thoroughbreds like the CV's, are competent enough lenses.
I'm not sure I understand you last sentence - aren't all Z lenses optically compatible with the ZF?
Regarding the Zf, it's not about technical compatibility, but rather optical and tactile compatibility. The Zf is a design camera whose charm is completely ruined by modern lenses, especially by the black, "stove-pipe" lenses of the Z era. Releasing such a lifestyle camera without an optically matching lens series strikes me as utterly pointless. Okay, there are the 26mm and the 40mm, but even those are rather half-baked and don't even have an aperture ring. I genuinely believe that Nikon should do something about this.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
Regarding the Zf, it's not about technical compatibility, but rather optical and tactile compatibility. The Zf is a design camera whose charm is completely ruined by modern lenses, especially by the black, "stove-pipe" lenses of the Z era. Releasing such a lifestyle camera without an optically matching lens series strikes me as utterly pointless. Okay, there are the 26mm and the 40mm, but even those are rather half-baked and don't even have an aperture ring. I genuinely believe that Nikon should do something about this.
You are right. But, some of us approach the Zf differently. I don't care a whit about the retro styling. Put dials on a Z6 and I'm in.
Dials transfer aperture, speed and ISO at a glance quicker for me. I'm not a pro so my eye isn't up in a viewfinder all day, with muscle memory always mapped to spin exposure wheels the right way. (How often do you spin the front and back wheels the wrong way for your first picture?)
When I make (forget) changes during the day, I comprehend what the settings are and can see which way to turn the knobs quicker with dials. Are the Z9's wheels faster for a pro? Yup. But, very often they aren't for me.
I do have a bias growing up with a new FE and I've only wanted a digital FE since. Only 43 years later, effing Nikon finally produced it...and only Cosina is providing the chipped MF glass for it.
OT: The Df with AIS lenses could have been great. But, DSLRs have crap manual focus aids. So close to perfect, but it missed biggly for that reason. A few folks hacked in old, fast split-image fresnel screens and did make it the real deal -- just noticed that the Taiwanese company is making their own now instead of using old Nikon stock.
The rage in the '60s and '70s was Nikon vs Leica and we're kinda back to that situation for the use and kind of camera that I want. I wish Nikon would recognize it and get rid of the video hardware bulk to slim it down. (Who shoots video with a Zf?)
Green box focus is about as fast and probably more accurate than the old SLR split prism.
Regardless, I love the Zf to bits with the Cosina lenses.
The only thing I don't like with the Nokton is the pronounced barrel distortion. 
