Question: Found a couple of these are available in Olympus and Minolta mounts. Could not find one in EOS (rare I know). Other than having to get a decent adapter, any problems in using either one of these on a Canon or would it be best to hold out for an EOS mount?
There may be a difference in available aperture settings.
I have both and EF mount and Nikon mount.
EF mount is camera selectable in 1/3 stops.
2.5, 2.8, 3.3, 4, 4.8, 5.6, 6.7, 8, 9.5, 11, 13, 16, 19, 22
Nikon mount is lens selectable
2.5, 4, 4.8 5.6 6.7 8 9.5 11 16 22
There are no half click settings between 11 and 22 and 2.5 and 4. Between 2.5 and 4 you can get 2.8 by Av metering and carefully turning the aperature carefully until you see a time change.
The optics are the same with all 125s. I have shot with both on my Canon and see no difference in the images produced by either lens.
I confirmed with other Nikon mount lens owners about the no half clicks. I would assume that both Olympus and Minolta mounts would be the same.
Additional information stated in the Voigtlander 125 manual
M42 mount
Precautions for use of hood with M-42 mount
As M42 mount is of screw in mount type, distancce index or aperture index does not always stop at the right position. However, the photography is not affected even when a hood is obliquely set on the camera body.
Use with EF mount or Maxxum mount.
To use with EF by Canon and Maxxum mount by Minolta manual focusing is required. However, use of focus and function (focus display funcyion) is allowed, and auto exposure mechanism fully works.
DocsPics wrote:
Thanks so much for the information.
This is the Macro of all Macros right? (I plan to run it along side my Contax 100.2.8 for comparison).
Hi.
I'm currently using the 125/2.5 in the Nikon F-mount version and it's one of the best lenses I've ever owned, plain and simple. I cannot speak for the others but in my humble experience it has nothing to envy even to the best from Leica and Zeiss. Just to give an idea I've used (and loved) the Leicas 180/2APO and 28-90 in the past.
Now the Voigtlander 125/2,5 is sitting between my Nikkors 14-24, 24-70, 200/2, 200-400 and my beloved Leica 90/2 APO Asph: the macro really shines and is on par with those stellar performers. I've had the Zeiss ZF 100/2 but sold it because of its exaggerated CA (for MY taste) and started to search for the Voigt 125/2,5. After something like an year I've finally found one in 2008 and bought it (about 1500USD) without regretting the expense.
I like its IQ and versatility: absolute control over CAs. Please, look here for a quick test of mine: http://emanuelec.smugmug.com/Other/TestsReviews/125100/704127784_oynkG-O-1.jpg
Outstanding from few centimeters to infinity.
Here you can find some shots made with this gem, I hope you'll like them (the first ten are from a recent assignment): http://emanuelec.smugmug.com/Jewelry/Jewels/9759702_sCGQe#776709368_95vpg
I'm not stating that the Voigt is the best-of-the-best but only that it's an amazing piece of glass, really hard to beat. IMHO!
I was able to find a EOS mount last month. So they are out there, you just have to be always looking (and have the cash available). I was willing to go the OM/Nikon route with and adapter then found one by chance in EOS mount.
I have CV 125 APO in an EOS mount and I did not find the Contax 100mm N an acceptable replacement for it. I bought an N 100 hoping it would better the CV 125, and allow me to get AF for bees and butterflies, and allow me to sell the CV 125mm EOS mount at a healthy profit.
I wound up returning the N 100, and I still have the CV 125mm.
For me it is worth spending the extra time, or money to get an EOS mount so you can have auto diaphram control, and focus confirmation. You may have a different opinion, but I am not a big fan of manual stop down.
The Leica 100mm is the only contender thatI have not tried, but so far the CV 125mm is still the champ.
I think it's a matter of taste when you compare such nice lenses.
CV125 was very sharp with hardly any CA, with admirable bokeh, truely a wonderful lens.
It's colors are very subdued and heavy... Please excuse my English... I don't know how else I can explained.....
I then tried Leica Apo 100, another legendary macro lens....
Again, nothing to complain about it's performance...Very colorful and bleedingly sharp.
But, as with CV 125, I found the images to be little bit less exciting.
I guess I'm just too used to the images from Contax lenses, especially the Planar 100, of which I grew fond of...
I just preferred that little 'pop' or 3-D look I get from the Contax lenses.
So, to make a long story short, try all of them if you would, and pick your taste.....
burningheart wrote:
I would stay away from it. It is an FD mount, needs a glass adapter to maintain infinity focus on EF and lessens the IQ.
Oops. I didn't read it closely enough. Well, unless you're in a hurry, I'd be patient. I watched for about a month and then all of a sudden there were 3 or 4 in the $1300 - $1400 range. They all included caps, hood, and box and were in mint condition.
I got a copy that was in FD mount, but converted professionally by the prior owner, to EF. So if you know someone can do the conversion and the price is right then why not -- Ok, you will miss the 1/3 stop in the native EF mount and other nice to have features.
Paul Yi wrote:
I think it's a matter of taste when you compare such nice lenses.
CV125 was very sharp with hardly any CA, with admirable bokeh, truely a wonderful lens.
It's colors are very subdued and heavy... Please excuse my English... I don't know how else I can explained.....
I then tried Leica Apo 100, another legendary macro lens....
Again, nothing to complain about it's performance...Very colorful and bleedingly sharp.
But, as with CV 125, I found the images to be little bit less exciting.
I guess I'm just too used to the images from Contax lenses, especially the Planar 100, of which I grew fond of...
I just preferred that little 'pop' or 3-D look I get from the Contax lenses.
So, to make a long story short, try all of them if you would, and pick your taste.....
Maybe 3D-ness and microcontrast is what you like on Contax...
Leica users like 'Leica colors'...
Zuiko fans like portability and macrocontrast...
And so on.
alexandre wrote:
Maybe 3D-ness and microcontrast is what you like on Contax...
Leica users like 'Leica colors'...
Zuiko fans like portability and macrocontrast...
And so on.
Exactly.....
Again, it's a matter of taste at such level of lenses....
The Contax Makro-Planar 2.8/100 is exciting lens - I have got through both versions - JAPAN and GERMAN .
German is LITTLE bit 'better' if I can say this --
I have never tried the Leica Apo 100 f/2.8 or Apo-Lanthar 125
But I have got Apo-Lanthar 90 /3.5 SL and I compared pictures to the Zeiss ..
ehmm !! the Zeiss wins in my eyes -- it's simply magic with his rendering but Apo-Lanthar is also good ..
What I like on Zeiss is that they didn't put anything like 'APO' on this lens and I can say that at f/4 performs 'almost' like apo -- especially -- no fringing with strong back light ..
Apo-Lanthar lacks of contrast and under strong light conditions, there are some areas with no-texture whereas Zeiss can manage this with no problem because it has great coating.
It is not yet New Year's eve but I really have to make a "resolution" now.
No more lenses !
No more Alt lenses either !
Just read all the Fred Miranda post with a smile - not more !
I don't need Zeiss, Leica and Voigtlander ... no, no, no !!!
No more lusting after these gems.
I did not even explore the full potential of my Zuiko collection.
