So, I did a little shooting of my own after being frustrated with the lens in actual usage this weekend.
Essentially, the lens is a lot more like the 35/1.5 than the 28/2 Ultron ASPH, even when stopped down to f2. You can see some crops with systematic tripod testing.
As someone who often shoots WO, off-center and near MFD to about 2 meters, I don't think this lens is a good fit for me though it's very good lens for what it is so I agree with Bastian here. And especially compared to the 28 Lux as Fred's testing shows. The 28/2 Ultron is a better option on optics alone, while the price and size are also preferable. Though I do really like the optical vignetting profile on the 28/1.5 quite a bit more. And while it was not too sunny, I also noticed the 28/2 Ultron has better flare resistance.
But the real kicker, if you are shooting the 28/1.5 at 1.5 or f2 on a MILC, like an a7r2 or a7c, I could not acquire accurate MF focus on a stationary subject shooting WO because of the FC + SA (I think?). Even using max magnified view. Very frustrating. These are taken on a modded a7r2, so native performance.
Below are 2 sets of crops. One take directly at the rule of 1/3's point (focus on toothpaste text). The second is on the words "Jordi Vigue" author name. Even at f2, the 28/1.5 quite trails the f2 ultron.
My take away from all this: I think the CV 28/1.5 is still killing the Leica factoring in price and size, but I would prefer the CV 28/2 Ultron ASPH (or the Summicron) for my style of shooting. Or, I'd have to adjust my way I use a fast 28mm to get around the CV 28/1.5/28 Lux optics. I think I have a good copy of the lens. I just think I am dealing with the limitation of the 28/1.5's optical design.
But thanks Rusty, Fred and Bastian for the testing and attention
So, I did a little shooting of my own after being frustrated with the lens in actual usage this weekend.
Essentially, the lens is a lot more like the 35/1.5 than the 28/2 Ultron ASPH, even when stopped down to f2. You can see some crops with systematic tripod testing.
As someone who often shoots WO, off-center and near MFD to about 2 meters, I don't think this lens is a good fit for me though it's very good lens for what it is so I agree with Bastian here. And especially compared to the 28 Lux as Fred's testing shows. The 28/2 Ultron is a better option on optics alone, while the price and size are also preferable. Though I do really like the optical vignetting profile on the 28/1.5 quite a bit more. And while it was not too sunny, I also noticed the 28/2 Ultron has better flare resistance.
But the real kicker, if you are shooting the 28/1.5 at 1.5 or f2 on a MILC, like an a7r2 or a7c, I could not acquire accurate MF focus on a stationary subject shooting WO because of the FC + SA (I think?). Even using max magnified view. Very frustrating. These are taken on a modded a7r2, so native performance.
Below are 2 sets of crops. One take directly at the rule of 1/3's point (focus on toothpaste text). The second is on the words "Jordi Vigue" author name. Even at f2, the 28/1.5 quite trails the f2 ultron.
My take away from all this: I think the CV 28/1.5 is still killing the Leica factoring in price and size, but I would prefer the CV 28/2 Ultron ASPH (or the Summicron) for my style of shooting. Or, I'd have to adjust my way I use a fast 28mm to get around the CV 28/1.5/28 Lux optics. I think I have a good copy of the lens. I just think I am dealing with the limitation of the 28/1.5's optical design.
So, I did a little shooting of my own after being frustrated with the lens in actual usage this weekend.
Essentially, the lens is a lot more like the 35/1.5 than the 28/2 Ultron ASPH, even when stopped down to f2. You can see some crops with systematic tripod testing.
As someone who often shoots WO, off-center and near MFD to about 2 meters, I don't think this lens is a good fit for me though it's very good lens for what it is so I agree with Bastian here. And especially compared to the 28 Lux as Fred's testing shows. The 28/2 Ultron is a better option on optics alone, while the price and size are also preferable. Though I do really like the optical vignetting profile on the 28/1.5 quite a bit more. And while it was not too sunny, I also noticed the 28/2 Ultron has better flare resistance.
But the real kicker, if you are shooting the 28/1.5 at 1.5 or f2 on a MILC, like an a7r2 or a7c, I could not acquire accurate MF focus on a stationary subject shooting WO because of the FC + SA (I think?). Even using max magnified view. Very frustrating. These are taken on a modded a7r2, so native performance.
Below are 2 sets of crops. One take directly at the rule of 1/3's point (focus on toothpaste text). The second is on the words "Jordi Vigue" author name. Even at f2, the 28/1.5 quite trails the f2 ultron.
My take away from all this: I think the CV 28/1.5 is still killing the Leica factoring in price and size, but I would prefer the CV 28/2 Ultron ASPH (or the Summicron) for my style of shooting. Or, I'd have to adjust my way I use a fast 28mm to get around the CV 28/1.5/28 Lux optics. I think I have a good copy of the lens. I just think I am dealing with the limitation of the 28/1.5's optical design.
So, I did a little shooting of my own after being frustrated with the lens in actual usage this weekend.
Essentially, the lens is a lot more like the 35/1.5 than the 28/2 Ultron ASPH, even when stopped down to f2. You can see some crops with systematic tripod testing.
As someone who often shoots WO, off-center and near MFD to about 2 meters, I don't think this lens is a good fit for me though it's very good lens for what it is so I agree with Bastian here. And especially compared to the 28 Lux as Fred's testing shows. The 28/2 Ultron is a better option on optics alone, while the price and size are also preferable. Though I do really like the optical vignetting profile on the 28/1.5 quite a bit more. And while it was not too sunny, I also noticed the 28/2 Ultron has better flare resistance.
But the real kicker, if you are shooting the 28/1.5 at 1.5 or f2 on a MILC, like an a7r2 or a7c, I could not acquire accurate MF focus on a stationary subject shooting WO because of the FC + SA (I think?). Even using max magnified view. Very frustrating. These are taken on a modded a7r2, so native performance.
Below are 2 sets of crops. One take directly at the rule of 1/3's point (focus on toothpaste text). The second is on the words "Jordi Vigue" author name. Even at f2, the 28/1.5 quite trails the f2 ultron.
My take away from all this: I think the CV 28/1.5 is still killing the Leica factoring in price and size, but I would prefer the CV 28/2 Ultron ASPH (or the Summicron) for my style of shooting. Or, I'd have to adjust my way I use a fast 28mm to get around the CV 28/1.5/28 Lux optics. I think I have a good copy of the lens. I just think I am dealing with the limitation of the 28/1.5's optical design.
So, I did a little shooting of my own after being frustrated with the lens in actual usage this weekend.
Essentially, the lens is a lot more like the 35/1.5 than the 28/2 Ultron ASPH, even when stopped down to f2. You can see some crops with systematic tripod testing.
As someone who often shoots WO, off-center and near MFD to about 2 meters, I don't think this lens is a good fit for me though it's very good lens for what it is so I agree with Bastian here. And especially compared to the 28 Lux as Fred's testing shows. The 28/2 Ultron is a better option on optics alone, while the price and size are also preferable. Though I do really like the optical vignetting profile on the 28/1.5 quite a bit more. And while it was not too sunny, I also noticed the 28/2 Ultron has better flare resistance.
But the real kicker, if you are shooting the 28/1.5 at 1.5 or f2 on a MILC, like an a7r2 or a7c, I could not acquire accurate MF focus on a stationary subject shooting WO because of the FC + SA (I think?). Even using max magnified view. Very frustrating. These are taken on a modded a7r2, so native performance.
Below are 2 sets of crops. One take directly at the rule of 1/3's point (focus on toothpaste text). The second is on the words "Jordi Vigue" author name. Even at f2, the 28/1.5 quite trails the f2 ultron.
My take away from all this: I think the CV 28/1.5 is still killing the Leica factoring in price and size, but I would prefer the CV 28/2 Ultron ASPH (or the Summicron) for my style of shooting. Or, I'd have to adjust my way I use a fast 28mm to get around the CV 28/1.5/28 Lux optics.
So, I did a little shooting of my own after being frustrated with the lens in actual usage this weekend.
Essentially, the lens is a lot more like the 35/1.5 than the 28/2 Ultron ASPH, even when stopped down to f2. You can see some crops with systematic tripod testing.
As someone who often shoots WO, off-center and near MFD to about 2 meters, I don't think this lens is a good fit for me though it's very good lens for what it is so I agree with Bastian here. And especially compared to the 28 Lux as Fred's testing shows. The 28/2 Ultron is a better option on optics alone, while the price and size are also preferable. Though I do really like the optical vignetting profile on the 28/1.5 quite a bit more. And while it was not too sunny, I also noticed the 28/2 Ultron has better flare resistance.
But the real kicker, if you are shooting the 28/1.5 at 1.5 or f2 on a MILC, like an a7r2 or a7c, I could not acquire accurate MF focus on a stationary subject shooting WO because of the FC + SA (I think?). Even using max magnified view. Very frustrating. These are taken on a modded a7r2, so native performance.
Below are 2 sets of crops. One take directly at the rule of 1/3's point (focus on toothpaste text). The second is on the words "Jordi Vigue" author name. Even at f2, the 28/1.5 quite trails the f2 ultron.
My take away from all this: I think the CV 28/1.5 is still eating killing the Leica factoring in price and size, but I would prefer the CV 28/2 Ultron ASPH (or the Summicron) for my style of shooting. Or, I'd have to adjust my way I use a fast 28mm to get around the CV 28/1.5/28 Lux optics.
So, I did a little shooting of my own after being frustrated with the lens in actual usage this weekend.
Essentially, the lens is a lot more like the 35/1.5 than the 28/2 Ultron ASPH, even when stopped down to f2. You can see some crops with systematic tripod testing.
As someone who often shoots WO, off-center and near MFD to about 2 meters, I don't think this lens is a good fit for me though it's very good lens for what it is so I agree with Bastian here. And especially compared to the 28 Lux as Fred's testing shows. The 28/2 Ultron is a better option on optics alone, while the price and size are also preferable. Though I do really like the optical vignetting profile on the 28/1.5 quite a bit more.
But the real kicker, if you are shooting the 28/1.5 at 1.5 or f2 on a MILC, like an a7r2 or a7c, I could not acquire accurate MF focus on a stationary subject shooting WO because of the FC + SA (I think?). Even using max magnified view. Very frustrating.
Below are 2 sets of crops. One take directly at the rule of 1/3's point (focus on toothpaste text). The second is on the words "Jordi Vigue" author name. Even at f2, the 28/1.5 quite trails the f2 ultron.
My take away from all this: I think the CV 28/1.5 is still eating killing the Leica factoring in price and size, but I would prefer the CV 28/2 Ultron ASPH (or the Summicron) for my style of shooting. Or, I'd have to adjust my way I use a fast 28mm to get around the CV 28/1.5/28 Lux optics.
So, I did a little shooting of my own after being frustrated with the lens in actual usage this weekend.
Essentially, the lens is a lot more like the 35/1.5 than the 28/2 Ultron ASPH, even when stopped down to f2. You can see some crops with systematic tripod testing.
As someone who often shoots WO, off-center and near MFD to about 2 meters, I don't think this lens is a good fit for me though it's very good lens for what it is so I agree with Bastian here. And especially compared to the 28 Lux as Fred's testing shows. The 28/2 Ultron is a better option on optics alone, while the price and size are also preferable. Though I do really like the optical vignetting profile on the 28/1.5 quite a bit more.
But the real kicker, if you are shooting the 28/1.5 at 1.5 or f2 on a MILC, like an a7r2 or a7c, I could not acquire accurate MF focus on a stationary subject shooting WO because of the FC + SA (I think?). Even using max magnified view. Very frustrating.
Below are 2 sets of crops. One take directly at the rule of 1/3's point (focus on toothpaste text). The second is on the words "Jordi Vigue" author name. Even at f2, the 28/1.5 quite trails the f2 ultron.
My take away from all this: I think the CV 28/1.5 is still eating killing the Leica factoring in price and size, but I would prefer the CV 28/2 Ultron ASPH (or the Summicron) for my style of shooting. Or, I'd have to adjust my way I use a fast 28mm to get around the CV 28/1.5/28 Lux optics.
