soundimageplus Posted December 22, 2009 Share #1 Posted December 22, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I use one of the new VM mount Voigtlander 15mm wide angles on my M9. At first I had problems with it but with advice from these forums,I use both the 21mm F/2.8 setting in the camera + Cornerfix and the images are "clean" again. I was thinking I may have to get the 16-18-21 WATE, and am still actively considering it, as this is a group of focal lengths I use a lot. However there are some concerns that I have, for which I would like to "pick the brains" of people who have used both.(N.B. With the WATE I would use the 16mm setting the most.) Firstly, I'm very impressed by my 15mm in terms of sharpness & I've seen some samples from the WATE which are no better. For example is this a good representation of what the WATE can do?. http://a.img-dpreview.com/gallery/leicam9_preview/originals/l1070505_aw.jpg This image from the dPreview review of the M9 is not as sharp as my 15mm. Would you expect better from the WATE? Secondly I'm a bit concerned about the 16-18-21 viewfinder. The lens itself is quite small and light but this viewfinder looks a monster. If anyone has experiences of using both and would be happy to share their experiences/opinions I'd be very grateful, since the chances of me getting to try one out are remote. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 22, 2009 Posted December 22, 2009 Hi soundimageplus, Take a look here Voigtlander 15mm or WATE on M9. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
viramati Posted December 22, 2009 Share #2 Posted December 22, 2009 The WATE is IMHO an amazing lens. whenever I use it it always surprises me, it is really sharp wide open, has beautiful contrast and is has such enormous DOF that focusing is no problem. The frankenfinder is large but a really useful bit of kit as it cover 4 different focal lengths and can adjust for close up focus. I wouldn't take any images posted on the web as a real way to judge this lens. Personally I would go for the WATE without any hesitation as it is just a more versatile option and a lot smaller. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
soundimageplus Posted December 22, 2009 Author Share #3 Posted December 22, 2009 The frankenfinder is large but a really useful bit of kit as it cover 4 different focal lengths and can adjust for close up focus. Thanks for your response. How heavy is the finder? Looks huge. Also how is the lens for CA?. I find the M9 is a bit unforgiving on that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
delander † Posted December 22, 2009 Share #4 Posted December 22, 2009 Looking at your website I would say that the images you show taken with the 15mm CV were taken on one of those cold crisp days when the sun was low in the sky and the light was absolutely crystal clear. Such conditions create a great amount of brilliant contrast. The DPreview sample was not taken in such favourable conditions. I dont have the 15mm CV but I do have the 12mm which I know can also create beautiful images in the best light (on the M8). In that brilliant clear contrasty light I think you will see similar results from a WATE. Unfortunately I dont have such an M9/WATE sample to show. The universal Frankenfinder may look a bit clumsy but in fact covers a wide range of focal lengths with frame lines for different distances. The view it produces is nothing short of stunning so much so that it makes one want to take photograph after photograph. The WATE is three lenses in one of course and 16-21 is quite spread and does not need Cornerfix. Hope this helps, Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted December 22, 2009 Share #5 Posted December 22, 2009 I don't have the CV15, I have the WATE. I have to agree with everything that has been said about the WATE. The color reminds me very much of my 28/2.0 and the finder was a pleasant surprise for me. Not sure as I don't have the CV15, but I didn't think it was coupled. How do you accurately focus with it? Very often, I like to use the wide angle to get close to my subjects. I would think that not having a coupled lens would be a pain. If, this is true, then for me it would be a deal breaker to consider the CV15. Maybe someone can correct me if I'm wrong but, I know one of these CV lenses are not coupled. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bo_Lorentzen Posted December 22, 2009 Share #6 Posted December 22, 2009 Rick, The current cv 15mm is coupled. being able to focus it accurately really makes it pop.! . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted December 22, 2009 Share #7 Posted December 22, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) the frankenfinder is really light. Here is a shot from today on which I have done no manipulation (will convert to B&W for photo forum) shot at 16mm f4 in fading light. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/107451-voigtlander-15mm-or-wate-on-m9/?do=findComment&comment=1160834'>More sharing options...
haroldp Posted December 23, 2009 Share #8 Posted December 23, 2009 The WATE is also a retrofocus lens (and true zoom), and as such, the rear element is quite far from the sensor for it's focal length (like SLR lenses). It's incident angle of light is therefore not as extreme as real RF wide angles of it's focal length's and much more comfortable for a digital sensor. Because of this It has none of the color or fringing issues associated with 'deep' rear element WA lenses. I use one and it deserves all of the praise it gets, and is versatile. Th only downside is cost, and max F4, which for me is rarely an issue. I do most trips with a MATE, WATE, (on M9) and 90 elmarit (on M8). Regards ... Harold Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlanJW Posted December 23, 2009 Share #9 Posted December 23, 2009 I have had the CV 15mm (not the rf coupled version) and the 12mm as well. Now I have the WATE. I second the earlier comments that the WATE is extraordinarily good. I never made any scientific comparisons but I do not miss the CV's. The finder for the WATE is large but not unwieldy, is pretty accurate, and versatile in terms of the focal lengths covered. I bought my WATE soon after I bought my M8, and before the price was increased. I have zero regrets. It is after all three lenses so one can do some internal rationalization to justify the cost. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted January 8, 2010 Share #10 Posted January 8, 2010 How can you use FLASH with WATE and frankenfinder attached? Best Regards, Jerry_R Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwelland Posted January 8, 2010 Share #11 Posted January 8, 2010 How can you use FLASH with WATE and frankenfinder attached? Best Regards, Jerry_R No way to do this ... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cliffp Posted January 8, 2010 Share #12 Posted January 8, 2010 I don't have a WATE but use a Frankenfinder with my 21mm F2.8. I find this viewfinder fantastic. It is light (I think it is 122g) but bulky but the view is superbly bright and a great aid to composition. i agree with the previous poster who said that it encourages you to take lots of pictures. It has a spirit level which is very useful (and it works in the dark). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted January 8, 2010 Share #13 Posted January 8, 2010 Even with this: match Technical Services - Thumbs Up CSEP-4 ? If not, it is shame from my perspective and needs... Any idea why we can't connect flash to M9 using flash SOCKET, and ONLY hot shoe? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted January 10, 2010 Share #14 Posted January 10, 2010 I use the FrankenFinder with both the WATE and the 24mm Lux. Works well. I also have the 12mm V UW-Heliar that has it's own viewfinder. The full window of the FF (with out my glasses) is close to this, so I usually leave that at home as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted January 10, 2010 Share #15 Posted January 10, 2010 I use the FrankenFinder with both the WATE and the 24mm Lux. Works well. I also have the 12mm V UW-Heliar that has it's own viewfinder. The full window of the FF (with out my glasses) is close to this, so I usually leave that at home as well. What is quality of 12mm? As good as 15mm? Sharpness, corners? Can you remove red corners with CORNERFIX? How close you can focus it from the subject? Is this really 30cm as stated here: L&VM Super Wide- Lens How you see it against 15mm one, which has nearest distance 50cm? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
swamiji Posted January 10, 2010 Share #16 Posted January 10, 2010 What is quality of 12mm? As good as 15mm? Sharpness, corners? Can you remove red corners with CORNERFIX? How close you can focus it from the subject? Is this really 30cm as stated here: L&VM Super Wide- Lens How you see it against 15mm one, which has nearest distance 50cm? The Quality of the 12mm is good, not as good as the WATE. I have never tried the 15mm so I don't have a comparison. Sharpness is good, slight darkening of the corners, no redness, and nothing that Cornerfix cannot handle. I have lens detection turned off. Yes, minimum focus is 1ft, or .3m, at 2m or 5+ft, it jumps to infinity. I would not really be interested in a 15mm as it's so close to the WATE. The WATE is excellent. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted January 10, 2010 Share #17 Posted January 10, 2010 Thanks, I rather won't afford WATE - unless there would be BIG IQ difference (I rather don't believe) and it is "only 16mm" ;-) I have to select between 12mm and 15mm. Today - I use 14mm (calculated to 35mm) on u43. And I love this focal. 18mm for example is definitely to narrow for my needs. Probably I will have to go to shop when my M9 will arrive, connect both, make few samples, go home - and then decide. My next more narrow focal will be 35mm. Any further advices - welcome! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecar Posted January 10, 2010 Share #18 Posted January 10, 2010 I don't own the WATE, but have been generally happy with the CV 15 on the M8. Hoping for a firmware fix that will help using this lens on the M9 without too much PP. With respect to finders, the new CV 15-35 zoom finder seems promising - as a matter of fact, I was wondering if the early adopters could share their experience on the forum. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted January 10, 2010 Share #19 Posted January 10, 2010 Rick, The current cv 15mm is coupled. being able to focus it accurately really makes it pop.! . Bo, thanks for that. When I bought my WATE the CV was not coupled, as I remember. Now that it is coupled it must be a very nice lens. Still like my WATE, but it is way too expensive. If, I did it again I might be tempted to buy the CV(coupled) this time around. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
markowich Posted January 10, 2010 Share #20 Posted January 10, 2010 Bo, thanks for that. When I bought my WATE the CV was not coupled, as I remember. Now that it is coupled it must be a very nice lens. Still like my WATE, but it is way too expensive. If, I did it again I might be tempted to buy the CV(coupled) this time around. i tried the CV 15mm (rangefinder coupled) onthe M9 and got horrible red shifts. gave it back and bought the super elmar 18mm. wonderful lens...mine is, tim ashley has problems with it, i hear. peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.