wlaidlaw Posted September 6, 2012 Share #1 Posted September 6, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I thought I would give Voigtlander lenses another try. Just by the law of averages, I should get a decent one at some point. I had 2 paperweights (21/4 Skopar, 35/2.5 Skopar) and one that after some adjustment became adequate but no better (35/1.2 Nokton). I have just bought via the post, from a french camera shop, a new 15/4.5 Super Heliar. This is the later lens with M mount and RF coupling. I have just been trying it out on my M9 with lens detection set to manual and WATE at 16mm. I am more than a little surprised by the extreme vignetting still present on out of camera JPEG's. Now when I use it properly, I will set up a lens correction template in Capture One but if the data is not there, even C1 cannot recover it or at the least, will increase noise in the boosted areas (no free lunch etc). I am wondering if I have been unlucky yet again or whether this is normal for this lens. I post two shots below. One taken with the 15 super Heliar wide open and a comparison shot taken with a 16mm/2.8 Zenitar Fish-eye at f4. It is easy to see how much less vignetting there is on the Zenitar with its longer exit pupil to sensor distance but the colour shift is also much less than on the Heliar. Does this performance duplicate others experience with this CV lens? Wilson 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! Quote 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/187353-horrendous-vignetting-on-m9-with-voigtlander-super-heliar-15mm/?do=findComment&comment=2106352'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted September 6, 2012 Posted September 6, 2012 Hi wlaidlaw, Take a look here Horrendous vignetting on M9 with Voigtlander Super Heliar 15mm. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
gyoung Posted September 6, 2012 Share #2 Posted September 6, 2012 I think you are expecting too much of a rectilinear 15mm, whats it like stopped down? I have had my original 15mm for more than 10 years, and it 'normally' gets used at f/8 or even 11, which is probably neccesary for sharpness in the corners (I haven't done a brick wall test, just used it!) and its been ok. Certainly any tendency to underexposure will show up the fall off in the corners even more. My experience is on film of course, so the digital body might have problems coping with it, but I don't remember any particular comments being passed. Gerry Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted September 6, 2012 Author Share #3 Posted September 6, 2012 (edited) Gerry, I was mentally comparing it with the WATE, which I used to have but swapped for a 28 ASPH Summicron and cash, as I rarely used it. The in-camera correction, even at 16mm and f4, got rid of about 90% of the vignetting on the WATE. I spotted this Super Heliar at a very good price in the ever dropping Euro, at a French dealer and could not resist it. It was less than the Hong Kong price. I post below another image taken as a DNG with the Super Heliar but after correction with a profile I generated in Capture One for f4.5. This is very quick and easy procedure using an LCC profile. I will generate some additional profiles for smaller apertures. I note that the Heliar is a bit soft in the corners compared with the WATE but I suppose given the difference in cost, this is to be expected. I know the picture is over exposed, as I forgot to reset the EV after taking the profile image of a neutral colour wall (you take at +1EV) but it shows what C1 can do. Wilson 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! Edited September 6, 2012 by wlaidlaw Quote 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/187353-horrendous-vignetting-on-m9-with-voigtlander-super-heliar-15mm/?do=findComment&comment=2106421'>More sharing options...
Robert_M Posted September 6, 2012 Share #4 Posted September 6, 2012 Wilson, I have the same lens. I use the 21 f/2.8 lens coding (pre-asph) and it give a better correction in the camera than the 16mm WATE coding. There are some threads around here and other forums which discuss this. In addition, I use cornerfix to correct the rest. For me, the result is fine for the limited use I give to this lens. RM 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jaapv Posted September 6, 2012 Share #5 Posted September 6, 2012 Wilson, my CV 15 behaves exactly the same. And shooting an LCC profile in C1 does indeed give a good correction with one mouseclick. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Erik Gunst Lund Posted September 6, 2012 Share #6 Posted September 6, 2012 (edited) A 15mm rectilinear lens and a 16mm full frame fish eye lens are two completely different types of lens designs, not comparable. You have some huge dust specs on the sensor to show up wide open... Edited September 6, 2012 by Erik Gunst Lund dust... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted September 6, 2012 Share #7 Posted September 6, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) I like mine a lot although it doesn't get frequent use. Hopefully a correction can be found Gerry Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted September 6, 2012 Author Share #8 Posted September 6, 2012 A 15mm rectilinear lens and a 16mm full frame fish eye lens are two completely different types of lens designs, not comparable. You have some huge dust specs on the sensor to show up wide open... I know and I only cleaned it a few days ago Wilson Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted September 6, 2012 Author Share #9 Posted September 6, 2012 (edited) When I think back to how bad the vignetting was on the 16mm/f8 Hologon on my Contax G2, the Super Heliar should not have come as a surprise. We now know maybe why the WATE is so long. I wonder if it is a retrofocus design to avoid the vignetting issue. It is good to hear that I don't have another lens from the optical equivalent of the Duff Beer Company. Wilson Edited September 6, 2012 by wlaidlaw Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted September 6, 2012 Author Share #10 Posted September 6, 2012 Hand coded it as a 21/2.8 Elmarit non-ASPH. It worked immediately - that's a first! Wilson Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
adan Posted September 6, 2012 Share #11 Posted September 6, 2012 We now know maybe why the WATE is so long. I wonder if it is a retrofocus design to avoid the vignetting issue. Yes. But then, the 15 Heliar is also a retrofocus design (it sits nowhere near as close to the film/sensor as symmetrical wide-angles like the Hologon 15/16, or even the 21 Super-Angulons.) In fact, all of Leica's lenses wider than 28mm have been retrofocus to some extent ever since the v.2 28 Elmarit (1972) - if only to clear the M5/CL metering arms, and later allow metering with the M6 et seq. "Retrofocus" is a variable property - the lens designer can add more or less of it depending on requirements (clearing the M5 meter arm, clearing the M6 meter cell, clearing an SLR mirror). Or in other words, some retrofocus lenses are "more" retrofocus than others. Hint - if a wide lens has a rather funnel-shaped optical design (big front element funneling light down to a smaller set of rear elements) it is likely retrofocus: L&VM Super Wide- Lens However, the 16-18-21 is also likely a rather "telecentric" design - a long tube for light that tends to project it vertically onto the sensor even near the corners, reducing "sensor vignetting." It only goes to 21mm - but is longer than a 75 Summarit. http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/16mm-18mm-21mm_f/4_ASPH_Tri-Elmar-M One picks one's poison - the 15 c/v is vastly smaller, lighter and cheaper, and gives away little in terms of resolution. But it was designed in the film era, and the WATE was designed with digital sensors in mind. Incidentally, yes, the coded correction for the 21 pre-ASPH is the "strongest" of the M9 corrections. I was fiddling around with a 12mm C/V we have in the store just yesterday, and between no corrections, WATE corrections at any focal length, and the 21 corrections, the latter did the best at reducing vignetting and red-edge. I'll upload my samples when I get a moment 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted September 6, 2012 Author Share #12 Posted September 6, 2012 Andy, Thank you for all the information. Even though I did not use my WATE a lot, there are just those occasions in streets and in buildings, where you need an extra wide. At €500 for a new 15mm lens, it seemed an opportunity not to be missed. I thought of getting the older 15/f4.5 LTM lens, which comes with a VF but I used the Frankenfinder so seldom, I did not feel it was a great advantage for me. I think the RF coupling is neither here nor there at this focal length. I think I will still set up a couple of LCC profiles in Capture One with 21/2.8 correction on and taken at f4.5 and f11. Wilson Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gyoung Posted September 6, 2012 Share #13 Posted September 6, 2012 I like the viewfinder, mainly for the 'I can't believe it gets all that in' when I put it to my eye I have never missed rangefinder coupling, and only use the focussing scale on the 17 I have for the Nikons too (which is not as good), plenty of depth of field. The Heliar is so light and small I am never tempted to leave it at home. I remember paying Peter Walnes £169 for it secondhand Gerry 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wlaidlaw Posted September 7, 2012 Author Share #14 Posted September 7, 2012 I made some more LCC profiles this morning using the in-camera correction of a 21/2.8 pre-ASPH Elmarit, at f4.5, f8 and f11. The images below show that the out of M9 DNG (converted to JPG of course) is not bad at all and certainly a country mile better than the 16mm WATE correction. The second image is after application of an f8 LCC profile in Capture One. Both images are uncropped full frame and had the shadows brought up by 25% and the highlights reduced by 25% but deliberately I did no other corrections. Wilson 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! Quote 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/187353-horrendous-vignetting-on-m9-with-voigtlander-super-heliar-15mm/?do=findComment&comment=2107201'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.