Jump to content

The widest worldview yet: Voigtlander 10mm VM reviewed on the Leica SL!


Vieri

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

As you know, I am a huge fan of wide and ultra-wide lenses; as such, I couldn't miss the chance to get one of the first Voigtlander Heliar-Hyper Wide 10mm f/5.6 in my local and immediately put through my tests.


 


I have been very impressed by this little lens, and I hope you'll enjoy my review here:


 


https://vieribottazzini.com/2016/08/voigtlander-heliar-hyper-wide-10mm-f5-6-review.html


 


Best,


 


Vieri


  • Like 9
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a very helpful review. Looks like you have a good copy (or it works better with the SL, than with the bodies used in other tests).

 

I like the 15mm -- and did not notice any colour casts -- but have only used it on the M240.  I wonder whether the 12mm will produce a clean picture.  I am not so worried about vignetting, but my days of fiddling around correcting colour shifts are over.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The lens looks amazing and the results seem also extremely positive. But the big problem is the missing filter possibility.

As we edit all the pictures on computer, anyway, I find it better to use a good stitching software with the WATE if I need more than 110 degrees. It also helps me to get around the missing megapixels in the SL. (But I actually do not miss them). The WATE is for me the better solution and a extremely handy solution. And it is already more than I ever wanted to invest in UWAs.

 

Have you ever considered making a comparison of WATE with stitching against other UWA lenses - but maybe this would only be interesting for me.

 

By the way, your great photo of the big arch in sunset, taken with WATE makes it even dearer to me. (Of course stitching is then no viable option).

Edited by steppenw0lf
Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a very helpful review. Looks like you have a good copy (or it works better with the SL, than with the bodies used in other tests).

 

I like the 15mm -- and did not notice any colour casts -- but have only used it on the M240.  I wonder whether the 12mm will produce a clean picture.  I am not so worried about vignetting, but my days of fiddling around correcting colour shifts are over.

 

Thank you very much jrp, glad you enjoyed it.

 

About the good / bad copy, I haven't seen any other review of the VM version of this lens. It would be very helpful to me if you could point out a link - it seems that there is only the Sony E mount version around. Two things about colour shift:

 

1. The 15mm also has some, as you can see in my review HERE: even if you have already read it, I think it's worth a look since I added today a whole new section on vignette and colour cast - correction - etc. However, you can easily get rid of it using Photoshop Camera Raw's lens profile for this lens (again, see my review for images etc). 

 

2. The 12mm, profiled in PS as the 15mm, gets clean enough for most practical applications (photographing a white wall aside!); I am pretty confident that Adobe will soon create a lens profile for it as well, so I am not really worried about it.

 

The lens looks amazing and the results seem also extremely positive. But the big problem is the missing filter possibility.

As we edit all the pictures on computer, anyway, I find it better to use a good stitching software with the WATE if I need more than 110 degrees. It also helps me to get around the missing megapixels in the SL. (But I actually do not miss them). The WATE is for me the better solution and a extremely handy solution. And it is already more than I ever wanted to invest in UWAs.

 

Have you ever considered making a comparison of WATE with stitching against other UWA lenses - but maybe this would only be interesting for me.

 

By the way, your great photo of the big arch in sunset, taken with WATE makes it even dearer to me. (Of course stitching is then no viable option).

 

Hello steppenw0lf, thank you for your comment, glad you enjoyed the review.

 

I completely agree with you on the filter problem, as I wrote in my review for me this is a very important point when choosing a lens. Stitching is an option, of course, but is not always a viable one; plus, you'd be able to stitch with this lens as well, for crazy wide compositions ;) I seriously hope that someone will produce an adapter to let us use 150mm filters on the 10mm :D

 

Last but certainly not least, thank you very much for your kind words about my Mesa Arch at sunrise picture, I am glad you enjoyed it :D

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Vieri.  I don't specifically remember any tests of the VM version, but I assume that it's the same glass with a different fitting.  I do use the ACR/Lightroom lens correction, so that may explain the absence of cast!  I do prefer the native lenses, since applying the profile manually is a pain.  But I didn't want to shell out for the WATE when I have superb Leica primes in the range.  But sometimes it's great to go wider (usually indoors rather than vistas, in my case).

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Vieri.  I don't specifically remember any tests of the VM version, but I assume that it's the same glass with a different fitting.  I do use the ACR/Lightroom lens correction, so that may explain the absence of cast!  I do prefer the native lenses, since applying the profile manually is a pain.  But I didn't want to shell out for the WATE when I have superb Leica primes in the range.  But sometimes it's great to go wider (usually indoors rather than vistas, in my case).

 

jrp, it may very well be. Certainly it appears to be the same formula, but the E version has electronics in it, and therefore is built differently which may or may not cause more QC problems - or perhaps I was just lucky.

 

Well, if you use the ACR correction for your 15mm, you'll just need to do the same for your 10mm (for now with the 15mm's profile), which is not that big of a hassle (and you can apply the profile in batches too, to speed things up). For interiors, the 10mm opens up some wild possibilities! :D

 

Best,

 

Vieri

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for the review ..... I have ordered the VM version and it arrives tomorrow .....

 

Out of interest, did you try coding it as anything else in camera  ?

 

With the 12/5.6 the best results were by coding as the Elmarit 21/2.8 ...... on the basis that this has one  of the worst digital sensor performances on the M for Italian Flag colour effects and vignetting .....

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks for the review ..... I have ordered the VM version and it arrives tomorrow .....

 

Out of interest, did you try coding it as anything else in camera  ?

 

With the 12/5.6 the best results were by coding as the Elmarit 21/2.8 ...... on the basis that this has one  of the worst digital sensor performances on the M for Italian Flag colour effects and vignetting .....

 

 

Thank you thighslapper, I am glad you enjoyed the review - sorry if it made you spend some money though :rolleyes:  :unsure:  No, I didn't think about the 21/2.8, I am not sure what kind of distortion such coding will introduce though. In my experience, fixing vignette and colour cast is much easier than fixing complex distortion; that's why I actually think that the best solution is not coding it at all, and using PS or ACR/Lightroom profiles instead. This way, you'll not introduce distortion in such a perfectly corrected lens, and the 12mm or 15mm's profile will get rid of most of the cast and vignette anyway (I choose one of these because they have the same optical formula, and will not introduce much distortion if at all). Even if the images aren't perfectly clean, as you can see in my test, unless you shoot white wall (interior architecture comes to mind) whatever cast and vignette are left are pretty much non influent in real world use. If you really need a perfectly clean image, just made a profile in CaptureOne (or CornerFix) and you are all set. :)

 

Best,

 

Vieri

Edited by Vieri
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The in camera correction when set for an M lens is only for vignetting and the colour cast issues ..... which is why I suggested it. 

 

Further correction in PS/LR is optional. 

 

I will do some experimenting when the lens appears ....... but I suspect I will eventually self code it permanently as a reasonable M lens equivalent ..... if one gives good results.....  as I have done with the 12/5.6. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The in camera correction when set for an M lens is only for vignetting and the colour cast issues ..... which is why I suggested it. 

 

Further correction in PS/LR is optional. 

 

I will do some experimenting when the lens appears ....... but I suspect I will eventually self code it permanently as a reasonable M lens equivalent ..... if one gives good results.....  as I have done with the 12/5.6. 

 

Actually no, it isn't, it does indeed correct for distortion as well, I looked into it when getting my reviews ready. See here for the 10mm, uncoded image first:

SL_01184_V10mm_Distortion_Uncoded.jpg

Then coded as the Leica Tri-Elmar:

SL_01185_V10mm_Distortion_Coded.jpg

 

And see here for the 15mm, uncoded image first:

SL_01186_V15mm_Distortion_Uncoded.jpg

Then coded as the Leica Tri-Elmar @ 18mm:

SL_01187_V15mm_Distortion_Coded_18.jpg

 

 

As you can see, the in-camera correction do correct for distortion as well, introducing complex distortion which is very difficult to remove. Which is why I decided not to recommend coding the 10mm or the 15mm, but rather using PS / ACR profiles for it.

 

Best,

 

Vieri

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting ...... as the original 6 bit M lens coding only adds colour and vignetting info to the exif for M series cameras ..... as far as I am aware.

 

Clearly the SL goes one step further ...... 

 

I will have to do some experimenting ......  :rolleyes:

 

and I'm not surprised using the 16mm Tri -elmar causes distortion correction issues ...... it is one of the worst performing of all Leica's lenses with regard to this ....

 

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 by thighslapper
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The in camera correction when set for an M lens is only for vignetting and the colour cast issues ..... which is why I suggested it. 

 

Further correction in PS/LR is optional. 

 

I will do some experimenting when the lens appears ....... but I suspect I will eventually self code it permanently as a reasonable M lens equivalent ..... if one gives good results.....  as I have done with the 12/5.6. 

 

I do not know if an M9 with the 10mm is pertinent, but I have tried mine with various manual lenses set, and with lens detection off. It worked best with lens detection off. I use Photoshop's ACR preprocessor, and that's about all it needs. Filter -> Lens Correction 12mm overdoes the vignetting correction a bit, and the perspective distortion correction is minimal.

 

12mm because 10mm is not yet available

Edited by pico
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

When there was a lot of forum discussion of how to code the very short back-focus CV wide angles such as the 15 mm (the 12 has a much greater exit pupil distance) to use the M's vignetting and color shift corrections, I think the consensus was that the 28 Elmarit-asph M profile gave the best corrections.  The WATE is relatively telecentric (that is, it's LONG) and thus doesn't have as much color shift to correct.  If you look at the technical specs of the WATE it's clear why the distortion corrections are going to be strange if applied to a different sort of lens.  At 16 and 18 mm, the WATE has strong moustache distortion. When the WATE is set for 16 mm focal length, the image is pulled in by 3.2% at a radius of 15 mm (just inside the frame edge) but the distortion is down to -1.5% at the corners of the frame.  At 18 mm focal length, the distortion is -2.4% at a radius of 15 mm, and then reduces to -0.8% at the frame corners.  That is how wide angle lenses used to be designed (pre-Karbe, I guess).  The R 19mm, the super-Elmar 18 and the various R 15 mm lenses all have similar distortion curves.  The 28 Elmarit-asph has very little distortion (at most a few tenths percent, and it increases monotonically with radius).

 

scott 

 

PS:  Distortion correction is not done in the camera for raw files, as it is easiest to do it after the image has been translated into RG and B values at every pixel site, after demosaicing.  In effect, Leica copies the distortion curve in the form of a four parameter expansion for each color into the DNG file in a standard location, and then it is up to ACR, LR, Capture One or the tool of your choice to use this information to undo the shifts and put the image information into each pixel that should have gotten there.  You can turn this off, but it is not very obvious how to do it, or why you should.

Edited by scott kirkpatrick
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Interesting ...... as the original 6 bit M lens coding only adds colour and vignetting info to the exif for M series cameras ..... as far as I am aware.

 

Clearly the SL goes one step further ...... 

 

I will have to do some experimenting ......  :rolleyes:

 

and I'm not surprised using the 16mm Tri -elmar causes distortion correction issues ...... it is one of the worst performing of all Leica's lenses with regard to this ....

 

attachicon.gifScreen Shot 2016-08-17 at 18.37.06.png

 

 

Indeed the SL corrects for distortion as well. Your diagram is actually very enlightening, as you can see it show an exact contrary of what adding coding to the 10m does in terms of distortion. The 10mm is  good lens to check that since it is practically distortion-free.

 

Best,

 

Vieri

Link to post
Share on other sites

I do not know if an M9 with the 10mm is pertinent, but I have tried mine with various manual lenses set, and with lens detection off. It worked best with lens detection off. I use Photoshop's ACR preprocessor, and that's about all it needs. Filter -> Lens Correction 12mm overdoes the vignetting correction a bit, and the perspective distortion correction is minimal.

 

12mm because 10mm is not yet available

 

pico,

 

it is exactly my conclusion in the review, no coding, just ACR / PS profiling. However, shooting a white wall it is clear that the 12mm's profile overcorrects for vignette, and IMO the 15mm v. III's profile is much better even if it leaves a little vignette. Profiling the 10mm as a 15mm v. III you'll have to add -3 barrel correction for perfect results.

 

Since Adobe profiled all the ultra-wide Voigtlander lenses, I think it's only a matter of time before they'll give us a working profile for the 10mm.

 

Best,

 

Vieri

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

When there was a lot of forum discussion of how to code the very short back-focus CV wide angles such as the 15 mm (the 12 has a much greater exit pupil distance) to use the M's vignetting and color shift corrections, I think the consensus was that the 28 Elmarit-asph M profile gave the best corrections.  The WATE is relatively telecentric (that is, it's LONG) and thus doesn't have as much color shift to correct.  If you look at the technical specs of the WATE it's clear why the distortion corrections are going to be strange if applied to a different sort of lens.  At 16 and 18 mm, the WATE has strong moustache distortion. When the WATE is set for 16 mm focal length, the image is pulled in by 3.2% at a radius of 15 mm (just inside the frame edge) but the distortion is down to -1.5% at the corners of the frame.  At 18 mm focal length, the distortion is -2.4% at a radius of 15 mm, and then reduces to -0.8% at the frame corners.  That is how wide angle lenses used to be designed (pre-Karbe, I guess).  The R 19mm, the super-Elmar 18 and the various R 15 mm lenses all have similar distortion curves.  The 28 Elmarit-asph has very little distortion (at most a few tenths percent, and it increases monotonically with radius).

 

scott 

 

PS:  Distortion correction is not done in the camera for raw files, as it is easiest to do it after the image has been translated into RG and B values at every pixel site, after demosaicing.  In effect, Leica copies the distortion curve in the form of a four parameter expansion for each color into the DNG file in a standard location, and then it is up to ACR, LR, Capture One or the tool of your choice to use this information to undo the shifts and put the image information into each pixel that should have gotten there.  You can turn this off, but it is not very obvious how to do it, or why you should.

 

Thank you Scott, however I would never code any of the Voigtlander ultra-wides on the SL. ACR / PS profiles do a much better job and don't introduce any distortion problem.

 

Best,

 

Vieri

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

pico,

 

it is exactly my conclusion in the review, no coding, just ACR / PS profiling. However, shooting a white wall it is clear that the 12mm's profile overcorrects for vignette, and IMO the 15mm v. III's profile is much better even if it leaves a little vignette.

 

I just tried the 15mm lens correction and it is indeed better than the 12mm version. Subtle, but very good. Thank you for your information.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just tried the 15mm lens correction and it is indeed better than the 12mm version. Subtle, but very good. Thank you for your information.

 

 

You are most welcome pico, I am glad I could be of help :) Best,

 

Vieri

Link to post
Share on other sites

Vieri,

thank you and congratulation to your review: It is interesting, enthusiastic and yet balanced, informative and inspiring!.

 

Even if there is the filter problem there might be one manufacturer being able to produce such filters. There are filters for wideangle lenses in his portfolio: Lensinghouse (Germany, being distributed by Isarfoto.) they produce highclass glassfilters, with very clear images not being spoilt by any hue. They have a website and shop by Isarfoto. you can contact them.... :) ...)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Vieri,

thank you and congratulation to your review: It is interesting, enthusiastic and yet balanced, informative and inspiring!.

 

Even if there is the filter problem there might be one manufacturer being able to produce such filters. There are filters for wideangle lenses in his portfolio: Lensinghouse (Germany, being distributed by Isarfoto.) they produce highclass glassfilters, with very clear images not being spoilt by any hue. They have a website and shop by Isarfoto. you can contact them.... :) ...)

 

Iduna,

 

thank you very much for your comment, I am glad you enjoyed the review :D I checked out the shop you indicated, but they don't have anything for the Voigtlander 10mm (perhaps it's too new a lens). Hopefully someone will solve the problem soon :D In the meantime, I guess digital solutions will be the way to go; and, sadly, no long exposures... :( It's still a great lens for interiors, and for "landscape with limitations" though ;)

 

Best,

 

Vieri

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...