jsrockit Posted October 14, 2009 Share #21 Posted October 14, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) What would be a reasonable used price for a 28mm summicron. I could not find prices to reference on ebay. For the latest version, I would think 75% of the new price would be normal. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 14, 2009 Posted October 14, 2009 Hi jsrockit, Take a look here Anyone using the 28/2 Ultron?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sean_reid Posted October 15, 2009 Share #22 Posted October 15, 2009 My solution to the 28mm problem was to buy (used) both the VC 28/1.9 and the VC 28/3.5. I use the 28/1.9 lens for available light, and the (now discontinued) 28/3.5 outdoors. Total cost, used, about 1/4 of the 28 Summicron. No focus shift on the fast lens, superb quality and no flare on the slower lens. If I had unlimited disposable income, or if 28mm was my primary focal length on the M8, I probably would have sprung for the Summicron. Since 35mm is my go-to lens on the M8, the VCs are fine for 28mm. Hi Peter, As you know, I really like that CV 28/3.5 as well - great lens in many respects. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alnitak Posted October 17, 2009 Share #23 Posted October 17, 2009 For the latest version, I would think 75% of the new price would be normal. You are lucky to see 10% off on a latest version in excellent condition. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mzcloud Posted October 17, 2009 Share #24 Posted October 17, 2009 You are lucky to see 10% off on a latest version in excellent condition. Guess $2,500 is a decent price if its in mint condition Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
epand56 Posted October 21, 2009 Share #25 Posted October 21, 2009 Steven, instead of words I will give you two examples. First one is the Summicron, the second one is the Ultron. Both taken wide open with the same camera by the same guy. The difference in price is around 2000 USD. 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/100000-anyone-using-the-282-ultron/?do=findComment&comment=1083537'>More sharing options...
Alnitak Posted October 21, 2009 Share #26 Posted October 21, 2009 Enrico, Your pair of images demonstrates my experience with the two lenses: The Summicron is a higher-contrast lens, but that's the main difference is practical use. I can adjust the Ultron's images in post-processing to match the contrast of the Summicron if required. For that reason, I tend to lean towards using the Ultron in brighter light, so the shadows aren't as blocked up, and then I can open them up easier in post processing. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted October 21, 2009 Share #27 Posted October 21, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I imagine that I am seeing more detail in the first shot. Could you post a 100% crop of the man's forehead? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
epand56 Posted October 21, 2009 Share #28 Posted October 21, 2009 Carsten, you're right, some more sharpness in the Cron, but don't know if it really is worth the difference in price. Of course, is money is no problem, a Leica lens is a Leica lens. Here it is the 100% crop. First one is Summicron, second one is Ultron. They are just out of the DNG, no PP at all. Taken with the M9. The Ultron had the UV/IR filter on. 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/100000-anyone-using-the-282-ultron/?do=findComment&comment=1084145'>More sharing options...
carstenw Posted October 21, 2009 Share #29 Posted October 21, 2009 One photo isn't conclusive, of course, but in this shot the Leica does look sharper. Anyway, it is not a huge difference. I would be more interested in how the Ultron does in boke torture tests, since that is often one area where Leica pulls ahead (but not always!). Something like Christmas trees with lights on, at night, in the background, out of focus. I find myself quite attracted to several of the Voigtländer lenses, in theory, but so far have only picked up the 15mm, which I will probably sell due to its poor match with the M9. Maybe I'll get a 12mm and have some fun Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
epand56 Posted October 21, 2009 Share #30 Posted October 21, 2009 Carsten, if you look at my first post here, the one with the two full pictures, you will notice that the bokeh in the two pictures is surprisingly similar. Almost the same. Keep in mind that I'm not fully satisfied with the Ultron and would like to have the Cron of my friend, but I must say that for a 400 euros lens it is almost able to challenge the Summicron and come out of it without shame. Dommage for the focus shift that is the real problem of this lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alnitak Posted October 22, 2009 Share #31 Posted October 22, 2009 Carsten, Apart from the fact that one image is not the best comparison of sharpness, you must factor in the contrast difference. We perceive slight differences in local contrast as sharpness differences (this is the basis for many sharpening algorithms, such as unsharp masking). As such, a slight tweak to the Ultron 28 image and it would no doubt look even more favorable in comparison at the pixel-level for sharpness. Again, this is something you can adjust to taste in your workflow. To me, the contrast difference really only matters if you are a jpeg shooter. Otherwise a few tweaks on the DNG and I would bet you would be hard pressed to tell which image came from which lens. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alnitak Posted October 22, 2009 Share #32 Posted October 22, 2009 Two quick images from the Ultron 28mm f/2, both shot wide open on the M8.2. Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f/2, wide open on Leica M8.2 on Flickr - Photo Sharing! My beautiful wife on Flickr - Photo Sharing! In both cases you can find the original full-sized image from the link; just select "All Sizes" from above the image, and then on the resulting image page, select "Original." The first image shows how the Ultron draws specular highlights in the distance as part of the bokeh. Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carstenw Posted October 22, 2009 Share #33 Posted October 22, 2009 Carsten, Apart from the fact that one image is not the best comparison of sharpness, you must factor in the contrast difference. We perceive slight differences in local contrast as sharpness differences (this is the basis for many sharpening algorithms, such as unsharp masking). As such, a slight tweak to the Ultron 28 image and it would no doubt look even more favorable in comparison at the pixel-level for sharpness. Again, this is something you can adjust to taste in your workflow. To me, the contrast difference really only matters if you are a jpeg shooter. Otherwise a few tweaks on the DNG and I would bet you would be hard pressed to tell which image came from which lens. Jeff I am not saying that it isn't sharp, but there is a difference, contrast or not. The Ultron appears to render more like some of Leica's better pre-Asph lenses, gentler, although not unsharp. The portrait of your wife shows that too, although the JPG compression has unfortunately destroyed the detail in some areas of the face. In the left corner of that same image there is some funky boke going on, and in the bottom right, there is a tiny bit of CA in the transition from colour to white. Both of these artifacts are very mild and it does look like a really good lens, but they are still there, which is something to keep in mind while using it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 22, 2009 Share #34 Posted October 22, 2009 I've described the similarities and differences among these three fast 28 mm RF lenses as thoroughly as I can in past reviews. They certainly are not equivalent in all respects but, as always, only the photographer can decide which combinations of strengths and weaknesses matter most to him or her. I have begun re-testing these same three lenses on the M9 for a future review and what those new tests, of course, can show us is how the lenses perform beyond the area of the M8's 1.33X crop. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 22, 2009 Share #35 Posted October 22, 2009 Carsten, ...you must factor in the contrast difference. We perceive slight differences in local contrast as sharpness differences (this is the basis for many sharpening algorithms, such as unsharp masking). As such, a slight tweak to the Ultron 28 image and it would no doubt look even more favorable in comparison at the pixel-level for sharpness. Jeff That's an important point. One can increase contrast in a picture made with a lower contrast lens (having held more shadow detail in the bargain) *but* the trade-off with lower contrast lenses can be veiling flare. I've owned and used a CV 28/1.9 for many years now and its biggest weakness is flare when shooting into the light (unless one is looking for that effect). The CV 35/1/7 is much the same. I'm glad you made your point though because people so often think they see higher resolution when they're really seeing stronger local contrast. The former can't be added but the latter can. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 22, 2009 Share #36 Posted October 22, 2009 The Ultron appears to render more like some of Leica's better pre-Asph lenses, gentler, although not unsharp. Indeed and often observed. Many older Leica lenses were more moderate in contrast as well. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alnitak Posted October 22, 2009 Share #37 Posted October 22, 2009 I've described the similarities and differences among these three fast 28 mm RF lenses as thoroughly as I can in past reviews. They certainly are not equivalent in all respects but, as always, only the photographer can decide which combinations of strengths and weaknesses matter most to him or her. I have begun re-testing these same three lenses on the M9 for a future review and what those new tests, of course, can show us is how the lenses perform beyond the area of the M8's 1.33X crop. Cheers, Sean This will be interesting to see. Any idea on when this will be available? Jeff Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 23, 2009 Share #38 Posted October 23, 2009 This will be interesting to see. Any idea on when this will be available? Jeff Thanks. I don't know yet. There are several cameras and lenses all being tested now and I just have to take things day by day, finishing up each review as its ready. But the first M9 lens review should cover the three fast 28s. Maybe November but I don't know yet. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
xme53 Posted January 15, 2012 Share #39 Posted January 15, 2012 I got a lot of information that leads me to risk the purchase of the ultron, indeed reviews repeat over and over again the ultron to be a bargain which offers exelent value. The one thing i could not find out: Is the ultron blocking the 0.58 finder? Ken rockwell posted the sight throug the 0.72 finder and his opinion was: "Finder blockage is moderate to severe" will the situation be the same on a 0.58 finder? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nggalai Posted January 15, 2012 Share #40 Posted January 15, 2012 Hi xme53, for reference, the coverage through a M9 (0.68x) viewfinder. You’ll have more coverage with your finder, but perhaps you can guesstimate the amount from other lenses you were able to compare in the past? I must say I still like the Ultron F/2.0 very much. Great bang for the buck. And as I use 28mm for interior shots more often than landscapes the additional stop comes in handy, compared to my Elmarit. I’ve never had issues with front/back-focussing, as many online sources claim, but then, I print, don’t pixel-peep. I have to admit, though, that I prefer the Elmarit’s rendition over the Ultron most of the time. Most = when not pushing the ISO limits. Cheers, -Sascha 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/100000-anyone-using-the-282-ultron/?do=findComment&comment=1898534'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.