pes084k1 Posted January 10, 2010 Share #21 Posted January 10, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) 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 The difference is mainly in the in-camera calibration. Otherwise, CV 15 and SE 18 mm have very similar performance in all photos I saw. Maybe the SE 18 is "a little" more contrasty a low spatial frequencies, but I never saw a wide-angle more optically perfect than the CV 15: I saw this lens making aliasing on M8 and even a Minolta 5400 II scanner (>100 lp/mm at 15 mm off center at f/4.5 is extraordinary). Its CA rate is about 1/3000 at 5400 dpi and its I could not reliably measure any distortion at common distances! After shooting a while with the CV 15 you will hate any little-distorting or flaring lens. Surely, the 18 SE is state of the art, but also the CV 15 is: the right price comes from squeezing the aperture (but you can held a small 15 mm at 1/4" or less) and developing a cheaper, but not bad, lens mount. Engineering and good ideas are more than myth! If I would need a 18 mm, I would take the SE, but a fixed non distorting 15 mm has another image punch. New samples of the VC 15 built after 2005 seem consistently at the top. Bye Elio Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 10, 2010 Posted January 10, 2010 Hi pes084k1, Take a look here Voigtlander 15mm or WATE on M9. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
markowich Posted January 10, 2010 Share #22 Posted January 10, 2010 The difference is mainly in the in-camera calibration. Otherwise, CV 15 and SE 18 mm have very similar performance in all photos I saw. Maybe the SE 18 is "a little" more contrasty a low spatial frequencies, but I never saw a wide-angle more optically perfect than the CV 15: I saw this lens making aliasing on M8 and even a Minolta 5400 II scanner (>100 lp/mm at 15 mm off center at f/4.5 is extraordinary). Its CA rate is about 1/3000 at 5400 dpi and its I could not reliably measure any distortion at common distances! After shooting a while with the CV 15 you will hate any little-distorting or flaring lens. Surely, the 18 SE is state of the art, but also the CV 15 is: the right price comes from squeezing the aperture (but you can held a small 15 mm at 1/4" or less) and developing a cheaper, but not bad, lens mount. Engineering and good ideas are more than myth! If I would need a 18 mm, I would take the SE, but a fixed non distorting 15 mm has another image punch. New samples of the VC 15 built after 2005 seem consistently at the top. Bye Elio still, it takes some PP to get rid of the shift (and you are right, it depends on in-camera calibration). but what to do? peter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 10, 2010 Share #23 Posted January 10, 2010 I happen to have both the WATE and the CV 15. I used the VC with y M8.2 for sometime before I could get my hands on the WATE. I bought it for a trip as a substitute. I must admit I was very surprised at the results. For a lens of this price the quality was very well worth it. It was also my first non-Leica lens. I later got the WATE I ordered and as far as I am concerned it is better than the CV 15 as far as I could see. Side by side there is really no contest on the M8.2 and comparing both at this price range is a bit far fetched if you ask me. Another matter is discussing if the WATE was worth the price difference over the VC 15. Personally it was for me. That said, the CV15 is worth every penny. On the M9 I have not tested the CV15 yet. I will take to shots with both lenses and my M9 next week for you to compare both once I get my CV15 back from a friend. You can make your mind then. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted January 10, 2010 Share #24 Posted January 10, 2010 I will take to shots with both lenses and my M9 next week for you to compare both once I get my CV15 back from a friend. You can make your mind then. That would be PERFECT! Even with red shift, as we know we can remove it in post processing. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dseelig Posted January 11, 2010 Share #25 Posted January 11, 2010 I found the 15 voigt to flare where the wate does not. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 11, 2010 Share #26 Posted January 11, 2010 I will not be geting my CV15 back untill Thursday so in the meantime here is a shot from somewhere in Paris... Here is an example at low light at full aperture with a slow/medium shutter speed. ISO 160, f4,0 and 1/45 sec... I only converted to B&W and nothing else. Can't find the original DNG... Full size here... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 11, 2010 Share #27 Posted January 11, 2010 Advertisement (gone after registration) Here is one that was only converted from DNG to jpeg. No sharpening, no color correction, nothing... Again. f4,0 at 1/1500sec Link to the picture... Careful! It is over 4 megs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted January 11, 2010 Share #28 Posted January 11, 2010 How can you use FLASH with WATE and frankenfinder attached? Best Regards, Jerry_R take off the frankenfinder, attach a flash and chimp? i say this not to mock but because i often use the wate with a radio trigger and/or without the finder. admittedly that's mostly on a tripod but it also works freestyling handheld and without a finder. try it. i'm with viramati, btw..it's a truly wonderful lens if you like going really wide Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted January 11, 2010 Share #29 Posted January 11, 2010 Thx, I will check that approach! I assume you use flash trigger right? It isn't TTL compliant with Leica, is it? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Olsen Posted January 11, 2010 Share #30 Posted January 11, 2010 I have used my WATE and the old type, not rangefinder coupled, CV15 alongside each other on my M8 for years. The WATE is far better. The tests I have done shows far greater difference than what Sean Reid found. One can certainly argue if the difference can defend the huge price difference. But it has always been like this in camera business. You have to pay a hefty price premium for, to some, only marginal improvements. I use the Frankenfinder, but just as much this small Voigtländer viewfinder. The Frankenfinder is voluminous, but not heavy. It got a huge advantage in having a libelle/water pass. I even use it with my Canon 1Ds III whenever it is critical to hold the camera streight. As with shooting architecture. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted January 12, 2010 Share #31 Posted January 12, 2010 The WATE is far better. The tests I have done shows far greater difference than what Sean Reid found. One can certainly argue if the difference can defend the huge price difference. But it has always been like this in camera business. You have to pay a hefty price premium for, to some, only marginal improvements. I hear so many different opinions ;-) Maybe there is a question - when the differencies are visible? Since what print size? Ehhh... Will wait for samples from two lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted January 12, 2010 Share #32 Posted January 12, 2010 Thx, I will check that approach! I assume you use flash trigger right? It isn't TTL compliant with Leica, is it? you are welcome, yes..radio flash trigger which is not ttl-compliant with any brand camera Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
mikeyt Posted January 12, 2010 Share #33 Posted January 12, 2010 oops.. I just had an accident with my credit card and bought a WATE. Please nobody tell my wife how much it was Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 14, 2010 Share #34 Posted January 14, 2010 I am sorry but the test will have to wait. To be honest I did it today and the result has made me just send my M9 back to Leica. There is a problem with the alignment of my sensor since with the CV15 I am having problems on the left side of the picture (too much coincidence with the Summilux problems I had). The result was so bad that it would not be fair to CV to post such a comparison. The WATE on the other hand did better probably because the last element of the lens is farther away from the sensor. (I have a question regarding that that I will post on a new thread) I will post pictures with my M8.2 and both lenses if you wish tomorrow. Unfortunately it is not what you asked and I do think that in this case the difference will be much less on the M8.2 than on the M9. I hope I will get my M9 back soon so that I can finally compare both although from what I have seen so far on the M9 the WATE seems to be far ahead of the CV15. On the M8.2 I believe the CV15 can hold its ground against the WATE and for the price difference I would rather get the CV15 and a LUX 35 or 50. Anyway, can't wait to get it back to really see the difference of both lenses on the M8 and on the M9. Sorry for the delay though... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted January 14, 2010 Share #35 Posted January 14, 2010 Thanks for update! Really appreciate! But I am afraid - color shift on M9 with non Leica lenses - means nothing to Leica. Especially when it doesn't occur on Leica lenses. Or not on such scale. This is my feeling based on all that I have read in last weeks. It repeats on MANY bodies, not only yours. Anyway - let me be wrong! Keep us updated. If can - pls post comparison on M8 body anyway! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jerry_R Posted January 14, 2010 Share #36 Posted January 14, 2010 PS: What about Zeiss Distagon T* 15mm 2.8? Any experiences??? Very expensive, how it compares to WATE on 16mm? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 15, 2010 Share #37 Posted January 15, 2010 PS: What about Zeiss Distagon T* 15mm 2.8?Any experiences??? Very expensive, how it compares to WATE on 16mm? That one was an option on the M8.2 since it would have replaced my Elmarit 21. Yet with the M9 it is not that useful to me. 15mm is very wide and I hardly can justify that much money for a "once in a while" lens. The price is also much closer to the WATE and I suspect that the M9 is much less forgiving on some lenses and especially on non-Leica lenses. I would go with the WATE here especially since you have a much smaller price difference. Right now I feel that with the M9 and my Elmarit 21 being back to how it always was (full frame) my WATE has somehow become redundant. With my Elmarit I gain not only an aperture but also reduce size and weight. I was going to replace it with the CV15 for those "once in a while" sunsets in the Caribbean or Alps but now I will wait until I get my M9 back properly calibrated. I will test it again and if it gives me acceptable shots I will without a doubt say goodbye to the WATE. Awesome lens, no question, but in my case a lot of money to be redundant. It is my purpose (wish for 2010... ) is to fit my entire M-system inside my Billingham case. One body and unfortunately max four lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DFV Posted January 17, 2010 Share #38 Posted January 17, 2010 Sorry for the delay but the weather has been less than ideal to give you propers pictiures to get an idea. It has been raining for almost one month practically every day and to make things worse it was fogy for most of the day today. I am leaving for one week to Geneva so I will not be able to take the pictures until next week. I will also add pictures of the CV12mm for the wait... My apologies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
scott kirkpatrick Posted January 17, 2010 Share #39 Posted January 17, 2010 I am sorry but the test will have to wait. To be honest I did it today and the result has made me just send my M9 back to Leica. There is a problem with the alignment of my sensor since with the CV15 I am having problems on the left side of the picture (too much coincidence with the Summilux problems I had). I'm not sure that you needed to send your M9 back because there was an asymmetric "Italian flag"pattern with the very deep-set CV15 lens. Lots of people have seen this. It's interesting that the pattern is red on one side, greenish on the other, strongest in the corners, but it is not a sign of sensor misalignment. It is apparently some interaction between the demosaicing algorithm in the M9 which contributes the asymmetry, and the glancing angle at which light rays from the CV15 strike the edges of the picture. It may be fixable in firmware, but sounds like major changes are required. Look for threads involving the CV15 and Cornerfix on this forum to see other examples. scott Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
AGeoJO Posted January 17, 2010 Share #40 Posted January 17, 2010 Is there any difference in the resulting images taken with rangefinder coupled and non-rangefinder coupled CV 15mm on M9? Do both exhibit color shifts in the corner? Thanks, Joshua Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.