Giorgio Festa Posted January 5, 2011 Share #1 Posted January 5, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi, I am undecided between the two a.m. lenses. The first parameter I consider is the quality of the image and its sharpness. Can someone give me some suggestions? Thank you very much for your precious help. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted January 5, 2011 Posted January 5, 2011 Hi Giorgio Festa, Take a look here Voigtlander 28 f1.9 Ultron vs Elmarit 28 2.8 asph. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
geotrupede Posted January 5, 2011 Share #2 Posted January 5, 2011 The Ultron was my first lens on the Leica system (M6). I did not realised how incredible this lens was until I sold it to get the Elmarit. The main reason I made the switch was to have something more compact and also to have a sharper lens. Which the Leica clearly is (and by far). So I decided to trade in the Ultron for some cash and get the Leica. Sadly I underestimated the f1.9 factor which I now miss as in the meantime I become a M8 user. I used to love the 35mm f2 on film, which is very similar to the Ultron on M8. I would say that the Elmarit is perfection, but f2.8: f5.6 is incredibly sharp, there is no distortion and size is tiny. The Ultron is poetry but not particularly perfect as it shows a little more distortion and low resolutions in corners ... but I used it mostly at f1.9.... so it is not a real comparison... My optimal setup would be Ultron, on M8, for night time and reportage. Leica 28 for whenever precision is a requirement. Since the price of the Ultron, I would start there to test a couple of pictures at f4/f5.6 and see the corners, if you are happy go for it as you will gain the f1.9 mode in the deal ;-) Good luck G Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geotrupede Posted January 5, 2011 Share #3 Posted January 5, 2011 ultron on M6 elmarit on M8 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Giorgio Festa Posted January 5, 2011 Author Share #4 Posted January 5, 2011 Thank you for your reply. What about the Elmarit Bokeh? Tks again Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geotrupede Posted January 5, 2011 Share #5 Posted January 5, 2011 not much from me, the Elmarit is really not for this... anyway see this one (M8 Elmarit 28). This is the main reason I miss the Ultron. G Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jsrockit Posted January 5, 2011 Share #6 Posted January 5, 2011 The Ultron was my first lens on the Leica system (M6).I did not realised how incredible this lens was until I sold it to get the Elmarit. The main reason I made the switch was to have something more compact and also to have a sharper lens. Which the Leica clearly is (and by far). So I decided to trade in the Ultron for some cash and get the Leica. Sadly I underestimated the f1.9 factor which I now miss as in the meantime I become a M8 user. I used to love the 35mm f2 on film, which is very similar to the Ultron on M8. I would say that the Elmarit is perfection, but f2.8: f5.6 is incredibly sharp, there is no distortion and size is tiny. The Ultron is poetry but not particularly perfect as it shows a little more distortion and low resolutions in corners ... but I used it mostly at f1.9.... so it is not a real comparison... My optimal setup would be Ultron, on M8, for night time and reportage. Leica 28 for whenever precision is a requirement. Since the price of the Ultron, I would start there to test a couple of pictures at f4/f5.6 and see the corners, if you are happy go for it as you will gain the f1.9 mode in the deal ;-) Good luck G I sold my Elmarit ASPH and bought a CV 28mm 1.9 and the CV 28mm 3.5... and still had plenty of cash left over. Now I have one fast one and one compact one. That said, the Elmarit is a great lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted January 5, 2011 Share #7 Posted January 5, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have both lenses, and use the Elmarit much more. More compact, and very sharp even wide open. I'm not selling the Ultron though. If you go for the Ultron be aware that the paint wears very quickly, and I'd expect a reasonably well used sample to show brassing, particularly on the ridges on the focussing ring. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
geotrupede Posted January 5, 2011 Share #8 Posted January 5, 2011 Some comparison shots here: focus at about 70 - 100 cm, all lenses full open Test lens - a set on Flickr Unfortunately the Ultron is long gone... :-( So not included. G Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
deirdre Posted January 5, 2011 Share #9 Posted January 5, 2011 I love the Elmarit's compactness. I only used it for one day and I was completely spoiled. That said, I have the older f/1.9 Ultron because, sadly, monetary compromises needed to be made. If I could afford it, I'd have both (and probably eventually will). All of these were shot with the Elmarit on an M9. Almost all the ones in this gallery starting with L are shot with the Ultron on an M8. (the few that weren't were shot with a 15mm) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
efix Posted January 5, 2011 Share #10 Posted January 5, 2011 Can't comment on the Elmarit, but I own the Ultron and like it very much. It's large, it's heavy, but it's fast. at f/1.9 and f/2 it renders slightly softly with low micro contrast, but macro contrast is quite good already. Corners are a bit fuzzy, there is some vignetting and some fringing around highlight edges. At f/2.8, overall IQ gets better, and at f/4 it reaches its peak performance: very sharp, good micro contrast, higher-than-average macro contrast, good as no vignetting. I also like its colour rendition and can't say to have seen distortion so far - but this is nothing I'm looking for, I admit. All in all, the Ultron is very good at f/2.8 and great at f/4. It's okay at f/1.9 if you pixel-peep, but I think for web size and normal sized prints it delivers enough quality. For me, the speed was imperative, as 1) I like shallow d-o-f with much backgroudn blurring, and 2) I often shoot indors in low light. 2.8 just doesn't work for me. I'm currently working on a comparison between the Ultron and the Minolta M-Rokkor 28/2.8, which will contain series from f/1.9 through f/8, with center and corner crops. Check my website later this week if you're interested. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bocaburger Posted January 6, 2011 Share #11 Posted January 6, 2011 I have the Ultron and the 4th-generation Elmarit. Tit for tat other than price and the extra stop on the Ultron. I've compared the 4th to the ASPH Elmarit and if there's a difference it doesn't show up in actual photographic use. The only advantage I can see to the Elmarit ASPH on an M8 is its size. On an M9, whole 'nother story. The Elmarit (3rd, 4th, and ASPH) have calibrated firmware correction for red-edge, while there is no substitute that works effectively at all ISOs with the Ultron, so Cornerfix is a must. I only bring it up here in case you or someone else contemplates someday getting an M9. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
carlosecpf Posted January 7, 2011 Share #12 Posted January 7, 2011 Even though this does not answer your question, it might worth considering the Zeiss 28mm 2.8 Biogon. I got results with it that are very similar, if not better, to my friends Elmarit 28mm asph. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.