VC 35 1.2 v2

[ezc203]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The reason why Voigtlander decided to have the lens focus down to 0.5m is because more and more Leica M-mount lenses are no longer used on rangefinders caneras. People buy them to use on m4/3 or other EVIL cameras.

 

This was one of my first complaints about the lens when I first got it. It really annoyed me when I was fiddling with it at home, on my desk. Take pictures of this and that. But then I realized, how often am I going to shoot at a < 0.7m distance out in the real world?? Honestly, ask yourself that question.

 

I know Robert Capa said something to the effect: If you're pictures aren't good enough, you're not close enough. But getting significantly within a meter to a subject when I'm out shooting is highly unlikely.

 

So to answer your question, this focusing problem (for me at least) only exists when I'm bored at home trying to make some pseudo-macro photographs. In the real world, I have yet to encounter a single situation where I accidentally focus pass the 0.7m mark.

[k_g_wolf ✝]

>> erure

 

 

Don´t worry, use the 0.5 m to it´s advantage. A bit of guestimate helps,

not expensive in our digital days.

 

Shot #1: The chaircorner was guessed at 0.5 m

Shot #2: Properly focused at 0.7 m

 

Both photos at max. app. You gain a lot in bokeh I think

 

 

Best

GEORG

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!

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[k_g_wolf ✝]

Same scenes b/w- converted.

 

best

GEORG

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!

[ezc203]

Good examples Georg.

 

Yes, by all means, please don't take my comments as to completely neglect the 0.5-0.7m range, it is definitely usable with a little bit of guessing. This was shot at 0.5m:

 

 

But I was just trying to point out that it shouldn't be a reason NOT to get the lens because you think it'll be a hindrance in regular shooting.

[Bmorena]

In an effort to use the .5 close focus I use my fore arm to measure the distance from film plane to subject. For me the distance from my elbow to finger tip is 17" I visualize the extra inch and a half and bang .5 meters. I've been pretty successful. However, I'm a focus puller in movie and television production so I do have a slight advantage in judging distance. I have found the closer MFD valuable in real world shooting. While visiting my friends new born in the hospital the closer position allowed me to improve my composition greatly.

[Shade]

I'm really curious regarding the 35/1.2 V2, the dealers here don't have it yet and I'm starting to wonder if the demand is so high that we're not getting it at all..

[erure]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Okay. I guess I'll get used to it if I use it more. The lens is on very short term loan but I do want one of my own in the near future. I love taking portraits of friends and I do shoot at the 0.5-0.7 range and not knowing the exact focus frustrates me but I guess I'll get used to it. Plus I can get a NEX adapter and use it on my C3 and future 7 at the 0.5 range. Thank you everyone!

[mustafasoleiman]

The ability to focus to less than 1 meter is for me essential and that is one of the reasons I sold the 50/1.1 and never bought the v1 of this lens.

 

In close spaces and especially when doing portraits, I always need to focus down to the .7 meter mark.

 

Now the .5 m minimum of this lens is a bit of a bore because you have to be aware of it when closing in on the subject, not too loose focus and struggle to get it back, only to realised that you are passed the camera link to the lens... Still... I now have my .7

 

 

My .7 cents

[cdh]

The ability to focus down to .5m is really usefull, I think.

My daughter is 10 days old, and being able to take a picture of her in that range is essential (for me).

The trick is to know in the focusing patch were the "double" image will be when focusing down to .5m.

Roughly, the focusing point (an eye for instance) and its "double" image will be away from each other with a spread equal to 2/3 of the long side of the focusing patch.

It is, of course, a matter of trials and errors at the beginning, be after a while I've been more consistant in my results...

Focusing down to .5m is definitely an important bonus of that lens, in my opinion.

 

Cyrille

[Hannes Lummes]

The ability to focus to less than 1 meter is for me essential and that is one of the reasons I sold the 50/1.1 and never bought the v1 of this lens.

 

 

My .7 cents

 

v1 focuses down to 0.7 meters

[mustafasoleiman]

v1 focuses down to 0.7 meters

 

Yup... true... my mistake... I meant that as I sold the 50/1.1 I looked at the 35/1.2 v1 but already there was talk about a v.2, so I waited.

 

The v2 is a great lens if a bit too heavy... but at least you can buy one (mostly), not the same can be said about the new Summilux.

[Racefan]

Anyone done "marker coding" on this lens yet, and if so what code did you use? I purchased this lens last week and have been happily using it coded in the M9 menu as a 35 Summilux pre-asph, but I can't find a six-bit code for that series of lenses and according to this thread there isn't one.

[exile]

My God, don't put ice in that Eddie!!!

[k_g_wolf ✝]

>> Ron

 

I choosed the 35 SUMMICRON IV, because I´am mostly interested in

the >>35<< exifdata. The lens is pretty good, don´t think it needs much

of an in-camera correction.

 

My results are very pleasing.

 

 

 

best

GEORG

[mustafasoleiman]

Anyone done "marker coding" on this lens yet, and if so what code did you use? I purchased this lens last week and have been happily using it coded in the M9 menu as a 35 Summilux pre-asph, but I can't find a six-bit code for that series of lenses and according to this thread there isn't one.

 

it's Summilux 35 11874 coding is: 011101.

[Racefan]

>> I choosed the 35 SUMMICRON IV,

 

it's Summilux 35 11874 coding is: 011101.

 

Thanks folks - looks like I'll need to run a little Sean Reid style experiment with the six-bit codes for myself - and I'll try both of those options.

[billib]

Hi, I have and use the new VC 35mm f/1.2 v2.

I coded it for the Leica Summilux-M f/1.4 ASPH

Code "011101" The lens doesn't misbehave so

you could get away with not coding it at all.

[sdk]

I may have to get one next year, after my coffers replenish from the hit my M9P inflicted upon my checking account! The look of the 35mm/1.2 shots I have seen look wonderful.

[lmmo]

How cumbersome is this lens? It seems quite large and the antithesis of Leica philosophy...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[fotolebrocq]

How cumbersome is this lens? It seems quite large and the antithesis of Leica philosophy...

 

Well, it's smaller than the 21mm, 24mm Summiluxes and all 50mm Noctiluxes. Are those lenses the antithesis of the Leica philosophy? I really do think it balances well on the M9

 

Tony

 

Documentary, Street and Social Photography in Crete and UK

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/justprimelenses/

Edited November 30, 2011 by fotolebrocq
addition