Wideangles magenta shift

[wlaidlaw]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Why would that be strange?

 

You might have hoped that the people making the CV lenses would have learnt about QC from the Zeiss inspectors.

 

Wilson

[Advertisement]

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

[01af]

You might have hoped that the people making the Voigtländer lenses would have learnt about quality control from the Zeiss inspectors.

And you also hoped they'd do the work of high-paid quality inspectors for free, right?

[CaptZoom]

For whatever it's worth, I've CV lenses (35mm f/2.5 skopar, 50mm f/1.5 LTM, and 75mm f/2.5 skopar) and all are of sound quality and performance. The 75mm was a "used" lens (I don't think it actually was more than once).

[wlaidlaw]

And you also hoped they'd do the work of high-paid quality inspectors for free, right?

 

I would have happily paid a bit more to have usable lenses. Sending out lenses that are cheap but totally useless, is worse than sending out no lenses at all. A customer will remember the bad experiences longer than the good. I would happily recommend anyone to buy a CV built Zeiss lens, whereas I would only recommend buying a CV own brand lens, if you had a very watertight return agreement or as in the case of my CV15mm, it is extremely cheap and worth taking a chance. It may be that they have tightened up their production tolerances and QC since I had the bad ones, made from 2003 through to 2007 but I know quite a few other people who would not consider buying a CV lens because of bad experience allied to poor service.

 

Wilson

[CaptZoom]

Keep in mind that the XV has an equivalent minimum FL of 28mm, a possibly limiting factor if you like 18 or 21 ultra wide on full frame.

I don't know yet if I like ultra wide lenses, I've very little experience with them and none at all with a RF. 21mm is sufficiently far enough from 15mm and 28mm, that it makes sense (for me). I want to expand my skill set to the wide end. And you're right XV doesn't go to the ultra wide but it offers other advantages (consistency of physical and electronic interface with the M9, full warranty (as opposed to a used M8), etc).

I own the SEM21 and never used any of the other three lenses. The SEM21 has excellent performance for the size and weight, but I often desire more subject separation.

That review made me want to try the Voigt, and made me aware of possible downsides I should be checking before purchasing the lens.

 

I find comparative reviews like this, on real subjects, quite useful because they define an absolute scale... in the reviewer's subjective perspective

I must thank the author for sharing his results and opinions.

 

I also find the NEX7 a very nice to have in the review, because it renders a "preview" of lens performance with future high-density sensors, at least in the mid and center of the full frame.

 

Agreed.

[derleicaman]

My experience has been the opposite with the CV lenses. I have had a 15/4.5 Super Heliar since they first came out, a 28/1.9 for years and a 50/1.5 Nokton. I recently acquired a used Color Skopar 21/4 LNIB on ebay for $300 with finder. I have just returned from a week long trip to San Diego and Scottsdale and Flagstaff, Arizona with stops at the Grand Canyon and Montezuma's Castle. I used the 21/4, 28/1.9 and 15/4 extensively on my M9-P and NEX 6. I also used my 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH, pre-ASPH 35 Lux, 50/1.4 Lux v1 and 90/2.8 Tele-Elmarit. I saw none of the problems reported here with any of the CV lenses. I was very pleased with my images and I think the CV lenses give great bang for the buck. Are they as good as my 35/1.4 Lux ASPH? Frankly, no. Very few lenses are. The 35/1.4 ASPH has been my workhorse lens for 18 years. Before that, I used the 35/1.4 pre-ASPH Lux since 1972. It was fun to have it along and it works well on the NEX.

Up until recently, my go to camera was my Nikon D700 and stable of pro Nikon lenses. I have even re-mounted a number of my old Leica R lenses for it. Then last December I bought a NEX 6 to use with my M lenses, but a digital M was still a dream which I probably wouldn't ever be able to realize. Regrettably, over the years I sold my Tri-Elmar, 21/2.8 Elmarit, 24/2.8 ASPH, 75/1.4 and 28/2.8 Elmarit and 90/2.8 Elmarit M. Wish I hadn't but I did not see getting a digital M, but came along a deal I just couldn't pass up, so here I am with an M9-P! My dad's old 21/4 Super-Angulon is a horror in color on the M9, so I picked up the CV 21/4 as a user for it. Would I rather have a 28/2.8 Elmarit ASPH or 28 Chron ASPH than the 28/1.9. Sure, but the 28 CV is a very good performer and I'll probably get the 28/2.8 someday. Leica doesn't make a 15 and it gives me the FOV of a 21 on the NEX 6 with no issues as some have reported on the NEX 7. The M9 is hyper critical with lenses and is certainly much less forgiving than a film M is, and it exposes many lenses shortcomimgs.

So far, so good for me. I've only had the M9 for a few weeks, so more experience will tell me more over time. It does feel good to come home again, so to speak.

I've been shooting Leica M for almost 45 years, so I've more than enough experience with Leica lenses, in addition to Leica R, Nikon, Hasselblad, Canon, Zeiss, etc. which I have used on a professional basis.The CV lenses may not beat Leica or have the mystique, but they are easily as good as anything I've used from Nikon, et al. I saw none of the Italian Flag issues with any of my images and only saw some very minor CA in some leaves near the edges of images at 1:1 magnification in Lightroom with the 21/4. No issues with any of the other lenses The CV lenses I have serve a purpose and perform quite well in my opinion.

The only one I have a problem with is my 50/1.5 Nokton which will not focus on the M9, but works just fine on the NEX 6. I have not had the time to determine what the problem is (def out of register) as I used this lens for years on my film M's without any issues.

[CaptZoom]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Derleicaman, our good experiences with CV and wlaidlaw's poor experience with them points to the lack of quality control at CV.

[01af]

I would have happily paid a bit more ....

But you didn't.

 

 

Sending out lenses that are cheap but totally useless, is worse than sending out no lenses at all.

I agree ... but that's how making—and selling—cheap products works. If Zeiss and Leica lenses are better than Voigtländer lenses, then I'd guess 20 % of the difference is due to superior design, 50 % is due to tighter manufacturing tolerances, and 30 % is due to more stringent quality control. All this costs money. However the three most important things to make more people buy your products are price, price, and price. Those who prefer high quality over low price are a tiny minority. That's why brands like Sigma, Tamron, and Voigtländer sell more lenses than Zeiss and Leica by several orders of magnitude.

[wlaidlaw]

Olaf,

 

I disagree that price is such a big driver for Leica fit (either LTM or LM). I think people are looking at least equally for quality as well as a good deal. That is why I don't now buy CV lenses if there is another make equivalent lens. I would much rather pay the extra in the knowledge that I am far more likely to get a good lens. I would very much doubt if I am alone in the this way of thinking within the Leica community.

 

However, I think Voigtlander have been very clever in that they have frequently targeted lens specifications where there is not a direct equivalent from another maker. For example I am still tempted to try another 40/1.4 Nokton, as this is a lovely field of view for a one lens trip. It is also very compact and light. This time I would go for an MC not an SC model, which I bought as an ex-display one on the last day of the Focus on Imaging show in the UK a few years ago. The nearest equivalent to the 40 Nokton is the Summicron C, which are now getting old (around 35 years) and even when new, was not one of Leica's top ten lenses, as I assume it was built to a budget for the CL. The Second hand price of these is about the same as a new Nokton plus VH-6 bayonet hood, so price does not enter into the choice. Imaging quality will make my choice.

 

Wilson

[01af]

I disagree that price is such a big driver for Leica fit (either LTM or LM).

Oh, sure it is! That's why so many people shot cell phone cameras and so few shoot Leicas.

[jaapv]

Olaf,

 

I disagree that price is such a big driver for Leica fit (either LTM or LM). I think people are looking at least equally for quality as well as a good deal. That is why I don't now buy CV lenses if there is another make equivalent lens. I would much rather pay the extra in the knowledge that I am far more likely to get a good lens. I would very much doubt if I am alone in the this way of thinking within the Leica community.

 

However, I think Voigtlander have been very clever in that they have frequently targeted lens specifications where there is not a direct equivalent from another maker. For example I am still tempted to try another 40/1.4 Nokton, as this is a lovely field of view for a one lens trip. It is also very compact and light. This time I would go for an MC not an SC model, which I bought as an ex-display one on the last day of the Focus on Imaging show in the UK a few years ago. The nearest equivalent to the 40 Nokton is the Summicron C, which are now getting old (around 35 years) and even when new, was not one of Leica's top ten lenses, as I assume it was built to a budget for the CL. The Second hand price of these is about the same as a new Nokton plus VH-6 bayonet hood, so price does not enter into the choice. Imaging quality will make my choice.

 

 

 

I think you are a bit hard on the Summicron - C, Wilson. Puts rates it between the Summicron 35 version 3 and version 4, both highly regarded lenses. I very much doubt if the Voigtländer does better.

[01af]

I very much doubt if the Voigtländer does better.

The Voigtländer 40/1.4 could do at least as well if it was manufactured to the same tolerances. But then it would cost three times as much as it actually is.

[Erik Gunst Lund]

The build quality of the 40mm Summicron C is not impressive, the front ring with the filter threads is glued on... not something you see on M lenses.

 

I agree that many of the Voigtlander lenses are mechanicaly not very solid or sturdy in their design, but optically some of the are very good to excelent.

[jaapv]

You mean that "proper" M lenses are built like a tank? Hmmm...

 

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-collectors-historica/211673-summicron-35-mm-pieces.html#post1900219

[Erik Gunst Lund]

Yes I recall that, but it must have been quite a fall for this part to breake like that

[wlaidlaw]

You mean that "proper" M lenses are built like a tank? Hmmm...

 

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-collectors-historica/211673-summicron-35-mm-pieces.html#post1900219

 

....and the front of my 28 ASPH Summicron always falling off is in my imagination

 

Wilson

[jaapv]

Yes I recall that, but it must have been quite a fall for this part to breake like that

Not really; this type of plastic has age hardening and gets brittle.

[Erik Gunst Lund]

OMG makes one think of Planned obsolence...

 

What type of plastic is that?

 

I have never seen that in a high end lens before. Sad...

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

Many plastics do. The cause is the ageing and/or evaporation/ leaching out of the plasticizers.

 

 

 

 

Phthalates, Plasticisers and Flexible PVC Information Centre - Specialty Plasticisers

[jankap]

I know, but this is an added step and just lifts the corners

 

The Leica correction in the camera lifts the corners too. What do you think is happening here?

Jan