epand56 Posted May 23, 2014 Share #1 Posted May 23, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) Anyone using the Voigtlander Ultron 21mm F1.8 Asph on his Leica M 240? I'm very interested in this lens and wonder if it's prone to magenta cast problems on the M 240. Any feedback is really appreciated. Thank you. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 23, 2014 Posted May 23, 2014 Hi epand56, Take a look here M 240 and Voigtlander Ultron 21mm F1.8 Asph. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
wogg Posted May 23, 2014 Share #2 Posted May 23, 2014 I won't quote are take much info form Sean Reid's site reidreviews.com since it's his income to do these tests, but he has a thorough study of this lens he posted a few months a go. For the color casting, it's good news though. With no lens detection, it still does quite well with only very minor blue shift on left frame and very minor red shift on right at f/8 (smaller aperture, worse the shift, so at 1.8 its barely detectable)... you might not even notice in most shots. Coding this lens as 21 elmarit or summilux will over-correct, but coding it as 16-18-21 WATE is just about right, and reduces it even more. In sum, it's about the safest lens out there other than WATE for avoiding color correction. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted May 23, 2014 Share #3 Posted May 23, 2014 I have one. It's great on my M240 and was great on my M9. Big(ish). Heavy. I code mine as a 28mm Elmarit and need no correction afterwards. I tried all the 21mm settings and the WATE and found the 28mm to be better on both model cameras. Gordon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Leonil Posted June 1, 2014 Share #4 Posted June 1, 2014 I have one. It's great on my M240 and was great on my M9. Big(ish). Heavy. I code mine as a 28mm Elmarit and need no correction afterwards. I tried all the 21mm settings and the WATE and found the 28mm to be better on both model cameras. Gordon Im interested to see comparison shots when you code it as a 21mm 1.8 to a 28mm 2.8. Im also interested in getting this lens as my go to wide angle. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
epand56 Posted June 1, 2014 Author Share #5 Posted June 1, 2014 Leonil, you can't code the Ultron as 21/1.8, but you can code it as a Summilux 21/1.4 I did this and I'm quite satisfied with this. But Gordon put a flea in my hear, as we say here in Italy, and will try to code it as 28/2.8 to see the difference. The only problem I see is that when you take picture at an aperture wider than 2.8 it will not be stated in the picture Exif. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
epand56 Posted June 1, 2014 Author Share #6 Posted June 1, 2014 Two pictures of almost the same subject (handheld) at same focus, aperture and shutter time, with the CV Ultron 21/1.4 Aspherical. The first one is taken with the lens coded as a Summilux 21/1.4 Aspherical The second one is taken with the lens coded as an Elmarit 28/2.8 Aspherical As you can see on the wall on the right, there is a noticeable cyan drift that is absent on the picture coded as Summilux 21/1.4. The two picture are UNTOUCHED, just out of the camera. Focus is on the top of the watering can. Coded as Summilux 21/1.4 Aspherical 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! Coded as Elmarit 28/2.8 Aspherical Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Coded as Elmarit 28/2.8 Aspherical ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/227545-m-240-and-voigtlander-ultron-21mm-f18-asph/?do=findComment&comment=2601816'>More sharing options...
viramati Posted June 1, 2014 Share #7 Posted June 1, 2014 Advertisement (gone after registration) I have one and have it coded as the 21/2.8 1134. Have tried hand coding it using my D-coder but the M just doesn't want to read it so I do it manually with a preset (use the same code for the Cv12/5.6) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
epand56 Posted June 1, 2014 Author Share #8 Posted June 1, 2014 David, I have coded the Ultron 21/1.8 with a coder I bought several years ago from a friend here on the forum. It's similar to the D-coder, but works quite better. I've used a black enamel for air models and a very thin brush to mark the black dots and it is perfectly red by my M 240 as a Summilux 21/1.4. This is the coder I bought: BoPhoto.com: M8 coder - simple manual handcoding of M lenses Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jip Posted December 11, 2014 Share #9 Posted December 11, 2014 Does the Voigtlander lens have a groove in the lens mount so the paint stays in? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted December 11, 2014 Share #10 Posted December 11, 2014 Does the Voigtlander lens have a groove in the lens mount so the paint stays in? Yes though it is hard to get the M240 to read it. I have mine coded as the 21/2.8 and it works fine like that. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
epand56 Posted December 18, 2014 Author Share #11 Posted December 18, 2014 I had no problems at all in coding the Ultron 21 and making it read on my M240. I've used the M8 Coding simple device I've bought years ago from Bo Lorentzen. It always works fine. Here is a link: BoPhoto.com: M8 coder - simple manual handcoding of M lenses Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indergaard Posted December 22, 2014 Share #12 Posted December 22, 2014 Does the Voigtlander lens have a groove in the lens mount so the paint stays in? The copy that I purchased new about two months ago didn't have any grooves. But some people did report that the lens should have it. So it seems like this might be dependant on the copy you get. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted December 22, 2014 Share #13 Posted December 22, 2014 The copy that I purchased new about two months ago didn't have any grooves. But some people did report that the lens should have it. So it seems like this might be dependant on the copy you get. It should definitely have it as it has been a standard feature on Voigtlander M mount lenses for a while now. It is not so much a groove as a lower area on the mount. You can see it here halfway down the page http://lavidaleica.com/content/voigtlander-21mm-f18-ultron Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.