voigtlander 28mm f2 better then 35mm 1.4(that disappointed me) ?

[leicatraveller]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

i tried the voigtlander 35mm 1.4 and i didn't like at all on M240, its very soft at f1.4 /f2

maybe the sample i tried was not such good copy , maybe to try another copy? 35mm 1.2 is too big i want something compact and 50mm is too long, so there is just 28-35mm

 

i was thinking instead about the ultron 28mm f2, how it perform? anyway it look also hard to find

 

thanx to all

[leicatraveller]

ps any info about the old voigtlander 28mm 1.9?

[epand56]

I had the CV Ultron 28/2 and sold it very soon because of a focus shift i didn't like at all.

I bought the CV Ultron 28/1.9 Aspherical instead and it is an helluva lens. I'm very satisfied with it. It is an Ltm lens so you need an M39 to M adapter, but it works like charm.

 

http://mlb-s2-p.mlstatic.com/lente-voigtlander-ultron-28mm-f19-aspherical-para-leica-m-12524-MLB20061536589_032014-F.jpg

[xalo]

I like the lower contrast, but very sharp CV 28/1,9 a lot. In my view it comes closer to the Leica drawing I prefer than other CVs (compared to 21/4, 25/4, 35/2,5, which I had at least and judging from the web). If sharp enough for you wide open or at ƒ2, I don't know; neither how it works on a digital M (240).

On my Epson RD-1 it works beautifully, but tends to coma and flare. The sensor plays a big role. I prefer the lens on film. As many lower contrast lenses, it does have a tendency to flare, though. Cheap enough now to try and sell basically without loss.

Alexander

 

P.S.: I'm a slow writer ;-)

[leicatraveller]

I like the lower contrast, but very sharp CV 28/1,9 a lot. In my view it comes closer to the Leica drawing I prefer than other CVs (compared to 21/4, 25/4, 35/2,5, which I had at least and judging from the web). If sharp enough for you wide open or at ƒ2, I don't know; neither how it works on a digital M (240).

On my Epson RD-1 it works beautifully, but tends to coma and flare. The sensor plays a big role. I prefer the lens on film. As many lower contrast lenses, it does have a tendency to flare, though. Cheap enough now to try and sell basically without loss.

Alexander

 

P.S.: I'm a slow writer ;-)

 

yeah i m afraid that on e 24mp full frame sensor (or in a 36mp on A7r) performance can be much different then on a 6mp ape-c sensor

 

anyway its not so easy to find this lens (used since new its not anymore in production)

[xalo]

Actually, I should add that the CV 28/1,9' performance on the RD-1 has probably nothing to do with the resolution of either lens or sensor. There seem to be other interactions at work (microlenses?), which also affect lenses like the Summilux 35 pre-asph and Summicron 35 iv. FWIW (since it is not such an important criterion in my view), the CV is a high resolution lens, with very detailed rendering and less flare issues on a 18mp APS-C (Eos-M) for instance than on the RD-1, not to speak of film.

Perhaps Enrico used in on FF?

I'd take the fact that it's not overly present on the used market as a token for quality ;-)

Best,

Alexander

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

i tried the voigtlander 35mm 1.4 and i didn't like at all on M240, its very soft at f1.4 /f2

maybe the sample i tried was not such good copy , maybe to try another copy? 35mm 1.2 is too big i want something compact and 50mm is too long, so there is just 28-35mm

 

i was thinking instead about the ultron 28mm f2, how it perform? anyway it look also hard to find

 

thanx to all

 

The CV 35mm f/1.4 is a reasonable copy of the Canadian pre-Asph Summicron, and that is also soft wide open. A lot of lenses are soft wide open.

 

The CV 28mm f/2 Ultron isn't as good as the earlier f/1.9 version, it has significant aperture related focus shift.

 

If you want compact lenses consider the 35mm Color Skopar f/2.5 or the 28mm Color Skopar f/3.5, both very sharp usable lenses.

 

Steve

[CheshireCat]

A Zeiss Biogon 35/2 perhaps ?

[leicatraveller]

A Zeiss Biogon 35/2 perhaps ?

 

i didnt consider this lens , but for what i m reading its a very good lens

[CheshireCat]

i didnt consider this lens , but for what i m reading its a very good lens

 

It is.

You may find this thread interesting:

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-lenses/333387-m9-35mm-biogon-f-2-vs.html

[microview]

i didn't consider this lens , but for what i m reading its a very good lens

 

The 35/f2.8 came out in Sean Reid's tests as superior [to the f2]. I had a 35/2.8 Summaron (beautifully made) and the resolution was indistinguishable. Nice copies sell at around £690 in the UK at present.