sootyvrs Posted July 19, 2015 Share #1 Posted July 19, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I currently own the CV 15mm v3 and happy with it but curious to know if anyone has compared it to the WATE (more at 16mm) in relation to rendering, Vignetting (uncorrected), CA and sharpness across the frame Just working out if it's worth adding an additional 21mm lens to bridge the gap between 15mm & 35mm or to pay the extra and get the WATE that can save changing lenses... I think I can perhaps live with losing 1mm focal length Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted July 19, 2015 Posted July 19, 2015 Hi sootyvrs, Take a look here WATE vs Voigtlander 15mm v3?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
jrp Posted July 19, 2015 Share #2 Posted July 19, 2015 The current Leica 21mms are stunning, in different ways. An advantage of the WATE is that it is one of the few wide angles that play nicely with Sony and other mirrorless bodies. Check out http://3dkraft.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=148:ultra-wide-angle-m-mount-lenses-on-sony-a7r&catid=40:camerasandlenses&Itemid=2 And http://3dkraft.de/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=171:adorable-uwas-zeiss-leica-voigtlander-olympus&catid=40:camerasandlenses&Itemid=2 For some samples. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdlaing Posted July 19, 2015 Share #3 Posted July 19, 2015 WATE Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoanP Posted July 19, 2015 Share #4 Posted July 19, 2015 I have the CV III and love it. I'm thinking about adding a 21mm SEM for more serious architecture and landscapes. I like the CV but think of it as my "wacky" lens when I want super wide with distortion type shots. I like the idea of the 21mm SEM due to size and amazing optics. I'm sure the WATE is an excellent choice as well. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sootyvrs Posted July 20, 2015 Author Share #5 Posted July 20, 2015 Thanks, I've seen the review of the WATE plus others and it confirms to say that the WATE is indeed an excellent lens (as expected by Leica) but I was hoping for a comparison as the CV15 v3 is also very good and designed for the digital era so wondering if it brings something to the table to justify the very expensive price tag. I have no problems replacing the CV15 with the WATE but wanted to know from anyone with experience of both before I take the plunge. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jrp Posted July 20, 2015 Share #6 Posted July 20, 2015 Leica lenses are always a multiple of the price of Voigtlanders. The WATE offers a choice of focal lengths a a slightly faster lens at the expense of bulk and cost. I don't think that in real world shooting, in terms of image performance, you will find the Leica noticeably better, and it will probably be worse than the Voigtlander at the edges. So it's more a matter of how much you a prepared to pay to avoid the chore of lens swapping. Or should I say, potential chore, because I suspect that many will use these varifocal lenses predominantly at one or other extreme. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
rramesh Posted July 27, 2015 Share #7 Posted July 27, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) If you can buy a WATE at a good price, there's nothing like it. It's compact, versatile, with excellent performance and it will hold it's value well into the future. After all who makes a WATE equivalent these days? And you are getting 3 lenses in one, unlike the Voigtlander 15. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted July 27, 2015 Share #8 Posted July 27, 2015 Thanks, I've seen the review of the WATE plus others and it confirms to say that the WATE is indeed an excellent lens (as expected by Leica) but I was hoping for a comparison as the CV15 v3 is also very good and designed for the digital era so wondering if it brings something to the table to justify the very expensive price tag. I have no problems replacing the CV15 with the WATE but wanted to know from anyone with experience of both before I take the plunge. I'm not sure what you mean, "and (the CV15 v3) designed for the digital era." I have the WATE and it is excellent and the corners are very sharp, maybe the sharpest of the ultra wide Leica lenses. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sootyvrs Posted July 27, 2015 Author Share #9 Posted July 27, 2015 Thanks all for your input... I meant the CV15 v3 was redesigned by Voigtlander especially for digital sensors to minimise edge colour casting and smearing.. I read they actually done something similar to the WATE where the exit pupil is further away from the sensor hence why it's a lot larger than the CV v1 & 2.. I did manage to speak to someone on FM forum who has both the WATE and the CV v3 and here are his comments for anyone who also maybe considering either lens. "Hi,I think for the money, CV 15 iii is a much much better value than WATE at 16mm. WATE is a bit sharper, a bit better contrast but the difference is not that big. Sure some people will feel that WATE is better and worth the difference. Personally, if WATE is just a straight 16mm lens, I would not feel very strongly about it over CV 15 iii. However, you can definitely see the difference here and there. On the other hand WATE is not as good as Leica 18/3.8, 21/3.4 but these 2 lenses do not play well with A7r as far as I know. I would say that at least with Sony, WATE is worth the price for the flexibility. It is not easy to just have 15mm lens to do everything for you and I ended up changing lenses frequently ulike walking around with 35mm or 50mm. With WATE I get a bit more IQ but much more flexibility but for a price. It is also just a bit bigger and does not weight that much more than CV 15 iii. So if you have the budget for it, I would go for it butdon't expect a huge increase in IQ at 16mm." walking around with 35mm or 50mm. With WATE I get a bit more IQ but much more flexibility but for a price. It is also just a bit bigger and does not weight that much more than CV 15 iii. So if you have the budget for it, I would go for it butdon't expect a huge increase in IQ at 16mm. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick Posted July 27, 2015 Share #10 Posted July 27, 2015 I meant the CV15 v3 was redesigned by Voigtlander especially for digital sensors to minimise edge colour casting and smearing.. walking around with 35mm or 50mm. With WATE I get a bit more IQ but much more flexibility but for a price. It is also just a bit bigger and does not weight that much more than CV 15 iii. So if you have the budget for it, I would go for it but don't expect a huge increase in IQ at 16mm. The WATE was designed from the start for a digital sensor, the M8. I believe it could have better edge sharpness than the 18/3.8 or the 21/3.4 because of this. All are fantastic lenses. The WATE has high contrast, sharpness, and wonderful color. Distortion is a bit more than the aforementioned lenses, but difficult to detect in most shooting situations. The ability to also have 18 and 21 focals is really why I bought this lens. Always with me when traveling. Recommended. Good luck. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.