Jump to content

Voigtlander 35mm Ultron 1.7


Panic

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello to everybody

 

New to the forum.Registered here about a week ago. Recently bought a used M9 that i am anxiously waiting to arrive. Hopefully tomorrow is the day. I previously had an A7ii that i sold together with some lenses in order to fund the M9. The only M mount lens that i have at the moment is a Voigtlander 21mm f1.8. It worked great on the Sony. I'm currently selling it to fund a 35mm to own as my only lens. Which brings me to the topic title. Anybody has any experience with the 1.7? Good bad? Few reviews say its a good lens. Ifi do getto keep the 21mm, is a 35 to close to it andmaybe i should get a 50? I've never owned a 35mm before. Lots of 50's which sometimes i find a bit narrow..

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome to the forum.

 

35 is not too close to 21.

I recommend you keep your 21.

 

Never tried the Ultron 1.7, but photos I have seen are nice.

If you don't mind the size, you should consider a Nokton 35/1.2. In my opinion, the 35mm with the best quality/price in Leica world.

In the same price range, you may also consider a Zeiss ZM 35/2 (very Zeiss-isch :)).

Edited by CheshireCat
Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi Panic, congratulations on your M9!

 

One other point to consider when deciding between 35 or 50 is how you feel about the viewfinder framelines for each lens.  I find the 50 framelines a bit too small unless using a viewfinder magnifier (the x1.25 magnifier that I have helps).

 

The 35 Nokton 1.2 is well regarded, but quite a lump on the front of the camera compared to some of the smaller 35's.  I didn't hang on to mine for that reason.

 

I tried the new m mount 35 Ultron 1.7 and wasn't too keen on the feel of the focus ring, so perhaps try before you buy if you can.  I couldn't fault the test images that I took with it though - 'modern' in feel, i.e. sharp and contrasty even wide-open and it dealt with flare well without the screw-in lens hood that comes with it (that I wasn't using at the time).

 

If you keep your 21 I guess you'll need a hotshoe mounted viewfinder?  I think the M9 only has framelines out to 28mm.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Welcome - and congratulations on the imminent M9; my M9P gives me untold amounts of pleasure.

 

It's not clear whether you refer to the old or new Ultron 1.7; I have the old one and it's an excellent lens. As sharp as you could wish for, though wide-open it's probably not as sharp in the corners as a modern Leica, if that concerns you.

It's small, very easy to focus and cheap second-hand. There are stories of it coming apart after much usage; mine is fine so far, though the build quality is clearly not quite up to Leica standards. Mine doesn't get much use though as I'm very much a 50mm man - if it were my sole 35mm though I should be very happy with it. At it's low second-hand price you wouldn't need to sell your 21mm. Or even get an inexpensive Voigtländer 50 as well!

 

M9P, Ultron 35/1.7:

 

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!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There are stories of it coming apart after much usage; mine is fine so far, though the build quality is clearly not quite up to Leica standards.

 

I once had one of the earlier ltm 35mm Ultrons and the decorative ring around the front element came loose and unscrewed - the rest of it seemed well enough put together though.

 

In the end I sold it, but mostly because I wasn't too keen on the relatively short focus throw and 0.9m close focus distance.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

It's a fantastic lens, IMO. I have the LTM version, with a coded M-adapter.

 

Here are a few sample I took with it:

 

8613929969_e9f1254b90_b.jpg

L'Ebauchoir, September 29, 2007 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

 

8022061121_35a0a4fa78_b.jpg

Dad and Domino, August 31, 2007 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

 

6853082648_731955fef1_b.jpg

Stockholm Tiger, October 07, 2007 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

 

6083320060_f2f70a83a9_b.jpg

Walter MC, August 21, 2011 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

 

5677156915_f612e30b1b_b.jpg

Blossom, April 30, 2011 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

 

14557961863_120f42f5f3_b.jpg

Inconsolable, Paris, September 29, 2007 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

 

25328071341_b7620ecafc_b.jpg

Jemma And Her Raccoon, February 25, 2016 by Maggie Osterberg, on Flickr

Edited by Maggie_O
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The new version is an entirely different design. Not that the old one is flawed, but the new lens seems to have been partly designed to work well on the Sonys. It's a very good lens, but you want to check your copy, as a few have been decentered. Look for uneven corners in a landscape situation. You see lots of people testing with charts, a nice infinity landscape from a high spot, rooftop or hill and several different perspectives is what i prefer.

Edited by uhoh7
Link to post
Share on other sites

It wouldn't be fair of me to make a thorough assessment of Version I of this lens based on one sample, but a new old stock sample I tested was average at best and often below that. I'm a fan of many VC lenses but Ver I of the 35mm f1.7 wasn't one of them. It wasn't decentering or soft corners but simply a lack of overall good sharpness across most of the frame and generally lackluster performance.

 

Based on comments here and inages from others with this lens I've seen, my sample might have been atypical.

 

The newly revised lens appears to be marketly i.proved and a steller performer in its price range.

 

Dave (D&A)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • 3 months later...
  • 2 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...