Jump to content
ramarren

a mini-digital SWC ... Leica CL + Voigtländer 10mm

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The Hasselblad SWC has been my gold standard in what I like in an ultra-wide camera for many years. Nowadays, I appreciate an all digital solution for the ease in use and the post processing options, but it proves difficult to get the kind of imaging that the lovely Biogon 38mm f/4.5 T* provides. 

I've also got a thing going where the equipment I want to carry must be light and compact because I spend so much of my time out and about riding a bicycle nowadays. Because of this, the Leica CL (digital) has become my standard camera in so many ways, generally fitted with Leica R or M mount lenses. 

Well, the small format requires a very short focal length lens to achieve the SWC's 73x73 degree angle of view when cropped square, and there are few of these around. I decided to give the Voigtländer Hyper-Wide 10mm f/5.6 a try; the 10mm nets approximately 77x77 degree AoV cropped square so it's quite close. The lens arrived two days ago; I had the chance to carry it on my bicycle ride Saturday morning and do some testing. 


Leica CL + Voigtländer 10mm f/5.6
ISO 100 @ f/8 @ 1/100

Some preliminary testing proved to me that:

  • The CL with M Adapter L mount adapter proves to be right on the money with mount registration. This is important because with a 10mm f/5.6 lens, TTL viewing/focusing is mostly silly unless you're working right up at the closest focusing distance provided by the lens mount. 
  • Diffraction means that although the lens can stop down to f/22, you're tossing most of its resolution down the tubes once you pass f/11. It looks like the best performing lens opening is between f/8 and f/11, there's little change between f/5.6 and f/8 anyway. 
  • A small amount of lateral chromatic aberration is there, but easily eliminated by nearly any image processing tools these days. Longitudinal chromatic aberration is very low, and resolution holds right to the corners and edges of the APS-C format (haven't done any testing on FF yet). Flare resistance also seems very good.


Leica CL + Voigtländer 10mm f/5.6
ISO 100 @ f/8 @ 1/160

Beyond that, the CL + V10mm proves to be handily sized, light, and ergonomically very nice ... better than the WATE, to me, and certainly a huge lot less to cart about than the CL+Super-Elmar-R 15mm. I haven't done comparisons yet, but I'm curious to see the differences when I get to that. 

By and large, I'm cautiously optimistic that this lens will complete my Leica CL kit nicely and provide that "mini-digital SWC" I've been seeking. And yes, I know that the native Leica TL-11-23mm is another very very fine lens that would do nearly the same, but it's three times the cost, much bulkier, difficult to get at present, and... well, I just don't really like zoom lenses all that much. :)

enjoy
G

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, ramarren said:

The Hasselblad SWC has been my gold standard in what I like in an ultra-wide camera for many years.

It all started so innocently.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It did, didn't it? When you loaned me your SWC, all those years ago, it was like a bolt of lightning hit me. I'd wanted an SWC since 1968. Playing with yours for a month or so, I realized I had to have one of my own... :D

Some obsessions are worth pursuing! 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, ramarren said:

Well, the small format requires a very short focal length lens to achieve the SWC's 73x73 degree angle of view when cropped square, and there are few of these around. I decided to give the Voigtländer Hyper-Wide 10mm f/5.6 a try; the 10mm nets approximately 77x77 degree AoV cropped square so it's quite close. The lens arrived two days ago; I had the chance to carry it on my bicycle ride Saturday morning and do some testing. 

I too dearly miss my old Hasselblad, but like you found a great digital compromise is my Leica M10 and a cropped image with a wide angle lens. Maybe I'm mistaken but didn't the 38mm Biogon have an angle of view closer to 91 degrees?  Cheers, jc

  Leica M10, Zeiss ZM 21mm Biogon

Edited by jkcampbell2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Love that photo! :)

Yes, I used to do this same thing using the WATE on the M-P240 and the Super-Elmar-R 15mm on the SL, the CL body has proven lighter, smaller, and more to my liking for most uses. Regards the FoV, using Rui Salgueiro's on-line field-of-view calculator shows the Hasselblad SWC with Biogon 38mm f/4.5 T* with these specs: 

Width = 56 mm, Length = 56 mm, Diagonal = 79.196 mm
  f      Hor       Vert      Diag
 38.0    72.7687   72.7687   92.3595

A 21mm lens on 35mm (FF) format provides the same diagonal, but completely different image proportions.

Width = 24 mm, Length = 36 mm, Diagonal = 43.2666 mm
  f      Hor       Vert      Diag
 21.0    81.2026   59.4898   91.7021

 
So cropped square, 21mm is only going to give you 59x59 degrees, nowhere near the same feel as the SWC. The closest match is about a 16-17mm lens. On the CL's APS-C cropped square, the Voigtländer 10mm is quite close as well: 

Width = 16 mm, Length = 16 mm, Diagonal = 22.6274 mm
  f      Hor       Vert      Diag
 10.0    77.3196   77.3196   97.0541

Of course, on these small formats you're never going to get the kind of subject isolation via focus zone that you can with a 38/4.5 lens on 56x56 format, but I can work with that. The resulting 16 mPixel image file is large enough for my printing needs. The remaining piece of the puzzle is getting the Biogon's superb edge and corner resolution and rectilinear correction—and that's where I'm the most pleased with the Voigtländer 10mm performance on APS-C. It is really very tight on both specs given the format. I haven't tried it on FF format yet, I hear it's darn good even there, but the CL is my primary target body for this lens and it looks like it actually outperforms both the WATE and the Super-Elmar-R 15 on FF in some respects ... possibly the result of the CL's outstanding sensor. :

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Haven't had any experience with the CV 10mm, but tried the CV 15mm v.1, and found it rather delightful. Great sweeps, sharp enough. 

 

Edited by geoffreyg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 minutes ago, geoffreyg said:

Haven't had any experience with the CV 10mm, but tried the CV 15mm v.1, and found it rather delightful. Great sweeps, sharp enough. 

 

You might be surprised by how much better the 10mm is.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, ramarren said:

Love that photo! :)

Yes, I used to do this same thing using the WATE on the M-P240 and the Super-Elmar-R 15mm on the SL, the CL body has proven lighter, smaller, and more to my liking for most uses. Regards the FoV, using Rui Salgueiro's on-line field-of-view calculator shows the Hasselblad SWC with Biogon 38mm f/4.5 T* with these specs: 

Width = 56 mm, Length = 56 mm, Diagonal = 79.196 mm
  f      Hor       Vert      Diag
 38.0    72.7687   72.7687   92.3595

A 21mm lens on 35mm (FF) format provides the same diagonal, but completely different image proportions.

Width = 24 mm, Length = 36 mm, Diagonal = 43.2666 mm
  f      Hor       Vert      Diag
 21.0    81.2026   59.4898   91.7021

 
So cropped square, 21mm is only going to give you 59x59 degrees, nowhere near the same feel as the SWC. The closest match is about a 16-17mm lens. On the CL's APS-C cropped square, the Voigtländer 10mm is quite close as well: 

Width = 16 mm, Length = 16 mm, Diagonal = 22.6274 mm
  f      Hor       Vert      Diag
 10.0    77.3196   77.3196   97.0541

Of course, on these small formats you're never going to get the kind of subject isolation via focus zone that you can with a 38/4.5 lens on 56x56 format, but I can work with that. The resulting 16 mPixel image file is large enough for my printing needs. The remaining piece of the puzzle is getting the Biogon's superb edge and corner resolution and rectilinear correction—and that's where I'm the most pleased with the Voigtländer 10mm performance on APS-C. It is really very tight on both specs given the format. I haven't tried it on FF format yet, I hear it's darn good even there, but the CL is my primary target body for this lens and it looks like it actually outperforms both the WATE and the Super-Elmar-R 15 on FF in some respects ... possibly the result of the CL's outstanding sensor. :

Thanks for the detailed explanation! I've been using the Zeiss 21mm Biogon thinking that the 90 degree AOV was a close match to the SWC. This lens is super sharp and cropping to a square takes care of the "red edge" on the sides leaving me with plenty of sharpness out to the corners. Of course I'm using it exclusively for B&W, this also covers up some of the flaws of the ZM Biogon on a digital sensor.  I also have the Zeiss 18mm ZM so I'll give that a try also. Sure wish I still had my old SWC, it was a magical camera. Cheers, jc

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, geoffreyg said:

Haven't had any experience with the CV 10mm, but tried the CV 15mm v.1, and found it rather delightful. Great sweeps, sharp enough. 

 

 

2 hours ago, pico said:

You might be surprised by how much better the 10mm is.
 

Frankly, my only hesitation in buying the 10mm was that when I had the 15mm v1, I found the edges and corners too mushy to be useful. That was on film, on FF 35mm film, of course ... I had that lens in the 1990s. 

At least on APS-C format, the 10mm is proving to be superb, truly outstanding for an ultra-ultra wide focal length. I had it out again today and I'm pretty amazed at how flexible and how handy this lens is for an ultra wide. I'll have to fit it to my M-D and give it a whirl there to see what its performance is like on digital FF. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, jkcampbell2 said:

Thanks for the detailed explanation! I've been using the Zeiss 21mm Biogon thinking that the 90 degree AOV was a close match to the SWC. This lens is super sharp and cropping to a square takes care of the "red edge" on the sides leaving me with plenty of sharpness out to the corners. Of course I'm using it exclusively for B&W, this also covers up some of the flaws of the ZM Biogon on a digital sensor.  I also have the Zeiss 18mm ZM so I'll give that a try also. Sure wish I still had my old SWC, it was a magical camera. Cheers, jc

There's something about the SWC field of view with the square proportions that just suits me well, fits my eye naturally. I was out with the camera and this lens again today and I saw dozens of photo opportunities for it that I'd never seen with longer focal lengths, despite that they were pretty darn wide already. 

I sold my second SWC back to the guy I bought it from recently because I found that I simply didn't use it and he really wanted it again. I'll miss it, but nowhere near as much as I missed my first one, because nowadays it's just not the right camera for me any more. I need smaller, lighter, and handier to carry; and for most use I need the full digital capture workflow. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, jkcampbell2 said:

I too dearly miss my old Hasselblad, but like you found a great digital compromise is my Leica M10 and a cropped image with a wide angle lens. Maybe I'm mistaken but didn't the 38mm Biogon have an angle of view closer to 91 degrees?  Cheers, jc

  Leica M10, Zeiss ZM 21mm Biogon

Fabulous image, thanks for posting.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
6 hours ago, ramarren said:

 

Frankly, my only hesitation in buying the 10mm was that when I had the 15mm v1, I found the edges and corners too mushy to be useful. That was on film, on FF 35mm film, of course ... I had that lens in the 1990s. 

At least on APS-C format, the 10mm is proving to be superb, truly outstanding for an ultra-ultra wide focal length. I had it out again today and I'm pretty amazed at how flexible and how handy this lens is for an ultra wide. I'll have to fit it to my M-D and give it a whirl there to see what its performance is like on digital FF. :)

Sounds like very good fun, a good find. Like yours, my 15mm v1 had soft edges which showed up on FF. But its fine with the crop on the CL. Curiously the CV 21 (at least my copy) is also soft on the edges, still evident on the CL. The 21 SEM is, of course, exemplary regardless of the platform - but the little CV 15, like your CV 10, is small, flexible and very easy to use. Great stuff. 

Edited by geoffreyg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I put the lens on the M-D for a few minutes this morning for a quick check, snapping a shot in my office hand-held and then the same shot with the CL. 

  • It's amazing how much FoV it produces with FF format!
  • Albeit the ISO was set way too high for a decent hand-held shutter time to make any clear comparison, the corners and edges look pretty good even with FF. 
  • The LR 6.14 lens profile for this lens makes a MUCH bigger difference with a FF capture than with an APS-C capture... as expected. 

I just processed a few more exposures from Saturday and Sunday. I'll post them to this thread later on when I have a little more time to finish them up. But I have to say: I'm more than just pleased! I think this is The One I've been looking for to do my ultra-wide square ideas. And even some more 2:3 and even 10:16 work... :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A few more photos from my first outing on Saturday. 

All with the Leica CL + Voigtlander Hyper-Wide 10mm f/5.6

enjoy!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, ramarren said:

I put the lens on the M-D for a few minutes this morning for a quick check, snapping a shot in my office hand-held and then the same shot with the CL. 

  • It's amazing how much FoV it produces with FF format!
  • Albeit the ISO was set way too high for a decent hand-held shutter time to make any clear comparison, the corners and edges look pretty good even with FF. 
  • The LR 6.14 lens profile for this lens makes a MUCH bigger difference with a FF capture than with an APS-C capture... as expected. 

I did a further test of the lens fitted to the Leica M-D, tripod mounted, at the camera's base ISO 200. The amount of detail it returns at the corners and edges of the frame is excellent. There's just the smallest amount of lateral CA ... which LR cleans up perfectly ... and a tiny hair of edge highlight (longitudinal CA) on extreme high contrast boundaries. 

Very satisfying and pleasing ... :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One wee question to ask , (btw....Fabulous Captures with it! ❤️ )   Does the rear element foul the cl sensor surround at infinity focus???

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you, John!

No: No part of the V10 ever protrudes past the mounting flange of the M Adapter L, and there are no marks in my camera to indicate that the rear element retainer ever comes in contact with the CL body at all. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Answering the question, "What's the first thing I did after opening the Voigtländer 10mm box...?" 


Leica CL + Voigtländer Hyper-Wide 10mm f/5.6
ISO 100 @ f/5.6 @ 1/10

Just saw the latest Hasselblad announcement. Love the modular system ... updated 50mPixel back, new body, compatibility with XCD and V system lenses ... Yeah! Just what I like out of Hasselblad. Whether I buy one or not remains a mystery for the future to resolve, but my Hasselblad V system is not for sale.  :D

After all, I'm having too much fun with what I just bought to take much too seriously ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

BTW Sean Reid https://www.reidreviews.com has reviewed the C-V 10, 12 and 15 lenses in M-mount, on the CL, with many interesting observations.  If you are considering one of these lenses it is well worth investing in his modest subscription charge to read what he says.

Edited by rob_w

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Is Sean going to tell me something that I cannot discover about the 10mm already, since I have both it and the CL? I'm not going to buy either a 12 or a 15 mm ... Don't need a 12mm, and I have the Super-Elmar-R 15mm for when I want that focal length. 🙂

 

Edited by ramarren

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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.

Loading...

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...