Ultra-wide Voigtländers: experiences/opinions?

[james.liam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

These crazy lenses (10, 12 & 15mm) cover 130˚, 121˚ and 110˚ respectively. Quite a leap from my widest lens, the 21 SEM (91˚ AOV). 

-Is the 15mm AOV that noticeably greater in practice?

-Any experience out there with the 12mm? The non-RF coupled 10 seems to be too crazy to consider (too much landscape to cover).

The 10 & 12 are now discontinued and interested in hearing opinions about them before they 'go away'. Cameraquest in LA is selling off its stock of the 12mm @ US$450 which seems to be a bargain.

[otto.f]

I owned an Elmarit 21mm and own the VC 15mm. I sold the Elmarit because the angle was not my thing, I prefer a 24. I also had the 18 and this was neither an angle to fall in love with. For me. The 15mm however is a very easy lens for me, somehow compositions mostly work out fine, even without the separate viewer. So between 24 and 15 I don’t need anything. I still have an eye on the VC 12mm, because the colors are great and it has a smooth sharpness, like the 15mm. I feel this 15mm belongs in my package and I will never sell it. I think it is because the angle fits well for cityscapes with piazza’s, architecture but landscapes also quite often.

Edited December 31, 2019 by otto.f

[adan]

Most of my experience is with the original screw-mount 15 (and a few trials with the original 12mm).

Getting the original 15mm and Bessa-L (external finder only) 20 years ago was what pushed me to dump all my SLRs and go almost entirely to viewfinder cameras (eventually Leicas). The freedom of just pointing a window at the world and popping the shutter was so - liberating!

I kept that 15mm through the M8 era - it made a perfect, ultra-compact "20mm" on the M8 crop.

But to your points:

I find the 15mm focal length to be just right as the "next step" below a 21mm. But I like a quasi-Fibonacci (more accurately, odd-numbered) spacing to my lenses, sometimes. i.e. 135/50/28/21/15 lenses producing nested framing-ratios of (approximately) 1:3:5:7:9 (Base image with original 15mm on M6 and film).

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!

I had a chance to try the newer, more digital-friendly 15mm v.III M-mount a couple of years ago - a competent lens. Clean and sharp enough for professional work. It wasn't on my shopping list at the time, so I didn't get it - a missed opportunity.

A full-frame 15mm image cropped square is slightly wider than a Hasselblad SWC 38mm Biogon image (original 15mm on M9):

Edited December 31, 2019 by adan

[romanus53]

agree with adan: 15 mm V3 is a good lens I use when shooting some architecture or interiors while travelling, the 1st screw-mount version was pretty soft in the corrners. I also have the 12 mm but in screw-mount so soft edges also but wide on the M8; the magenta-shift towards the corners can be easily adjusted in C1, the 15 mm V3 doesn't even show that.

[spydrxx]

I had the CV 15, but found that in practice it was too wide for my tastes...and it was easy to introduce undesired perspective, but that was just me. The lens itself was just fine.

[james.liam]

So no love for the 12?

[01af]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Yes, 15 mm is much wider than 21 mm and most definitely can create new and different vistas. And the same is true for the 12 mm lens (in comparison to 15 mm).

For decades, I always wanted to own the widest lens available for my camera. Except the 10 mm. In my opinion, that's too wide (in 35-mm format). The projective distortions ruin most pictures. Granted—if you get a good view then it can be spectacular ... but getting a good view with 10 mm is awfully difficult. In that regard, it's even worse than a fish-eye lens. To me, the ultra-wide range from 15 mm to 12 mm makes sense, but 10 mm does not. That said, great 10 mm pictures do exist. But they are rare. I am happy with my Tri-Elmar-M 16-18-21 mm Asph lens. That gives me all the wide angles I am ever going to need.

Edited December 31, 2019 by 01af

[a.noctilux]

I happen to use 12mm and 15mm.

Historically they were purchased for M8 (to have about 21mm and a bit wider field, then).

When on M9 and later, I still keep them for sporious use.

Too large for my taste and difficult to frame correctly with the added viewfinder.

I discovered the best VF ( Zoomfinder ) I understood by then that the difficult framing came from the viewfinder (distortion or accuracy ? ).

 

But when I use M10 with LV, they become "good for service" again.

 

I think corner distortion can be a concern.

This is from M9 (sorry, I don't remember 12mm or 15mm ) to show that there are too many "subjects" in the frame

(with cutting legs not "seen" when I framed the picture)

 

Bretagne 2013

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!

Edited December 31, 2019 by a.noctilux

[PCPix]

15mm version III is a nice lens, use it with the 16mm coding (for the WATE) in the M10 menu and it’s even better. I use the round metal Voigtlander optical finder and sometimes live view and have never really felt the need for the wider options.

Then again, no other system has 10 and 12mm lenses available to them, so maybe you need the 12 - just because 😉

[farnz]

7 hours ago, james.liam said:

The non-RF coupled 10 seems to be too crazy to consider (too much landscape to cover).

It depends how you use it.  Getting close to subjects, rather than the intuitive 'great wide landscapes', can produce interesting results providing the camera is kept level because keystoning becomes evident with small vertical movements.  For me it's a really fun lens that encourages me to think outside the box and think through shots before taking them.  Both below shot hand-held with Voigtlander 10/5.6 Ultra-wide Helliar and M10 using the rear screen to focus, compose, and keep level.

Pete.

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!

 

 

 

 

[david strachan]

Those are beaut pics by Pete...and his hint to use a live-view is pertinent.

Very careful composition is needed for ultra wides...after post fixing doesn't always work.

...

[paulcurtis]

I have the CV 12mm original version and had the 15 at one point too.

I used them extensively with an APS-C sensor but on full frame they're not as useful. Having said that i love the way the 12mm draws and close focus is fun. It's a unique look, that's for sure. But as i mentioned, on full frame i generally don't find myself reaching for anything wider than 21mm unless i'm looking for something really unusual.

cheers
Paul

[Simone_DF]

On 12/31/2019 at 9:01 PM, PCPix said:

Then again, no other system has 10 and 12mm lenses available to them, so maybe you need the 12 - just because 😉

Are you sure?

https://www.venuslens.net/shop/

[michali]

On 12/31/2019 at 9:20 PM, james.liam said:

So no love for the 12?

I have a vers. 1 C/V 12mm Ultra Heliar, I used it a lot more on the M8, these days it doesn't get as much use. Great little lens & fun to use, as mentioned by Paul above.

 

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!