Voigtlander APO-LANTHAR 35mm f/2 Aspherical VM

[Guest]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I think leica have "sold out " somewhat with the convoluted closer focus.

For me they should have simply concentrated on producing a top class rangefinder lens like the 50mm apo is said to be.

[lecycliste]

In an age when almost every new lens between 14mm and 100mm focuses down to 11" or closer, it's time Leica upped their game. Yes, the M-rangefinder camera is more or less a 1954 design, from a time when a lot more imprecision in framing, focusing and exposure accuracy was tolerated. But today's user wants the small size and optical quality of a Leica M and its lenses. If they get modern lens usability and performance, that user is willing to put up with a little extra effort in using the M-camera and lenses. 

Edited April 10, 2021 by lecycliste

[Guest]

56 minutes ago, lecycliste said:

In an age when almost every new lens between 14mm and 100mm focuses down to 11" or closer, it's time Leica upped their game. Yes, the M-rangefinder camera is more or less a 1954 design, from a time when a lot more imprecision in framing, focusing and exposure accuracy was tolerated. But today's user wants the small size and optical quality of a Leica M and its lenses. If they get modern lens usability and performance, that user is willing to put up with a little extra effort in using the M-camera and lenses. 

Which full frame cameras are small though? 

I have no idea myself because its not of interest but from what i have seen they are getting bigger including leica m lenses.

[t00l1024]

14 hours ago, Steven said:

The photos at 30cm looks so spectacular it could even make some dog poo look good 🤪

I was actually tempted to do this, but thought.... eh... not exactly the lasting impression to make as a relatively new person here.

I'm really gonna dig this lens. Light here was super harsh, heavy contrast. f/2.8 on the M10M. I reduced the contrast and attempted to pull back some highlights. My young, 2 year old "subject" doesn't like to stay still either. Makes for some fun focusing.

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 April 11, 2021 by t00l1024
spelling

[otto.f]

5 hours ago, t00l1024 said:

really gonna dig this lens

Are we still talking about APO Lanthar here? 

[250swb]

9 hours ago, lecycliste said:

In an age when almost every new lens between 14mm and 100mm focuses down to 11" or closer, it's time Leica upped their game. Yes, the M-rangefinder camera is more or less a 1954 design, 

Didn't Leica 'up their game' in around 1954 with the OUFRO close up adapter? There's now even a 'M Adapter' if you can't find an original OUFRO. And all your lenses become close focus.

[tgray]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 4/9/2021 at 10:26 AM, Alan Friedman said:

The Apo-Lanthar is longer, lighter and will leave your wallet seven thousand dollars heavier.

The amount of dollars left over wouldn't even fit in my wallet.

[t00l1024]

9 hours ago, otto.f said:

Are we still talking about APO Lanthar here? 

Yes. Sun is now up here, time to go out and shoot. 

[lecycliste]

15 hours ago, 250swb said:

Didn't Leica 'up their game' in around 1954 with the OUFRO close up adapter? There's now even a 'M Adapter' if you can't find an original OUFRO. And all your lenses become close focus.

When you're in a windy, dusty environment, or there's not much time to get the shot, you don't want to be unmounting a lens to put on extension rings. I have an original 16469Y / OUFRO in my bag, and it's stayed there for years. It was originally designed for use on the Visoflex II / III, the reflex mirrorbox kludge for Leica M film cameras. The Visoflex II and III made no sense in an era of dedicated SLR cameras. The 16469Y became usable with Leica M-cameras with live view, the M Typ 240 and everything after. I've used it for indoor product shots with a 75mm f/2 APO-Summicron-M ASPH on an M10 with live view. That's about it.

Again, if I'm going for closeups in a fast-paced or dusty / windy environment, I'm not going to slap on a closeup ring. I want a lens that gets me there to begin with, for general overall use. That's one reason the 16-18-21/4 Tri-Elmar-M ASPH, 25/2.8 Biogon T* and 35/1.2 Nokton II made a lot of sense for me at those focal lengths. They all focus down to 19"-20".

And most extension rings are way too long for wideangle lens use. You have to be unusably close when you put a 10mm extension on at, say, 21mm. 

Edited April 11, 2021 by lecycliste

[lct]

1 hour ago, lecycliste said:

Again, if I'm going for closeups in a fast-paced or dusty / windy environment, I'm not going to slap on a closeup ring. I want a lens that gets me there to begin with, for general overall use. That's one reason the 16-18-21/4 Tri-Elmar-M ASPH, 25/2.8 Biogon T* and 35/1.2 Nokton II made a lot of sense for me at those focal lengths. They all focus down to 19"-20".
And most extension rings are way too long for wideangle lens use. You have to be unusably close when you put a 10mm extension on at, say, 21mm.

+1. Leica did it in the sixties with lenses like Super-Angulon 21/3.4. Focusing all the way from 0.4m (even 0.2 or 0.3m on Sony bodies) to infinity can prove quite handy, especially to reduce DoF and get some bokeh with UWA lenses. CV did more or less the same with its 15/4.5, 21/4 and 21/3.5 lenses and even the CV 35/2 can go down to 0.58m.

[250swb]

7 hours ago, lct said:

+1. Leica did it in the sixties with lenses like Super-Angulon 21/3.4. Focusing all the way from 0.4m (even 0.2 or 0.3m on Sony bodies) to infinity can prove quite handy, especially to reduce DoF and get some bokeh with UWA lenses. CV did more or less the same with its 15/4.5, 21/4 and 21/3.5 lenses and even the CV 35/2 can go down to 0.58m.

But you are quoting lenses where focusing can be done based on the DOF scale, and CV lenses they aren't always what they seem, often the M mount lens was originally designed for another camera and simply adapted.

As regards the unsuitability of the OUFRO in post #155 it's an amusing thought that there may not be enough time to mount it, after all the photographer has to get their tripod set up as well, cable release screwed in, and then poof!, whatever it was has crawled away. I never thought the discipline of close up photography could be so frantic, or so habitually unplanned.

Edited April 12, 2021 by 250swb

[lct]

5 hours ago, 250swb said:

But you are quoting lenses where focusing can be done based on the DOF scale, and CV lenses they aren't always what they seem, often the M mount lens was originally designed for another camera and simply adapted.

Sure but i'm not sure to see your point. Leica could perfectly make a modern 21/3.4 with the same feature as the S-A. Down to 0.7m with RF and 0.4m with EVF no? As for LTM lenses adapted for the M mount, there are a lot of them including Leica's. Correct me if i'm wrong .

[250swb]

I'm sure Leica could do anything they liked, that they haven't felt the urge if it's apparently so easy maybe you could conclude that it's not so easy? I doubt it's actually difficult to design closer focus lenses, but that would be an increased focus throw of the lens, and for rangefinder users an annoying no-mans-land at the close end of the throw that makes it feel less like a precision camera or lens combination, more a dogs breakfast of design. The 'why don't Leica do.....' question comes up from time to time as a mechanical question but design is also about the overall system and how it works together based on how the camera is intended to be used.

So it isn't an accident that for fast focusing photographers get used to 'calibrating' where the infinity or close focus ends of the range are by hitting the stops and anticipating where and how much to turn the lens barrel from there. But now you don't want them to do that, you want a vague area at one end of the scale just so you can use your EVF and a longer focus throw to accommodate it. OK so you'll now say the new improved focus range can be crammed into the same space so the throw from infinity to closest distance remains the same. But that will mean focus becomes too fast, often under and overshooting the rangefinder especially. And this is so because the focus throw of the lens has to be balanced with the average diameter of the focus barrel so the gearing is neither too fast or too slow. So unless there are going to be switches on the lens to change from rangfinder to EVF the idea of simply adding more focus range is a sure way to bugger up the experience of using a Leica and it's range of lenses.

 

[lct]

54 minutes ago, 250swb said:

I'm sure Leica could do anything they liked, that they haven't felt the urge if it's apparently so easy maybe you could conclude that it's not so easy? I doubt it's actually difficult to design closer focus lenses, but that would be an increased focus throw of the lens, and for rangefinder users an annoying no-mans-land at the close end of the throw that makes it feel less like a precision camera or lens combination, more a dogs breakfast of design.

It is a question i asked myself in the past but now comes the 35/2 apo with 0.3m MFD...

[otto.f]

I’m constantly thinking I’m in the wrong thread

[lct]

6 minutes ago, otto.f said:

I’m constantly thinking I’m in the wrong thread

Sorry i thought we were discussing about MFD... Dog poo was just an example . Just kidding, sorry again.

[otto.f]

I see there’s an image thread for this lens, so I’ll go there

[lecycliste]

11 hours ago, 250swb said:

But you are quoting lenses where focusing can be done based on the DOF scale, and CV lenses they aren't always what they seem, often the M mount lens was originally designed for another camera and simply adapted.

As regards the unsuitability of the OUFRO in post #155 it's an amusing thought that there may not be enough time to mount it, after all the photographer has to get their tripod set up as well, cable release screwed in, and then poof!, whatever it was has crawled away. I never thought the discipline of close up photography could be so frantic, or so habitually unplanned.

Petroglyphs and food don't normally crawl away, so no Poof! involved. When you're hiking through Chacoan Anasazi ruins or Ancestral Puebloan or Fremont culture petroglyphs, it can be windy and dusty.

And you may have a limited time the client allows you to shoot his food products. There's absolutely nothing unplanned about it, just a need to go both 27" to 36" and closer than 27" on the client's schedule.

Edited April 12, 2021 by lecycliste

[250swb]

2 hours ago, lecycliste said:

Petroglyphs and food don't normally crawl away, so no Poof! involved. When you're hiking through Chacoan Anasazi ruins or Ancestral Puebloan or Fremont culture petroglyphs, it can be windy and dusty.

And you may have a limited time the client allows you to shoot his food products. There's absolutely nothing unplanned about it, just a need to go both 27" to 36" and closer than 27" on the client's schedule.

OK, I appreciate your clarification, from your original description I was imaging Indiana Jones sliding down a dusty hill and needing to stop and make a close focus photograph quickly before the bad guys caught up. So, an OUFRO is too slow......

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Dennis]

Hey, I had a question on my mind since yesterday, and I would love to ask you, folks, if you don't mind. I found my sweet spot with my M10, using mostly 35FL. So, I'm reading more about 35mm lenses rather than other FL. But I didn't find a clear answer to a personal doubt.

If you have to explain me the differences between the new CV 35/2 APO Lanthar and the ZM Distagon, without considering weight, size, and the extra stop, what would you say? It's just about character and look? Or is the IQ very different between them? Please delight me with your answers 🙂