voigtlander,the best leica lenses in the world

[jdlaing]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Voigtlander can be the best Voigtlander lenses but not the best Leica lenses. Just sayin………

Edited October 22, 2021 by jdlaing

[crony]

47 minutes ago, fotografr said:

Digital noise, often referred to as grain, is not caused by a lens. It's a function of pushing exposures, as in high ISO settings. The only impact a lens would have on noise (grain) is that a slower lens with a maximum aperture of f/3.5, for example, would require a higher ISO setting than a lens that opens up to f/1.4. 

Hi, a most interesting position ... --- The picture was taken at ISO 160. Maybe, I should not have used "grain", as others do. Proto-Onion-Rings or concentric circles might have been better...

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[fotografr]

8 minutes ago, crony said:

Hi, a most interesting position ... --- The picture was taken at ISO 160. Maybe, I should not have used "grain", as others do. Proto-Onion-Rings or concentric circles might have been better...

Yes, that would have made more sense.

[fotografr]

1 hour ago, jdlaing said:

Voigtlander can be the best Voigtlander lenses but not the best Leica lenses. Just sayin………

I think the point was that they might be the best lenses to put on a Leica M camera. They cannot, of course, be called "Leica" lenses.

[jdlaing]

2 hours ago, fotografr said:

I think the point was that they might be the best lenses to put on a Leica M camera. They cannot, of course, be called "Leica" lenses.

I knew that. 😃

[adan]

Don't believe everything you read on a lens

The v.III has four (count 'em, four) aspherical surfaces. C/V just doesn't engrave the word on the front.

Diagram included here:

https://www.voigtlaender.de/lenses/vm/35-mm-112-nokton-aspherical/?lang=en

[fotografr]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 10/27/2021 at 10:33 PM, adan said:

Don't believe everything you read on a lens

The v.III has four (count 'em, four) aspherical surfaces. C/V just doesn't engrave the word on the front.

Diagram included here:

https://www.voigtlaender.de/lenses/vm/35-mm-112-nokton-aspherical/?lang=en

This actually brings up another question. I've been wondering why the mystique and incredibly high prices for double aspheric lenses? I believe there are now a few other lenses, in addition to this 35/1.2, which have multiple aspheric elements. How is it that they're so reasonably priced compared to the Leica 35mm AA?

[Yarosuav]

On 10/27/2021 at 10:09 PM, Artin said:

Which one is the newer sharper lens. 
there is a Nokton 35 mm 1.2 VII. Aspherical 

and then the Nokton 35mm 1.2 VIII. That is not designated Aspherical 

 

 

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!

DDC1F555-E1CF-44C4-BAD6-EB362A9A55D8.webp 11.59 kB · 4 downloads

I have both -  the new one (v III) is definitely sharper. It’s also smaller and lighter than vII, so no contest really… I’ve used the vIII extensively recently (there’s a whole gallery with it on my website below). It’s not as sharp or contrasty, and it doesn’t quite have the “pop” of my FLE, but it does focus closer, and bokeh is somewhat smoother, if that matters to you. 

I bought it to try it out, but next time I put a 35mm on my M10R it’s going to be back to the FLE… So there. 

[adan]

2 hours ago, fotografr said:

This actually brings up another question. I've been wondering why the mystique and incredibly high prices for double aspheric lenses? I believe there are now a few other lenses, in addition to this 35/1.2, which have multiple aspheric elements. How is it that they're so reasonably priced compared to the Leica 35mm AA?

Around 1988 (when the AA was designed and production started in secret), there was still no relatively-cheap, easy, high-quality way to produce an aspheric (non-constant radius) surface for a glass lens. (Plastic or polymer was easier - if a plastic lens was adequate)

The AA was therefore produced in the only way possible in that era - hand-grinding the surfaces one at a time, with a very high failure rate (ooops - wrong shape - toss the glass back into the melting pot and start over). Depending on the source, somewhere between 200 and 4000 were successfully made over 5 years - but at a cost too high to be profitable. So it was discontinued - and the few AA lenses made have become legendary and collectible ($$$$) "freaks" (in a good way! ).

https://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-wiki.en/index.php/35mm_f/1.4_Aspherical_Summilux-M

In the meantime, however, Leica and Hoya (Japanese glass company, also known for their lens filters) began working together to develop a molded-glass method of producing aspherical glass. Grind or mill the aspherical surface once, into metal, and then mass-produce the glass by squishing it in semi-molten form against the metal mold (like pushing cookie dough into a metal mold).

https://www.amazon.com/Cookie-Mold/s?k=Cookie+Mold

By 1993-94, they had a working process, and Leica designed and began producing the single-ASPH 35mm Summilux-M that way (1994-2010). And over the next 26 years, the process has now spread throughout the industry. Anyone can do it (recall that Leica exchanges technology with its partner Panasonic, and Hoya has numerous partners in Japan with whom it exhanges knowledge and techniques).

It is still something of a work--in-progress since occasionally milling marks in the metal mold get transfered to the glass, producing such effects as "onion ring bokeh" - concentric circles in the bokeh-ball blurs from bright lights in the background. Or other artifacts. Panasonic may have licked that one.

https://www.imaging-resource.com/news/2014/05/02/the-end-of-onion-ring-bokeh-panasonic-beats-the-curse-of-aspheric-lenses

And so we progress: 1988-1993 - difficult, expensive and rare; 1994-today, easier and easier, cheaper and cheaper, better and better.

[fotografr]

On 10/27/2021 at 10:33 PM, adan said:

Thank you. That's a terrific amount of good information. I appreciate the time you spent putting it together.

Brent

[adan]

For historical completeness, I should have noted that the original 1960s 50mm F/1.2 Noctilux ran into exactly the same problem, and suffered a similar fate.

Too many failed elements, too much wasted material and labor hours, discontinued after 9 years for being a money-loser, with less than 2400 made, and became a rare collectible.

Replaced with the 50mm f/1.0 Noctilux non-Aspherical Leitz-Canada design - which became legendary.

Not sure why Leica thought they would have better luck with the 35mm AA - although I'm sure they had improved a lot of manufacturing processes between 1975 and 1988. But not enough, apparently.

[fotografr]

On 9/2/2021 at 9:22 AM, Yarosuav said:

 

Link to the Nokton pictures below:

https://www.berndt.photography/201208poland

 

 

Superb images of an astonishingly beautiful area. 

[OfeyKalakar]

On 6/29/2021 at 3:19 AM, luigi bertolotti said:

I agree, as a happy owner of the 15 V3;  but... making a camera is all another matter... they did a good job on film, indeed... but is really a tiny niche, today... make and maintain a digital device, with all that it means in terms of sourced critical parts, is a task not comparable to make fine manual focus lenses.

Example... how ended the project of the "Russian M" that was announced time ago ? 

 

Epson used a Best chassis for their digital range finder years ago

[OfeyKalakar]

On 6/29/2021 at 6:12 PM, earleygallery said:

It's a shame Voigtlander have dropped the LTM lenses, they offered a new lease of life for the Barnacks.

 

I have a couple of them Heliars Beautiful and razor sharp. Especially the unattached nickel one on the side.

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!

[cboy]

On 10/23/2021 at 12:13 AM, fotografr said:

 They cannot, of course, be called "Leica" lenses.

But they can be called 'Leica M mount' lenses 😀

[fotografr]

43 minutes ago, cboy said:

But they can be called 'Leica M mount' lenses 😀

I sure hope so. 🤔

[Capuccino-Muffin]

18 hours ago, Artin said:

Collectors .. who just make a legend out of a myth.. in fact the AA is nothing special as far IQ. It was superseded by the better ASPH which was then superseded by the current FLE. 

There is a failure in your logic, you are forgetting something very important: The AA actually superseded the 35 lux pre-asph, and it was a whopping skyrocketing incredible Jump forward. 

Then, as with anything, the superseeding lenses got better... but I can’t be so sure about this. I cannot say the 35 lux asph is better than the AA, and the FLE is not substantially better than the Asph, therefore not better than the AA.

First of all, the AA doesn’t have as much focus shift as the Asph , and it draws beautifully on its own. A true collectible and beautiful shooter.

All in all, the AA is the One Single lens that represents, still today, the biggest jump in Quality from its predesesor. The leap from the 35 lux pre-asph to the Lux AA is huge. All the subsequent “leaps” in the summilux 35m line are not even leaps. 

Second would be the 50 lux asph vs. 50 Lux Pre-asph.

 

[jaapv]

There is a conflation of a few different things here - AA and APO refer to the way the lens handles the light rays. ASPH and FLE refer to the lens design, one optical, the other mechanical.

[Capuccino-Muffin]

4 hours ago, Artin said:

I never said it was not a better lens then the pre asph .. Technically it was a huge jump and I never said the ASPH was a huge improvement. but an improvement it was and the FLE took that a step further .. However anyone that knows how to use the strengths and the weaknesses of their lenses can use them to their advantage and draw Wonderfull Images.

But outside of the Value of the AA to collectors and speculator, The AA for a user is not worth 15,000 + considering the other choices available. 

Still, the AA is totally justified as a legendary lens. It was the first in many things, and a breakthrough. It was a lens of giant leap just as the original noctilux was a leap.

If you find it too expensive, fine. But it is by no means overhyped. You tried to diminish the wrong lens.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[cboy]

Is there anything in the voigtlander lineup theyre missing? Since theyre on a roll what would you like have next?

Id like voigtlander to revise their 50 f1.1 or even better go all out and put out their own 50 0.95 to blow out of the water all the MIC noctilux clones.

On a cosmetic wish id like all front chrome rings to be black chrome and have a focus tab for easier focusing.