Jump to content

Rumor: New Heliar Classic 50mm f/1.5 VM


Danner

Recommended Posts

49mm is quite a large thread - maybe that helps with the bubbles.

I thought the in focus image can be well corrected , but the compromise if not accounted for can be over-correction outside the plane of focus, which leads to non-gaussian blur on one side of the focus plane.

( ordered one from RW @ 11am 🙂  )

Edited by FrozenInTime
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, FrozenInTime said:

49mm is quite a large thread - maybe that helps with the bubbles...

( ordered one from RW @ 11am 🙂  )

The 'bubbles' are rather prominent in the sample snaps. I'll have to hunt down some f1.5 pics with my Summarit and compare their relative rendering (as near as will be possible with different subject-matter).

Congrats on snagging one and I'll look forward to reading your impressions when it arrives.

Philip.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The sample snaps remind me of my Heliar 50mm f2 collapsible, as I suppose you might expect. The Heliar remains one of my favourite lenses of all time despite being anything but technically good. It has a medium focus-shift, a 1m close-focus limit and the corners are never great, even at f8, largely due to field curvature. But it looks great! It has a wonderfully restrained, gentle feel to the images it produces.

This'll likely be on my xmas list this year. Should be a natural on the Monochrom.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just had another look at the unusual (unless I'm very much mistaken!) optical design and it would appear to suggest that the aperture diaphragm is behind the front doublet and the two other doublets are behind. Never seen that construction before but, then again, I don't often study these things in too much detail!

I'm very curious about - and also very interested in - this lens.

Philip.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m both interested and yet ambivalent until there are more sample images. I would like to see how it performs stopped down.

If it gives good/contrasty/sharp* imaging at smaller apertures I’m wondering if it might tempt me to sell my v4 Noctilux 😳.
That gives me max glow/aberrations/swirly bokeh* at f1.0 but is a bit heavy and usually left behind in favour of the 50 lux (silver chrome or black anodised or black chrome retro depending on the body 🙄) but also works as a “normal” 50 stopped down ie it’s not an “effect” lens as such until it’s fully opened up.

* choose your favourite forum adjective here

(Actually I probably won’t sell the Noct it’s just a way of potentially justifying buying yet another 50mm lens)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 minutes ago, NigelG said:

I’m both interested and yet ambivalent until there are more sample images. I would like to see how it performs stopped down.

If it gives good/contrasty/sharp* imaging at smaller apertures I’m wondering if it might tempt me to sell my v4 Noctilux 😳.
That gives me max glow/aberrations/swirly bokeh* at f1.0 but is a bit heavy and usually left behind in favour of the 50 lux (silver chrome or black anodised or black chrome retro depending on the body 🙄) but also works as a “normal” 50 stopped down ie it’s not an “effect” lens as such until it’s fully opened up.

* choose your favourite forum adjective here

(Actually I probably won’t sell the Noct it’s just a way of potentially justifying buying yet another 50mm lens)

Do not sell the Nocti. 🙂

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Ouroboros said:

I have one on back order, delivery is due mid-September. 

 

Thanks for the information. I’m waiting for Stephen at Camera Quest to open up ordering for the US. 
 

encouraged by the review that stated at f/4 it sharpens up like other CV 50 lenses. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 8/17/2021 at 5:31 PM, pippy said:

Just had another look at the unusual (unless I'm very much mistaken!) optical design and it would appear to suggest that the aperture diaphragm is behind the front doublet and the two other doublets are behind. Never seen that construction before but, then again, I don't often study these things in too much detail!

I'm very curious about - and also very interested in - this lens.

Philip.

Sorta-kinda unusual. It is a re-tread of the Leitz Hektor design.

Which Leitz used with various modifications for 50mm f/2.5, 73mm f/1.9, and 135mm f/4.5 lenses in the early 1930s. But has not been used a lot since then (the 135 did survive in the product line until 1960, however - replaced by an Elmar and then the Tele-Elmar).The 90mm Thambar f/2.2 and the 125mm Hektor f/2.5 (Visoflex only) are also Hektor variations - a Merté cemented group bracketed by two single elements.

Voigtländer already recycled a Hektor design previously (73mm f/1.9) for their own 75mm Heliar Classic f/1.8, 10-12 years ago.

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 leave it as an exercise for the readers to track down diagrams of the other original Hektor-types. ;)

Key features of the C/V 75mm f/1.8 "Pseudo-Hektor":

- actual focal length really is a bit more like 73mm (includes slightly more in the picture than a Leica 75mm)

- very strong curvature of field at f/1.8 - f/5.6 or so. Which, as one of those links in post 20(?) mentions, makes for "more" bokeh - i.e. the background around the edges is even more out of focus than normal, due to the field of sharp focus curving towards the foreground.

- notably higher contrast than the old Leitz version, due to modern multicoating (and probably simply age and hazing - some of the Leitz Hektors are pushing 90 years old!)

- BTW, as that historic Leitz diagram shows, the aperture is between the 2nd and 3rd groups.

Optical trivia - the Hektor design is basically a triplet design, but with each (or at least one) of the three "elements" split into two halves of different glass types cemented together (thus 6 actual elements). This produces a strongly-curved "Merté surface" - which was an early attempt to achieve what an aspherical element does - change the refraction of the element/group, moving from the center to the edges. Merté surfaces come from the world of microscopy.

Note especially, in the 2nd and 3rd groups, that the centers of the elements are mostly (in thickness) one kind of glass, while the edges are mostly the other kind of glass. With a smooth transition in between. The total index of refraction of the two cemented elements thus changes from the center to the edges - which does not happen with a single spherical element. Thus approximating with two pieces of glass one aspherical surface.

(The late Erwin Puts gets the credit for explaining this, in his Leica Lens Compendium article on the 50mm f/2.5 Hektor (1930)).

.....................

My experience with the C/V 75mm f/1.8 was:

- quite sharp and very contrasty in the center, even at f/1.8. Very low flare tendency of any kind. Modern coatings plus only 6 air/glass interfaces.

- While producing an extra-soft blurred background in the corners (like it says on the box). In that regard, it sort-kinda simulated the rapid sharpness fall-off of a Peter Karbe APO/ASPH design (except that the corners even in the plane of the subject were fuzzy also).

I found it very acceptable for "documentary" (as opposed to "character") pictures, so long as I kept the main subject near the center of the picture. Or stopped down to f/5.6 or more.

- in some situations, where the corners of the picture included foreground objects, the curvature of field produced "extra depth of field" in the foreground, like a tilt-lens. Useful (if sometimes unpredictable) if you know it is there to be used. At 2.5m nominal focus setting and f/1.8, the center was sharp at 2.5m, while the corners were focused and sharp at about 2.35m.

I expect this new 50mm "Pseudo-Hektor" will likely behave about the same, although the f/1.5 aperture may exaggerate the effects.

.....................

Someone mentioned they were hoping for a 90mm from Voigtländer.

Word has it that Cosina's CEO Kobayashi-san thinks rangefinder photography "ends at 75mm."

Nevertheless, Cosina/Voigtländer did issue their very first APO-Lanthar as a 90mm f/3.5, in Leica screw mount, ~20 years ago. Also produced in Canon EOS and Nikon F(?) manual-focus SLR mounts later. So you just never know. ;) And the LTM version can be easily adapted to M mount.

https://casualphotophile.com/2018/07/16/speed-isnt-everything-voigtlander-90mm-f-3-5-apo-lanthar-review/

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, adan said:

...BTW, as that historic Leitz diagram shows, the aperture is between the 2nd and 3rd groups...

Thank-you very much, Andy, for having taken the trouble and time to write that fascinating post. I must re-read it a few more times...

As far as the positioning of the aperture diaphragm goes; do you think that the new 50mm f1.5 has it placed behind the front doublet or might there be sufficient space after the second pair? If the former then what would be the advantage / difference in having the aperture so placed? I did study optical theory and lens design as part of my degree but that was 35 years ago and I confess that my recall of all that stuff is a bit lacking!

Philip.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Just thinking about the position of the aperture diaphragm a bit more...

If the diaphragm is placed behind the first doublet (as I suspect just from looking at the diagram but could well be mistaken) rather than the second (as per the Hektor) might the reason be that it allows for a much wider max. aperture than is usually the case with the Heliar / Hektor design - the front lens-pairing being of significantly larger diameter than the second?

As stated in one of the links the new lens;

"...achieves a large aperture of F1.5 that exceeds the limit of the unique aperture depiction Heliar type..."

:-k

I can't for the life of me think why it might help or even be important but if it is behind the first doublet then there must be a reason...

Just a thought!

Philip.

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

2 hours ago, pippy said:

Just thinking about the position of the aperture diaphragm a bit more...

If the diaphragm is placed behind the first doublet (as I suspect just from looking at the diagram but could well be mistaken) rather than the second (as per the Hektor) might the reason be that it allows for a much wider max. aperture than is usually the case with the Heliar / Hektor design - the front lens-pairing being of significantly larger diameter than the second?

As stated in one of the links the new lens;

"...achieves a large aperture of F1.5 that exceeds the limit of the unique aperture depiction Heliar type..."

:-k

I can't for the life of me think why it might help or even be important but if it is behind the first doublet then there must be a reason...

Just a thought!

Philip.

I think you have to be right about the aperture. There a smudge on the image and it's difficult to see how it could squeeze between the rear groups.

http://www.cosina.co.jp/seihin/voigtlander/vm-mount/vm-h-50mm1_5/vm-h-50mm1_5-kosei.jpg

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

1) The aperture of the new 50 may well be between groups 1 and 2. I notice (now) that the original "long" 1959 90mm Elmarit for M is also a Hektor-ish layout (5 elements in 1:2:2 arrangement), and it famously has the aperture right up front behind the single front element.

https://www.kenrockwell.com/leica/90mm-f28-elmarit.htm

https://filmsupply.club/products/leica-leitz-wetzlar-elmarit-90mm-f-2-8-lens

2) Now that I see the linked page of sample pix from Voigtländer, the bubble or "bright-ring" bokeh is quite different from what the 75mm f/1.8 does. Glass types and curvatures within a similar layout can make a bokeh difference. See: Walter Mandler's various double-gauss lenses: 75 Summilux - famed for smooth bokeh (most of the time), compared with the also-DG 35mm Summicron v.4 or current 50 Summicron (bright-rings and doubled images - most of the time).

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

28 minutes ago, adan said:

1) The aperture of the new 50 may well be between groups 1 and 2. I notice (now) that the original "long" 1959 90mm Elmarit for M is also a Hektor-ish layout (5 elements in 1:2:2 arrangement), and it famously has the aperture right up front behind the single front element...

So why would a lens designer choose to put the aperture that far forward? Does it allow correction due to diffraction by the diaphragm-blades at smaller apertures easier to achieve?

I think I still  have a volume on Optics & Lens Design kicking around. Perhaps it's time to track it down...

Philip.

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.

×
×
  • Create New...