Voigtlander 50mm f/1 VM

[robb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

2 hours ago, wojtek_87 said:

Nice shot! Can you take a picture showing the finder blockage, please? I am thinking about a nice rendering 50mm for portraits and it's a tough decision... (would be a good combination of fast aperture and character so taking into account f1.5-0.95 lenses with reasonable budget where this Voigtlander will be rather from higher price end)

I would but I only use this lens on SL2 and SL2-s bodies.

I’m waiting on adding another M once it also has ibis…

I’d highly recommend an SL2 or SL2-s

not much bigger than an M.  Easy to nail focus on static subjects with fast wide open apertures.  
Robb

[eyeheartny]

23 hours ago, robb said:

I would but I only use this lens on SL2 and SL2-s bodies.

I’m waiting on adding another M once it also has ibis…

I’d highly recommend an SL2 or SL2-s

not much bigger than an M.  Easy to nail focus on static subjects with fast wide open apertures.  
Robb

It's good that the SL2-S works for you, but let's be real about the size differences. The SL2-S is 60% heavier than the M11 (850g vs 530g), 30% taller (107mm vs 80.3mm), and 215% deeper (83mm vs 38.8mm). Those are significant differences. 

 

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!

[otto.f]

31 minutes ago, eyeheartny said:

not much bigger than an M

🤣

PS: just like the previous owner of my SL, I sold it because it just doesn’t handle, compared to M, that is.

PS2: very nice lenses these Voigtländers, but there are two serious obstacles every time I think about it:

- the separate hoods, which make the lenses even bigger than they already are compared to Leica. It’s a pain in the ass that you have to pay so much more for a compact Leica lens, given the fact that the IQ is practically the same nowadays, but it is just that devilish detail. On an SLx that won’t be noticed…
- the not seldom weird filter sizes, except for the Ultrons ii 28 and 35.

Edited November 16, 2022 by otto.f

[Adam Bonn]

Please forgive me if this is already answered, I did try to search the thread for “code”

But are people using Ms home coding the CV 50/1 (or selecting something from the lens menu)?

and if so, would one code/select the Noctilux F0.95, the F1 or F1.2 or something different?

Many thanks in advance 

[M Street Photographer]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Adam Bonn:

.., would one code/select the Noctilux F0.95, the F1 or F1.2 or something different?

Many thanks in advance 

I use the Visoflex when I photograph max open because the DOF is too narrow. Mine is not encoded 6 bit. That could change, as I will soon be testing the Finder Magnifier 1.4.
Otherwise I select 50 1.0 in the camera.
Of course, a 1.0 is slightly larger, also with the corresponding filter diameter. On the other hand, if you look at other 50s 1.0 / 0.95 from third-party manufacturers, it's not too big on an M.
The sun visor (included) is not very deep. I don't have a problem with the VC 50 1.0 on the M, nor with the handling. I rather find the overall weight to be comfortable in my hands.

[Adam Bonn]

7 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

I use the Visoflex when I photograph max open because the DOF is too narrow. Mine is not encoded 6 bit. That could change, as I will soon be testing the Finder Magnifier 1.4.
Otherwise I select 50 1.0 in the camera.
Of course, a 1.0 is slightly larger, also with the corresponding filter diameter. On the other hand, if you look at other 50s 1.0 / 0.95 from third-party manufacturers, it's not too big on an M.
The sun visor (included) is not very deep. I don't have a problem with the VC 50 1.0 on the M, nor with the handling. I rather find the overall weight to be comfortable in my hands.

I'm quite taken with the idea of getting the CV 50/1, I'm just a bit worried I won't use it that much, as I already have a 50 lux asph (which IMHO is about right for a balance of IQ/size/speed) and also a 50 cron v5

There's something magical about a well executed F1 shot though...

I just asked about the coding as I'm a bit of a sucker for having something exif related about the lens to search on in LR.

My hunch would be that the F0.95 n'lux is probably the option that the CV would respond best to, as possibly the F1 option would try and correct corner issues that the CV doesn't have...

....easy enough to try some different codes with a pemy pen (I believe 'sharpie' in US parlance) and figure out the best one, (my ZM21/2.8 is sensitive to which elmarit 21 I code it as)

Very interested in your thoughts on this lens because unless I'm mistaken (quite possibly) you also have an M10R, and I'm a little curious about the high vignette lens on the high vignette camera!! (win some/lose some I would imagine)

The M10R samples from the FredMiranda review look nice enough, strong colours 'pop' etc - quite reminiscent to the 50 lux to my eye (no offence intended to anyone.... but I'm not getting bogged down in FC testing and OOF comparisons, of course they're important but I suspect -for me at least- missing focus will ruin more of my potential 50/1 images than ugly bokeh!)

[M Street Photographer]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Adam Bonn:

I'm quite taken with the idea of getting the CV 50/1, I'm just a bit worried I won't use it that much, as I already have a 50 lux asph (which IMHO is about right for a balance of IQ/size/speed) and also a 50 cron v5

There's something magical about a well executed F1 shot though...

I understand your thoughts well. I too had similar. As a Canon 50 0.95 TV lover, I also wondered if I would use the VC 1.0 enough. But since I know both of them very well, each has its area of application and fulfills one or the other of my ideas.

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Adam Bonn:

I'm quite taken with the idea of getting the CV 50/1, I'm just a bit worried I won't use it that much, as I already have a 50 lux asph (which IMHO is about right for a balance of IQ/size/speed) and also a 50 cron v5

There's something magical about a well executed F1 shot though...

I just asked about the coding as I'm a bit of a sucker for having something exif related about the lens to search on in LR.

Ich habe in der Kamera ein Profil angelegt und abgespeichert mit dem Namen 50 1.0. Da ich kein 2. 1.0 habe, ist es leicht zu finden. Bei meinen beiden 50 2.0 habe ich unterschiedliche Namen vergeben: Nikkor 50 .20 und Robert Frank 50 2.0. Sollten die Speicherplätze nicht ausreichen, nehmen Sie eine 2. kleine 1 GB / 500 K Speicherkarte und legen dort weitere Profile an. Je nach dem welche Sie brauchen, lesen die Profile der einen oder anderen Karte ein. Sicherlich dauert es ein wenig bis Sie die "richtige" Ordnung gefunden haben.

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Adam Bonn:

...My hunch would be that the F0.95 n'lux is probably the option that the CV would respond best to, as possibly the F1 option would try and correct corner issues that the CV doesn't have...

I hadn't thought of this until now. Thanks for the suggestion. I will try it with 0.95, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Adam Bonn:

...easy enough to try some different codes with a pemy pen (I believe 'sharpie' in US parlance) and figure out the best one, (my ZM21/2.8 is sensitive to which elmarit 21 I code it as)

I haven't coded myself yet, so maybe I'll try it with a gifted friend on an unimportant lens.

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Adam Bonn:

Very interested in your thoughts on this lens because unless I'm mistaken (quite possibly) you also have an M10R, and I'm a little curious about the high vignette lens on the high vignette camera!! (win some/lose some I would imagine)

The M10R samples from the FredMiranda review look nice enough, strong colours 'pop' etc - quite reminiscent to the 50 lux to my eye (no offence intended to anyone.... but I'm not getting bogged down in FC testing and OOF comparisons, of course they're important but I suspect -for me at least- missing focus will ruin more of my potential 50/1 images than ugly bokeh!)

Yes that's right, I have an M10R. Miranda probably had a pre-series model at the time of testing, so his results might not be entirely accurate.
At the moment I have very little time for testing, but I will do it intensively soon. I can't see some of his problems. Mine appears to be well adjusted and is a later model than his.
And yes, in the beginning, a misfocus is likely to cause some photos to fail. But, as I said, for close-up portraits I use the Visoflex, which minimizes waste. At the end of the week I'll get the 1.4 viewfinder magnifier and I'm curious if I can then focus more securely via the rangefinder.
The coloring reminds me a bit of the VC APO Lanthar series, which I really liked (on a Sony 7 C with very nice color rendering).
Please have courage for the VC 50 1.0, I don't think you will be disappointed. And even if you do, sell it a little cheaper later and book the small financial loss as learning / rental costs.

[Adam Bonn]

43 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

I understand your thoughts well. I too had similar. As a Canon 50 0.95 TV lover, I also wondered if I would use the VC 1.0 enough. But since I know both of them very well, each has its area of application and fulfills one or the other of my ideas.

All good points, sometimes it's good to have too many lenses (!!) I find they fall in and out of favour and it's good to mix it up a bit

44 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

Ich habe in der Kamera ein Profil angelegt und abgespeichert mit dem Namen 50 1.0. Da ich kein 2. 1.0 habe, ist es leicht zu finden. Bei meinen beiden 50 2.0 habe ich unterschiedliche Namen vergeben: Nikkor 50 .20 und Robert Frank 50 2.0. Sollten die Speicherplätze nicht ausreichen, nehmen Sie eine 2. kleine 1 GB / 500 K Speicherkarte und legen dort weitere Profile an. Je nach dem welche Sie brauchen, lesen die Profile der einen oder anderen Karte ein. Sicherlich dauert es ein wenig bis Sie die "richtige" Ordnung gefunden haben.

I think (.....) doesn't the M10x have a thing where if you set a lens from the menu then use a coded lens, the coded lens overrides it, then next time you put a non-coded lens on it reverts to whatever's selected in the menu? I might be imagining that...

46 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

I hadn't thought of this until now. Thanks for the suggestion. I will try it with 0.95, 1.0, 1.1, 1.2

Just a hunch... I mean the F0.95 is an ASPH lens with FLE and so is the CV 50/1.... I might be adding two and two and getting five here... 

48 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

Yes that's right, I have an M10R. Miranda probably had a pre-series model at the time of testing, so his results might not be entirely accurate.
At the moment I have very little time for testing, but I will do it intensively soon. I can't see some of his problems. Mine appears to be well adjusted and is a later model than his.

I like his (and others) thorough testing and it's important stuff, but IMHO most lens have pluses and minuses... I had a 7Artisans lens for a while and some of the pictures came out ok but what about the crazy bokeh? oh easy I mainly used it on the beach with nothing much behind the subject... AFAIK most modern ASPH well corrected lenses have FC and elliptical bokeh balls, it's a trade off for the positive points of having modern ASPH well corrected lenses. 

'We' pick lenses we like that work for the things we like to shoot..

54 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

And yes, in the beginning, a misfocus is likely to cause some photos to fail. But, as I said, for close-up portraits I use the Visoflex, which minimizes waste. At the end of the week I'll get the 1.4 viewfinder magnifier and I'm curious if I can then focus more securely via the rangefinder.

That's the rangefinder charm I think, so many little variables can spoil the focus... and as you say there's tools for minimising the error when it's critical (or other lenses that are more F8 and be there for that type of thing)

56 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

The coloring reminds me a bit of the VC APO Lanthar series

That's encouraging, not owned one but seen plenty of pictures

57 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

sell it a little cheaper later and book the small financial loss as learning / rental costs.

Every time I sell gear for a 'small financial loss' it's like a party as usually it seems to be a big loss  😅 (probably because I tend to keep lenses and sell digital bodies)

58 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

Please have courage for the VC 50 1.0, I don't think you will be disappointed

I just ordered and paid for it, if the winds of the courier service blow kindly... it should be delivered on Friday to the address I'll be at on Saturday afternoon

Thanks very much for your replies, I was about there with the decision but you offered some clarity

oh and FWIW

1 hour ago, M Street Photographer said:

I haven't coded myself yet, so maybe I'll try it with a gifted friend on an unimportant lens.

I keep meaning to download a template or something... but I do this, you probably know this, but in case it helps anyone

Place some masking tape next to the lens code sensor by the lens mount (on the leatherette side), then draw 6 lines where the sensor reads

Mount the lens and put some tape around the barrel, then extend the first set of lines onto the tape that's on the lens

Take the lens off the camera and the tape shows you where the sensor sees the code.

I use a black permanent marker and mark only the black parts needed (it doesn't need the white) in the little groove that CV (and Zeiss) helpfully provide

That's probably explained poorly. Sorry.

[M Street Photographer]

It is correct, if you use a coded lens, it will be recognized, then if you use one of the profiles, it will automatically switch to it.

One issue with Miranda was the field curvature at the center. Others and I do not have this effect or it is not visible. It was the pre-production model. Later people hardly or not at all showed this problem with him.

Sometimes when I sell something my heart bleeds too. You can't keep everything. It's getting too much. I had 8 ! 50 mm and no longer knew the disadvantages of some. Now I've reduced a lot, only "favorites" remain and I know them like the back of my hand. I will no longer sell anything unless I have to give up photography for health reasons. Now that I have successfully sold my Sony equipment, I am free. No native lenses, no artificially bred cameras whose performance I don't need. My concept is clear and simple:

M10 R, RX1 RII, Ricoh GR III - done.

For the M I now have everything I wish for, the last one will reach me on Thursday / Friday: VC Ultron 21 1.8 ASPH. I still have to get to know some lenses better, a nice task for the coming spring.
Congratulations on the decision to order the VC 50 1.0, it will be exciting and a lot of fun. I'm looking forward to your insights and photos.

As I said, I will try the coding with a friend, thanks for your instructive information.

[hdmesa]

57 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

...One issue with Miranda was the field curvature at the center. Others and I do not have this effect or it is not visible. It was the pre-production model. Later people hardly or not at all showed this problem with him...

If I recall correctly, the field curvature was an issue at the edges of the frame coming into sharper focus and losing the bokeh effect. But it was also determined via his testing that the performance was still better than the Noct f/1 (and 0.95 judging from images available here and elsewhere online).

I used the Noct f/1 lens profile with mine, and it seemed to work well.

[Dan Bachmann]

Thank you for the examples and reviews in these posts. I was considering this lens to replace a Noctilux f/1.0 and Summilux pre-asph. There's no issues with those lenses, just looking for a new toy/a change of pace. I think I would miss the vignetting and curve in the bokeh of the old Noctilux - it is imperfect in a beautiful way. It is so different, that if I had this lens, I would have to keep the other ones. Voigtalnder came out with some other fast 50mm lenses about the same time... I wonder how they look.

 

[hdmesa]

2 hours ago, Dan Bachmann said:

Thank you for the examples and reviews in these posts. I was considering this lens to replace a Noctilux f/1.0 and Summilux pre-asph. There's no issues with those lenses, just looking for a new toy/a change of pace. I think I would miss the vignetting and curve in the bokeh of the old Noctilux - it is imperfect in a beautiful way. It is so different, that if I had this lens, I would have to keep the other ones. Voigtalnder came out with some other fast 50mm lenses about the same time... I wonder how they look.

 

The CV 50 f/1 also has swirl, if that's what you mean by "curve in the bokeh" – perhaps not as much, but it's there – need a busy background for it to show up. Vignetting can always be enhanced in post, but it can't be removed non-destructively if you don't want it.

Where it really differs is at f/1, the CV is very, very sharp at the point of focus, and overall there is something more modern about the rendering. The best way I can put it is the CV at f/1 and close distance has a somber tone that I don't see in shots from the Noct f/1.

Here are a few samples with the CV 50 f/1 that show some bokeh swirl:

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 January 25, 2023 by hdmesa

[fil-m]

8 hours ago, Dan Bachmann said:

Thank you for the examples and reviews in these posts. I was considering this lens to replace a Noctilux f/1.0 and Summilux pre-asph. There's no issues with those lenses, just looking for a new toy/a change of pace. I think I would miss the vignetting and curve in the bokeh of the old Noctilux - it is imperfect in a beautiful way. It is so different, that if I had this lens, I would have to keep the other ones. Voigtalnder came out with some other fast 50mm lenses about the same time... I wonder how they look.

 

As a personal opinion the Nocti f1 is a quite special lens in terms of rendering with a unique character compared to modern lenses. You probably already know that, so just to say that it might become more and more difficult to find f1 Nocti's in good shape (and reasonable prices) as time goes, while you could always buy a VM Nokton f1 (which is a kind of improved Noctilux .95 in terms of sharpness). To make sure you do not regret your move later!   

[M Street Photographer]

@Adam Bonn , About the setting in the camera: I just spoke to a friend about how he handles it.
If it's not about the Jpeg of the camera, he always sets the lens detection to off. The frame is still displayed in the viewfinder. He edits the lens correction with C1.

[Adam Bonn]

1 hour ago, M Street Photographer said:

@Adam Bonn , About the setting in the camera: I just spoke to a friend about how he handles it.
If it's not about the Jpeg of the camera, he always sets the lens detection to off. The frame is still displayed in the viewfinder. He edits the lens correction with C1.

I thought it influenced the raw as well? 

Well today I must not have fully attached my 50 lux as it took me 3 shots to notice the frame lines were wrong and the info screen said 21mm/2.8 so I can see if there's any difference in the DNGs when I get home 

[M Street Photographer]

vor 2 Stunden schrieb Adam Bonn:

I thought it influenced the raw as well? 

As far as I know it shouldn't affect RAW's.
It would be almost fatal, because a RAW should be untouched in every respect.
You should also be able to see that when shooting RAW and Jpeg that there shouldn't be any lens profile correction.
Open both side by side (RAW+Jpeg) in C1, then it should be visible (import settings all set to 0).

[Adam Bonn]

45 minutes ago, M Street Photographer said:

As far as I know it shouldn't affect RAW's.
It would be almost fatal, because a RAW should be untouched in every respect.
You should also be able to see that when shooting RAW and Jpeg that there shouldn't be any lens profile correction.
Open both side by side (RAW+Jpeg) in C1, then it should be visible (import settings all set to 0).

it's not as simple as that, even if the effect is only visible in the SOOC jpeg then it comes from a RAW setting because the camera makes jpegs from it's own RAW, there's a ton of stuff in the RAW file that the RAW app can chose to act upon (or not) - for example, ever use an M9? Ever open an M9 DNG in an Adobe product? Well you just applied a -0.5 EV drop purely because Leica put a tag in the M9 DNG that says drop shot exposure by 0.5EV

Remember how on the M9/240 adobe always has zero NR, then after the M10 it started adding different values based on ISO? That's because there's stuff in the RAW file telling it to do it 🙄

I don't know enough about C1 to know how it interprets DNG data... AFAIK C1 M lens profiles don't do anything anyway (certainly never corrected the distortion that my 35 'rit had)

[S Maclean]

1 hour ago, Adam Bonn said:

it's not as simple as that, even if the effect is only visible in the SOOC jpeg then it comes from a RAW setting because the camera makes jpegs from it's own RAW, there's a ton of stuff in the RAW file that the RAW app can chose to act upon (or not) - for example, ever use an M9? Ever open an M9 DNG in an Adobe product? Well you just applied a -0.5 EV drop purely because Leica put a tag in the M9 DNG that says drop shot exposure by 0.5EV

Remember how on the M9/240 adobe always has zero NR, then after the M10 it started adding different values based on ISO? That's because there's stuff in the RAW file telling it to do it 🙄

I don't know enough about C1 to know how it interprets DNG data... AFAIK C1 M lens profiles don't do anything anyway (certainly never corrected the distortion that my 35 'rit had)

I am not sure that information is in the raw file...it's on the camera or lens profile.  Now, logically the camera model and lens info is contained in the RAW file, but the file itself just carries the information, not the changes.

That's why, when there are programs (DXO, C1, LR) that are not updated on the profile of a lens or camera it won't do anything with that data, just ignore it.

In other words; The Raw file is RAW until converted by a program or a camera (into JPG).  The RAW file tells the program "Hey, I come from an M9, and the program says...."That means I will take -0.5 EV as per the specifications on that profile"  Change the camera model or lens model on the EXIF data and a different outcome will take place.

[M Street Photographer]

vor einer Stunde schrieb Adam Bonn:

it's not as simple as that, even if the effect is only visible in the SOOC jpeg then it comes from a RAW setting because the camera makes jpegs from it's own RAW, there's a ton of stuff in the RAW file that the RAW app can chose to act upon (or not) - for example, ever use an M9? Ever open an M9 DNG in an Adobe product? Well you just applied a -0.5 EV drop purely because Leica put a tag in the M9 DNG that says drop shot exposure by 0.5EV

Remember how on the M9/240 adobe always has zero NR, then after the M10 it started adding different values based on ISO? That's because there's stuff in the RAW file telling it to do it 🙄

I don't know enough about C1 to know how it interprets DNG data... AFAIK C1 M lens profiles don't do anything anyway (certainly never corrected the distortion that my 35 'rit had)

I'm just getting used to LR now, so I can't say anything about it and I don't have the M9 anymore.
In C1 I just opened a RAW of the M10 R and the associated jpeg. No lens profile was activated in RAW. The correction of the Jpeg can be clearly seen from the camera with the correction and this is missing in the raw, which in my opinion would also be correct.

Regardless Adam, what do you think about opening a thread on this subject.
  "Does Leica intervene in the M10 / M10R RAW's? And if so, to what extent?"

We have a high level of competence here in the forum and regardless of the profile corrections, I would find it interesting to learn something about possible "interventions".
It can vary from camera to camera, hence the delimitation to M10 + M10R.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Adam Bonn]

19 minutes ago, S Maclean said:

I am not sure that information is in the raw file...it's on the camera or lens profile.  Now, logically the camera model and lens info is contained in the RAW file, but the file itself just carries the information, not the changes.

That's why, when there are programs (DXO, C1, LR) that are not updated on the profile of a lens or camera it won't do anything with that data, just ignore it.

In other words; The Raw file is RAW until converted by a program or a camera (into JPG).  The RAW file tells the program "Hey, I come from an M9, and the program says...."That means I will take -0.5 EV as per the specifications on that profile"  Change the camera model or lens model on the EXIF data and a different outcome will take place.

well it is!

Quote

Adobe has updated its DNG digital negative specification to allow a series of image corrections to be embedded in the file. Version 1.3 of the non-proprietary RAW file format allows a series of 'corrections and enhancements', which Adobe is calling opcodes, to be defined in DNG files. These opcodes include the ability to specify corrections for lens aberrations such as geometric distortion and lateral chromatic aberration that should be made to the RAW data when it's processed.

Adobe has this to say about opcodes:

"DNG 1.3 now includes opcodes, a defined list of operations and their parameters for performing complex activities in the raw file conversion process. These activities include corrections and enhancements that are beneficial when performed prior to the demosaic process but are difficult due to a camera's limited processing power. They also include corrections and enhancements that can only be performed after the demosaic process such as lens correction. By utilizing opcodes, photographers can maintain the advantages of raw mosaic data, giving them increased opportunity to improve their photographs with the maximum amount of image data preserved. The DNG SDK has also been updated to reflect the changes to the specification."

from here

Also here's a screen shot showing some of the tags in an M9 file (there's tags in all the Leica DNGs) - I've highlighted the baseline exposure offset

 

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!

These are all instructions written by Leica for the RAW app to act upon (and let's be honest DNG is adobe's invention, Leica's choice to use and back in the day Leica used to give you a free copy of LR with their cameras - so it's a safe bet that Leica expect's adobe solution to be the RAW app product that's used)

Now how much of this info adobe choses to act on, whether they act on it the same way with CC as they did with LR3 (or whatever it was back when the M9 came out) I couldn't tell you...

But I assure you a RAW file is not some vanilla entity that starts life in your RAW app for you to shape like clay.... it arrives in your RAW app full of suggestions from the OEM, that your RAW app may/may not act upon and that you can undo/not undo and all this happens with very little visibility...

as a general rule of thumb the maker notes are suggestions and/or 'FYI' but anything tagged as EXIF is instrumental to the imaging pipeline of the RAW file, from obvious stuff like what camera was it, to the AsShotNeutral tag which means the white balance was this the ColorMatrix tags are the embedded Leica profile and well that's enough, I get carried away talking about this stuff and I'm waaaay off topic (again)!