Voigtlander 50mm f/1 VM

[Adam Bonn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

This coming Saturday will see my five week anniversary with this lens... I've used it a lot. (about 1900 frames)

I've taken some photos I'm really pleased with, some where F1 really made the image pop, others where I stopped it down and I probably could've used a different 50.

I've also taken a lot of oh I wonder what that would look like at F1 type photos and a quite a few I wonder if I can actually nail focus on that or not type photos too, often with surprising results, today three times I nailed focus on a moving cat at a couple of meters or so - on Monday I didn't quite get a fecking massive stationary fire truck in focus... Funny old world isn't it? 😅

I've had a lot of fun. The lens had fun, hell even the cats had fun 🙂

I've stubbornly stuck with the 50 when the 35 in my bag by my side would have been so much better (not that I went anywhere or did anything I can't easily repeat)

Today I got my turista para Portugal vibe on and went on a massive walk down through Ribeira to Gaia (the pretty bit you'll see if you google image search Porto) all the way down to Afurada (and back).

I played with wide open focusing (and stray cats) at a variety of distances. I tried to notice and learn when I might have problems with FFS and when not (still getting my head around that one)

I've made a LR lens profile (using adobe lens profile creator) that removes a nice big chunk of the vignette without correcting any distortion (DM* me if you want it)

On the whole to me this lens has been a resounding success, it does wide open things that my Lux can't quite manage, it's really very sharp and I've become very acquainted with the chomat cromat** erm purple haze Jimi Hendrix tool in LR, more so than any other lens I've ever had I think... 😏

This weekend I'm going away to a place that's not so repeatable.

Having considered it carefully.... 

I'm done playing with the 50/1 now. I own it. It's a tool to do a job when I need it. I have other tools.

This weekend it's staying at home. It'll probably be all 28/35 anyway and I'll chuck the 50 cron in the bag just in case I want a 50.

If anyone is reading this and wondering if this is the fast fifty for them... Well go read the Fred Miranda review and see what you think... 😁 But for my €0.02...

This probably couldn't be my only 50 on an M it's big, it's heavy it blocks a LOT of VF real-estate... it's not a one trick pony, not in the slightest and if one wants a modern ASPH/FLE performance on a fast 50 then this will tick a lot of those boxes and all for less coin than a new 50 cron costs..

...if however shallow DOF isn't of great concern, or not the highest priority then I suspect you would be better served with an alternative.

For me, for the first time in erm maybe ever, my GAS balance was in the black and I wanted to treat myself to something that normally I wouldn't really be able to justify, something a bit special and the FM review seduced me by showing that the CV outperformed the Noctilux in both physical size and IQ oh yeah and cost 😂 and I thought why the hell not 

If you're in a similar frame of mind then you'll probably be happy with it.

Here's some screen shots (so I can fit more images in one post) from today. All wide open or thereabouts, all shot using a 2 stop B+W ND filter.

*If you want just drop me a line on the forum.

** I can spell chromatic aberration really. Honest.

 

 

 

 

 

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!

[Adam Bonn]

ok two more

 

 

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 March 1, 2023 by Adam Bonn

[Product Details]

More about Voigtlander 50 mm F1.0 Nokton Aspherical

Available at Amazon and B&H Photo Video

[Ray Vonn]

The thing is, this lens is now becoming natively available for the Canikon mirrorless systems.  So if, like me, you also own a Nikon Z camera, the one or two perceived advantages such as the pinpoint 200% magnified focusing/ simple focus peaking and 0.45 MFD does make you wonder whether to go that route rather than the rangefinder.  On the other hand, the rangefinder provides the nicer experience and makes one think and prepare more, which more often than not will result in a better image.  I'm finding it difficult deciding which mount to invest in with this lens to be honest.

[Adam Bonn]

I had no clue about that Ray.

Well on the one hand the VM mount will adapt to other systems, but not vice versa however 0.45MFD is a big upgrade over the 90cm of the VM - to put that in perspective (sic) if you’re sitting across the table from someone in an intimate restaurant and you want that lovely candle lit portrait.. you’d better hope there’s some room to slide your chair back a bit if you want a head and shoulders picture, or else it’ll just be the head and no one needs a close up of their dandruff… 😁

The only real fly in the soup IMO ( it’s restaurant analogy week) is the FFS.. you can’t really un-see it once you’ve noticed it.. (and the purple fringing but that’s par for the course, even APO lenses can PF and at least there’s a tool to fix that in LR etc), you can crop it out, possibly dick around with a radial gradient mask and negative clarity/sharpening values to mitigate it… but it’s a massive PITA

If the canikon versions do anything to address this, then that might be reason enough to chose that mount

 

[BastianK]

vor 8 Stunden schrieb Adam Bonn:

If the canikon versions do anything to address this, then that might be reason enough to chose that mount

On Fredmiranda I actually found a picture of the RF version from the back: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1797443

Looks to me like it has the same small rear element as the M-mount version.

So my guess for the RF/Z versions: not a complete redesign, just adjusted element spacing while using the same
lens elements to accomodate for different filter stacks as best as possible considering these design restraints.
This is not unusual (also makes sense from a business PoV) and has been the case for most of the Cosina
lenses that are available for different mounts (exception: 50mm 2.0 Apo-Lanthar, but you have to go to
the Japanese Cosina page to find this out, as information on German/English Voigtländer page is wrong).

So long story short: I expect very similar performance from the Z and RF mount versions but
I would definitely recommend to get these native ones if you want to use them on those Canon/Nikon cameras,
as the difference in filter stack will make things worse when using the unoptimized M-mount version here.

Edited March 2, 2023 by BastianK

[Ray Vonn]

11 hours ago, Adam Bonn said:

FFS

I had to Google that, as you know that has a rather different meaning where we're from.

[Adam Bonn]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

42 minutes ago, Ray Vonn said:

I had to Google that, as you know that has a rather different meaning where we're from.

Whenever I see one of my pictures affected by Front FieldCurvature Syndrome I find myself thinking “oh FFS” 😅 (in both senses of the expression)

[hdmesa]

7 hours ago, BastianK said:

On Fredmiranda I actually found a picture of the RF version from the back: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1797443

Looks to me like it has the same small rear element as the M-mount version.

So my guess for the RF/Z versions: not a complete redesign, just adjusted element spacing while using the same
lens elements to accomodate for different filter stacks as best as possible considering these design restraints.
This is not unusual (also makes sense from a business PoV) and has been the case for most of the Cosina
lenses that are available for different mounts (exception: 50mm 2.0 Apo-Lanthar, but you have to go to
the Japanese Cosina page to find this out, as information on German/English Voigtländer page is wrong).

So long story short: I expect very similar performance from the Z and RF mount versions but
I would definitely recommend to get these native ones if you want to use them on those Canon/Nikon cameras,
as the difference in filter stack will make things worse when using the unoptimized M-mount version here.

Perhaps images from the R and Z mount versions will exhibit less optical vignetting due to the wider mount openings.

[BastianK]

vor einer Stunde schrieb hdmesa:

Perhaps images from the R and Z mount versions will exhibit less optical vignetting due to the wider mount openings.

It doesn't matter how wide the mount is, it matters how wide the rear element is and as said: I see no difference here.

[hdmesa]

15 minutes ago, BastianK said:

It doesn't matter how wide the mount is, it matters how wide the rear element is and as said: I see no difference here.

Ok, I thought I remembered reading about a reduction in vignetting that happened with the change from M10 variants to the M11 due to the removal of the old rangefinder meter, so it had me thinking about the space inside the cameras when moving from M to another mount that has a larger space inside the camera between the lens and sensor. Perhaps the M11 is already optimal.

[Ray Vonn]

I thought I read somewhere that the Canikon versions are optically the same (albeit the MFD differences appears to show that they won't be 'exactly' the same).

[Adam Bonn]

1 hour ago, hdmesa said:

Ok, I thought I remembered reading about a reduction in vignetting that happened with the change from M10 variants to the M11

Might (and I mean might) that not be the BSI sensor in action there?

[hdmesa]

5 minutes ago, Adam Bonn said:

Might (and I mean might) that not be the BSI sensor in action there?

IIRC, it was independent of BSI's effect on wide angle lens vignetting, but I can't find the original discussion to confirm.

[LarsHP]

12 hours ago, BastianK said:

On Fredmiranda I actually found a picture of the RF version from the back: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1797443

Looks to me like it has the same small rear element as the M-mount version.

So my guess for the RF/Z versions: not a complete redesign, just adjusted element spacing while using the same
lens elements to accomodate for different filter stacks as best as possible considering these design restraints.
This is not unusual (also makes sense from a business PoV) and has been the case for most of the Cosina
lenses that are available for different mounts (exception: 50mm 2.0 Apo-Lanthar, but you have to go to
the Japanese Cosina page to find this out, as information on German/English Voigtländer page is wrong).

So long story short: I expect very similar performance from the Z and RF mount versions but
I would definitely recommend to get these native ones if you want to use them on those Canon/Nikon cameras,
as the difference in filter stack will make things worse when using the unoptimized M-mount version here.

To me, the much shorter MFD (45cm vs 90cm) seems to indicate that Cosina has done more than a minor adjustment for the thicker sensor glass in RF / Z cameras. However, they may have cut some corners regarding the focus mechanism by just moving the whole lens away from the sensor after the 90cm point.

We need to see some real world tests before we conclude how little or much optical difference there is between the M and RF/Z versions.

[J S H]

Nice scene at sunset. This was handheld at F4 and  a 3 shot vertical pano to get the framing I wanted. This lens seems to behave pretty well in backlit situations. 

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!

[Adam Bonn]

Oh something about this lens I keep forgetting to add…

The front element is very convex (if it was a watch the marketing would say triple domed sapphire crystal invokes the feel of plexi shod 1960s divers watches) 

But it’s a lens (and the FE isn’t made from sapphire), so my advice would be, take great effing care about whether the filter you’re using can screw on without hitting the FE… my B+W 2 stop ND is ok… 

[01maciel]

It has become quiet in this thread and around the lens. Surprising really, as I think it does its job quite well.
M10 + Voigtländer Nokton 50mm 1:1.0 VM (click to view properly)

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!

[J S H]

I have acquired a Nikon 5T close-up lens in 62mm to use with this lens. It seem like a good fit for 50mm, as there is a decent focus range you can achieve with the filter depending upon the distance you set the focus at. I didn't break out the tape measure, but I would say approximately 1.75-2.5 feet, which nicely complements the close focus distance you can achieve with the lens alone. The Nikon filter is relatively small and works with the lens hood.  Quality seems good, the focus point is sharp wide open, but everything improves a stop down. 

First image is the bare lens focused at MFD. Second image is close to the MFD you can achieve with the Nikon 5T (approx 2 feet). The lens could focus a few inches closer, but I couldn't move the tripod any closer, so stopped there. Both shots are wide open. 

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!

[LarsHP]

10 hours ago, J S H said:

I have acquired a Nikon 5T close-up lens in 62mm to use with this lens. It seem like a good fit for 50mm, as there is a decent focus range you can achieve with the filter depending upon the distance you set the focus at. I didn't break out the tape measure, but I would say approximately 1.75-2.5 feet, which nicely complements the close focus distance you can achieve with the lens alone. The Nikon filter is relatively small and works with the lens hood.  Quality seems good, the focus point is sharp wide open, but everything improves a stop down. 

First image is the bare lens focused at MFD. Second image is close to the MFD you can achieve with the Nikon 5T (approx 2 feet). The lens could focus a few inches closer, but I couldn't move the tripod any closer, so stopped there. Both shots are wide open.

It would be very appreciated if you could do a test with the 5T near MFD with something like black text on white paper (covering the whole frame). That's how I test my (two element) diopters on my lenses because it will reveal both sharpness/resolution and spherical aberration. The latter seems to be a common issue with combinations of various lenses and diopters: One lens will work greatly with one diopter, but that diopter won't perform well with another lens.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[J S H]

Here is a test chart with the Nikon 5T, shot at 18 inches, which is very near the MFD with this combo. Performance actually looks pretty good to me...certainly no glaring issues. I don't think the lens has a very flat field to begin with, but the close-up lens doesn't seem to be creating any major issues. I would never be using this combo for reproduction work, so the performance is more than adequate for my needs. 

Focus on center. Full frame and 100% crop from the left edge at F1.

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!