Jump to content

Voigtlander 50mm f/2 APO vs Leica 50mm f/2 APO


jffielde
 Share

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 hours ago, Goposer said:

..

 

I can’t see how VL making the lens a bit smaller would make it jump $8,000 in price. They made the 35f1.2 smaller and smaller and better optically and it didn’t go up in price. You’re being crazy now. The Leica 50APO price is absolutely ridiculous. 

..

Ok, then why didn't Voigtlander make their 50 APO smaller?  

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Capuccino-Muffin said:

I have a secret for you: I wear no underwear. This way I save 34.25$ a year. In 10 years, that’s 342.50$. I was smart, I paid 300$ for a voigtlander lens 10 Years ago. In 2027 my smart no-underwears move will pay off. Screw Leica, I could have never pulled it off so easily.

The smart man always wins.

 

Butt you're wearing out your trousers doing that.  And trousers are more expensive.  Penny wise, pound foolish.

😜

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Goposer said:

 

The way I see it is, the VL 50APO-Lanthar has effectively killed the Leica 50APO, except for doctors and lawyers that clean their toilet with $100 bills. I don’t know how any human can think paying $9,000 for a small 50mm lens is reasonable. 

Say the people who cannot afford the Leica lens.

Same old story.

Look, I'm not going to pay $8K for one either, but I'm not going to begrudge those who want to.  And I can guarantee that those who cannot afford that lens are the ones that are throwing away their money by doing stuff like cleaning toilets with it.

:)

Link to post
Share on other sites

I would not be able to pay 8k for a lens, after the earthquake two years ago which caused significant damage to the city I live, priorities are different. My new roof cost less then this.

So to me, VL lenses offer extremely good value, especially when you buy them with aim to use then and not resell them. 

And to be honest, I am not sure if any of my friends or family or clients could see the difference in IQ.

That said, the lanthar lenses are ugly. At least to me. It totally ruins the esthetic of a m. 

And this is great, as it tempers my GAS. 

But in the end, Leica is Leica, and I believe that every M owner should have at least one Leica lens. A kind of homecoming…
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Goposer said:

Because the Leica lens is NOT $8,000 better. 

No, it is not 8k better for YOU. Or me. But for some people it is.

often value is like beauty, it is in the eye of the beholder…

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Goposer said:

It is small. It’s the size of a summilux. Just like with the 35f1.2, it may come out in a version 2 even smaller. 

that lens was originally intended for Sony, not Leica. but again. If a few millimeters is worth $8,000 then it means you clean your toilet with $100 bills. Because the Leica lens is NOT $8,000 better. 

We are literally taking about the aperture ring. That’s how much taller it is. The side of the aperture ring. 
 

That’s like asking why can’t Leica make their 28f2 smaller? Why can’t it be as tiny as the Ultron?

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!

Whoa, thanks for that illustration!  The Summicron is tiny compared to the Voigtlander - shorter and  thinner. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

14 minutes ago, Goposer said:

 

That’s like asking why can’t Leica make their 28f2 smaller? Why can’t it be as tiny as the Ultron?

 

Because Leica didn't want the wide open vignetting that the Voigtlander has.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Goposer said:

Like all lenses, that goes away when you open the RAW file. There’s a thing called a Lens profile. It’s something you never see in real use unless you’re testing a lens with profiles turned off. 

Oh, so you need to correct it with software to make up for hardware deficiencies?

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

@Goposer: I can’t afford to use money in the toilet nor to buy a new leica lens. I for sure would not see the difference either, so for me the 8k value is not there.

But, for certain people, who make their money from photography, the difference might be worth it as it might attract them higher upscaled customers somehow. An investment well worth it.

May be many people are extremely happy to buy a 8k lens and therefore do not need to waste money elsewhere: fancy car, lover, drugs, whatever. A well made investment.

Don’t judge to easy please.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Goposer said:

Not when you have to open the hood, because of the nasty flare.

Even that small difference in size isn’t worth $8,000.  

That pic of the Voigtlander is without a hood?  How much bigger is it with a hood?

Link to post
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Goposer said:

Like all lenses, that goes away when you open the RAW file. There’s a thing called a Lens profile. It’s something you never see in real use unless you’re testing a lens with profiles turned off. 
 

The one thing you can’t take off with a profile is FLARE. Which the 50APO Leica has, but the VL doesn’t. 

Says the man who hasn't used a Leica 50 APO

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Goposer said:

I don’t care how someone spends their money. All I said was the Leica APO isn’t $8,000 better by any objective measure. You’re the one walking about people. I never mentioned people. I’m only talking about lenses. But you guys take everything personal. As usual. This thread was dead until I said the Leica isn’t $8,000 better. Now look. All of a sudden is a personal attack. Buy 10 of them for all I care. 🤷🏻‍♂️

How on earth did you turn this as a personal attack on you.  What I wrote was:

 

"Look, I'm not going to pay $8K for one either, but I'm not going to begrudge those who want to."

What there is personal?  It's a live and let live statement, where in fact you are insulting those who can buy the lens by saying they clean their toilets with money.

You need to be happy with what you have.
 

Link to post
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, Goposer said:

I don’t need to. I have a better one.🤷🏻‍♂️
 

flare ruins photos and has no place in an $8,000 lens.  

Ok, so you have never used the lens.  Got it.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just now, Goposer said:

Saying someone is rich is now an insult? 😀

If you don’t want to buy a Leica APO stop hitting the reply button. You’re really annoying me. I said what I had to say. Leave it alone. 

You're saying they clean their toilets with money.  Which obviously suggests they are stupid and wasteful.

When in fact people who can afford an $8K lens tend to be smart, resourceful and successful.  I am sorry that you are upset that Leica makes lenses for people who can afford them.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Goposer said:

I don’t need to. I have a better one.🤷🏻‍♂️
 

flare ruins photos and has no place in an $8,000 lens.  

I am glad you are happy with your lens.

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.

Loading...
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...