prav66 Posted October 5, 2007 Share #1 Posted October 5, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) After going through 3 new VC 28/1.9s tested on the M8 that's become my conclusion. It's apparent at all apertures from 3.5 onwards and is independent of contrast differences. Of course the VC 28 is softer yet wide open. The tiny VC 28/3.5 is as sharp as any Zeiss or Leica lens i've used. Maybe I got unlucky repeatedly but the contrast isn't the only thing that's low on the VC 28/1.9. It's visibly softer in general, text targets shot show up less legible, etc. No amount of messaging in post-production with sharpness or clarity sliders can make up the difference. Not a problem for people pictures, but visible for landscapes printed large. I'm beginning to wonder if it's the Leica summicron is the way to go for this focal length at f/2.0 down the road. Let me know if your experiences have been different in this regard. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 5, 2007 Posted October 5, 2007 Hi prav66, Take a look here VC 28/3.5 sharper than VC 28/1.9 lens?. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
cme4brain Posted October 5, 2007 Share #2 Posted October 5, 2007 After going through 3 new VC 28/1.9s tested on the M8 that's become my conclusion. It's apparent at all apertures from 3.5 onwards and is independent of contrast differences. Of course the VC 28 is softer yet wide open. The tiny VC 28/3.5 is as sharp as any Zeiss or Leica lens i've used. Maybe I got unlucky repeatedly but the contrast isn't the only thing that's low on the VC 28/1.9. It's visibly softer in general, text targets shot show up less legible, etc. No amount of messaging in post-production with sharpness or clarity sliders can make up the difference. Not a problem for people pictures, but visible for landscapes printed large. I'm beginning to wonder if it's the Leica summicron is the way to go for this focal length at f/2.0 down the road. Let me know if your experiences have been different in this regard. I have the CV 28/1.9 Ultron and it is sharp for me. I am wondering why you have gone through mulitple samples, every one I have had is sharp. Try Sean Reids website! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan States Posted October 5, 2007 Share #3 Posted October 5, 2007 If you are using the Ultron on an M8 what you are seeing as focus shift. It's pretty strong with the Ultron. I keep mine for use at F2, but use my Biogon 28 for 99% of shooting. Best wishes Dan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stunsworth Posted October 5, 2007 Share #4 Posted October 5, 2007 Can't say focus shift is something I've noticed with my M8/Ultron. In fact I've been impressed at how sharp the lens is - better than I remember it being with film. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 6, 2007 Share #5 Posted October 6, 2007 After going through 3 new VC 28/1.9s tested on the M8 that's become my conclusion. It's apparent at all apertures from 3.5 onwards and is independent of contrast differences. Of course the VC 28 is softer yet wide open. The tiny VC 28/3.5 is as sharp as any Zeiss or Leica lens i've used. Maybe I got unlucky repeatedly but the contrast isn't the only thing that's low on the VC 28/1.9. It's visibly softer in general, text targets shot show up less legible, etc. No amount of messaging in post-production with sharpness or clarity sliders can make up the difference. Not a problem for people pictures, but visible for landscapes printed large. I'm beginning to wonder if it's the Leica summicron is the way to go for this focal length at f/2.0 down the road. Let me know if your experiences have been different in this regard. That's surprising. The 28/3.5 is an extremely sharp lens but its contrast does indeed make it appear to have more resolution than the Ultron. The Ultron has lower contrast, as you know, but it isn't a soft lens. Perhaps the three you've tried all came from one problematic batch? Did the ones you tested match the resolution samples I showed in the 28s test? Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cme4brain Posted October 6, 2007 Share #6 Posted October 6, 2007 Can't say focus shift is something I've noticed with my M8/Ultron. In fact I've been impressed at how sharp the lens is - better than I remember it being with film. Perhaps I need to do more testing, but I have not noticed focus shift with my Ultron. No problem whatsoever. If I did not already own it, I would probably get the CV 28/3.5 version based on Sean's article. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
prav66 Posted October 8, 2007 Author Share #7 Posted October 8, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) It's possible my Ultron 28s are just a series of bad ones. The difference is defintely not a contrast difference as the legibility of lettering is very different sharpness-wise in sample tests. I'm going to try to exchange my Ultron for another sample where I bought it. In general I find Quality Control is the one area where one needs caution with getting a VC lens. My VC 35/1.7 also seems quite soft. However, the VC 50/1.5 and VC 35/1.2 have been outstanding, I see no reason to buy more expensive lenses over the ones I have. Will post results once I find a good sample. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 8, 2007 Share #8 Posted October 8, 2007 It's possible my Ultron 28s are just a series of bad ones. The difference is defintely not a contrast difference as the legibility of lettering is very different sharpness-wise in sample tests. I'm going to try to exchange my Ultron for another sample where I bought it. In general I find Quality Control is the one area where one needs caution with getting a VC lens. My VC 35/1.7 also seems quite soft. However, the VC 50/1.5 and VC 35/1.2 have been outstanding, I see no reason to buy more expensive lenses over the ones I have. Will post results once I find a good sample. Hi Praveen, That's true. There's no free lunch and the very low cost of the CV (not VC, by the way) lenses sometimes comes with the risk of bad examples. Keep in mind that contrast will indeed affect the legibility of lettering, etc. Want to post a couple examples of the same subject shot with both lenses (including your current Ultron)? If your CV 35/1.7 also seems soft, there's a chance that contrast actually is affecting things more than you've thought (for both lenses). My gut sense is that contrast differences may be what you're really seeing. Want to post some 100% crops with that lens as well? You may be surprised with how much resolution is actually in those files once local contrast is boosted. The 50/1.5 is a higher contrast lens and the 35/1.2 shows higher contrast than the Ultron. In general, the more expensive CV lenses (Ultron and up) seem to show less sample variation. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted October 8, 2007 Share #9 Posted October 8, 2007 Hi Praveen, I thought of this thread as I was prepping files for the 35s OOF section. Here's a crop from a file at 100% size, only default sharpening in C1. This is the 35 Ultron at F/2.8. Cheers, Sean 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/35099-vc-2835-sharper-than-vc-2819-lens/?do=findComment&comment=372224'>More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.