CV 1,9/28 on the M8

[Dan States]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In total the Ultron is a really good lens, but it does focus shift a bit. Not so much of a problem if you are shooting landscapes etc, but I noticed it when used at f4-5.6 on the M8.

 

The lens is less flare sensitive than the Summicron 28, so I never bother with the mostly useless metal shade.

 

I recently purchased a Zeiss Biogon 28 and have not used the Ultron since. There is no issues with focus shift on the Zeiss, and the level of clarity and resolution is visibly better even in print. Like the Ultron, I've found the Zeiss flare resistant and well constructed.

 

If you are shooting at F2 indoors a lot the Ultron is the one to have. If you are a landscape shooter I'd go with the Zeiss.

 

Best wishes

Dan

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[sean_reid]

In total the Ultron is a really good lens, but it does focus shift a bit. Not so much of a problem if you are shooting landscapes etc, but I noticed it when used at f4-5.6 on the M8.

 

The lens is less flare sensitive than the Summicron 28, so I never bother with the mostly useless metal shade.

 

I recently purchased a Zeiss Biogon 28 and have not used the Ultron since. There is no issues with focus shift on the Zeiss, and the level of clarity and resolution is visibly better even in print. Like the Ultron, I've found the Zeiss flare resistant and well constructed.

 

If you are shooting at F2 indoors a lot the Ultron is the one to have. If you are a landscape shooter I'd go with the Zeiss.

 

Best wishes

Dan

 

Hi Dan,

 

(The following based on my own experience testing these lenses, FWIW.)

 

Assuming your Ultron is a good example and focusing correctly, it's likely the Zeiss contrast, in part, that makes it seem to have more resolution. Contrast, of course, has a large effect on that perception. They're both excellent lenses. At F/2.8, assuming good copies of both lenses, the Zeiss shows excellent resolution on center but slightly lower resolution, than the Ultron, in the corners.

 

In my testing, the Ultron has been somewhat prone to veiling flare (which some will like as it lowers overall contrast) and the Zeiss ZM lenses, on the whole, tend to resist flare as well as (or better than) any other line of lenses I've tested. The standard CV hood on the 28 Ultron does reduce that tendency somewhat. The CV 28 that more closely matches the contrast level and flare resistance of the 28 Zeiss is actually the little CV 28/3.5.

 

If one prefers higher contrast lenses and doesn't need speed beyond F/2.8, I agree that the Zeiss is a good 28 mm choice. The higher contrast of the Zeiss lenses, in general, creates an immediate sense of definition (in files straight from the camera) that many people like.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Artorius]

I originally picked up the 28 Ultron for my M4-P & M6. Works great, on the M8 it seems a little off focus, and setting it at 2-2.8 works fine. I am going to do a focus test someday, but I am shooting too much, to test it at this time.

A little OT, I recently got the 21 f/4 P, and although a great lens with film, on the M8, I need to adjust the EV to -2/3. Is this normal?

 

 

Hi Dan,

 

(The following based on my own experience testing these lenses, FWIW.)

 

Assuming your Ultron is a good example and focusing correctly, it's likely the Zeiss contrast, in part, that makes it seem to have more resolution. Contrast, of course, has a large effect on that perception. They're both excellent lenses. At F/2.8, assuming good copies of both lenses, the Zeiss shows excellent resolution on center but slightly lower resolution, than the Ultron, in the corners.

 

In my testing, the Ultron has been somewhat prone to veiling flare (which some will like as it lowers overall contrast) and the Zeiss ZM lenses, on the whole, tend to resist flare as well as (or better than) any other line of lenses I've tested. The standard CV hood on the 28 Ultron does reduce that tendency somewhat. The CV 28 that more closely matches the contrast level and flare resistance of the 28 Zeiss is actually the little CV 28/3.5.

 

If one prefers higher contrast lenses and doesn't need speed beyond F/2.8, I agree that the Zeiss is a good 28 mm choice. The higher contrast of the Zeiss lenses, in general, creates an immediate sense of definition (in files straight from the camera) that many people like.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[jdos2]

I've had very mixed results with mine. I thought it extremely soft, but found instead that the lens is completely uncalibrated for my M8 (which focuses a 90mm Summi, a 50mm Summi, and even an Industar very well)/quote]

 

Had the same problem, fixed it with a plastic shim (0.2mm thick in my case) glued to the cam. Lens now very good

 

The tape on mine is just about .12- interesting that! I'll double the thickness. At least the mount on this lens doesn't rotate like the 40mm. That one is off, too.

 

It won't go back to CA for non-repair. I'll not wait 10 weeks for anyone to have forgotten that he owes me a lens. Amends, perhaps, though.

[jdos2]

I originally picked up the 28 Ultron for my M4-P & M6. Works great, on the M8 it seems a little off focus, and setting it at 2-2.8 works fine. I am going to do a focus test someday, but I am shooting too much, to test it at this time.

A little OT, I recently got the 21 f/4 P, and although a great lens with film, on the M8, I need to adjust the EV to -2/3. Is this normal?

 

I've found the same thing on mine- that it needs to -1 stop or thereabouts.

 

I've also found my 21mm very (very!) sharp wide open in direct contrast to the experience of many, softening as it drops towards f/8, but that's another thread, and more math than I want to deal with right now. I prefer it to the 28mm for sharpness... Apples - apples, it is not.

 

ANYWAY.

 

Sorry. I'll hush now.

 

Anyone wanna trade a LTM Ultron 35mm f1.7 for the 28mm version? :-)

[orjanf]

 

Can you explain exactly what you mean by this. I have the lens and the focus is way off, I really have no confidence when I use it. If there is some home made fix I'd love to try it.

 

Thanks

 

Hi,

 

Take a few test shots of a subject at infinity (>50 m will do)

Start on the infinity setting and then use different (very small changes) distance settings (ignoring the rangefinder) and note where the infinity mark is when the image is sharp.

 

Cut a donut shaped shim from a sheet of cardboard or plastic, about 28 mm inner diam and 31 mm outer.

 

Slide this over the inner barrel of the lens so it rests on the focusing cam.

This makes the rangefinder compensate for the back focus of the lens.

 

 

I my case the image was sharp with the infinity mark at about the 2.8 DOF marker on the lens and I needed 0.18 mm thickness for the shim.

 

Cardboard is easier to cut but for a permanent solution avoiding wear and dust plastic is better.

Of course if you have access to someone who can cut brass or alminium neatly...

[sean_reid]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I originally picked up the 28 Ultron for my M4-P & M6. Works great, on the M8 it seems a little off focus, and setting it at 2-2.8 works fine. I am going to do a focus test someday, but I am shooting too much, to test it at this time.

A little OT, I recently got the 21 f/4 P, and although a great lens with film, on the M8, I need to adjust the EV to -2/3. Is this normal?

 

The lens shouldn't change the metering but the 21/4 P has a good amount of contrast and so one may need to dial down to protect contrast in contrasty light. That will be true, of course, for any lens with a good deal of contrast (not the Ultron).

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

I've found the same thing on mine- that it needs to -1 stop or thereabouts.

 

I've also found my 21mm very (very!) sharp wide open in direct contrast to the experience of many, softening as it drops towards f/8,

 

That's usually just the result of diffraction and any lens that's very well corrected wide open can show it. Many of the current Leica lenses seem to hit their res. peaks at, or close to, wide open. This, of course, is a sign of excellent lens design and manufacture (technically).

 

Focus shift is another reason a lens can seem softer as it is stopped down but I doubt that's what you're seeing from the 21P.

 

Cheers,

[fordfanjpn]

Had the same problem, fixed it with a plastic shim (0.2mm thick in my case) glued to the cam. Lens now very good

 

This raises an interesting question for me. The Ultron was the first lens I bought for my M8, along with a CV adapter, and it was tack sharp. When I got more lenses, the Ultron sat unused for a while, and when I again tried it (with another Japanese generic brand adapter), it was soft. Not like I remembered it being at all. So now I'm wondering if the generic brand adapter could be the problem. Has anyone had the experience of different brands of adapters resulting in different focusing characteristics?

 

Bill

[sean_reid]

This raises an interesting question for me. The Ultron was the first lens I bought for my M8, along with a CV adapter, and it was tack sharp. When I got more lenses, the Ultron sat unused for a while, and when I again tried it (with another Japanese generic brand adapter), it was soft. Not like I remembered it being at all. So now I'm wondering if the generic brand adapter could be the problem. Has anyone had the experience of different brands of adapters resulting in different focusing characteristics?

 

Bill

 

That can certainly make a difference Bill.

 

Cheers,

[@bumac]

Anybody could show a picture with bokeh?

[cbretteville]

Rainer,

28mm Ultron at f1.9 on the M8.

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!