Maggie_O Posted November 12, 2007 Share #21 Posted November 12, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) There's a bit of perspective fooling the eye in that picture. The 28 Ultron is big but not as large as it looks there. It's a bit longer than the 35 but it's really the hood that makes it seem huge. A different (vented) hood, is a good idea. Cheers, Sean Guess what's going on my Xmas list, then! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 12, 2007 Posted November 12, 2007 Hi Maggie_O, Take a look here The sharp little 28 on the M8... I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
sean_reid Posted November 12, 2007 Share #22 Posted November 12, 2007 Guess what's going on my Xmas list, then! I hope Santa is good to you. If you want to get a good sense, grab the measurements of the two Ultrons from the 28s and 35s reviews and sketch them on paper at scale. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cme4brain Posted November 12, 2007 Share #23 Posted November 12, 2007 It's actually one of the sharpest 28s ever made by anyone in any mount. Cheers, Sean I have both now (having recently bought the 28/3.5 skopar based on Sean's review) and am testing the new 28/3.5 skopar. If it is a good Voigt sample (as all mine have been) then I may sell my 28/1.9 Ultron as I have begun to really appreciate the smaller lenses. Apparently my 49 year old eyes need a DOF cushion for focusing rendering fast lenses less optimal for me. I don't know, it somehow seems a shame to me for my shooting to put a large lens on the M8 body, along with a large flash. I could not imagine now going back to a DSLR. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdos2 Posted November 12, 2007 Share #24 Posted November 12, 2007 I´m just testing the cv 28/1.9 and I´m a little bit disapointed by the optical quality, referending to my 50mm Lux: free image hosting ▲ s4.bilder-hosting.de [url=http://www.bilder-hosting.de/show/http://www.bilder-hosting.de/show/SDB05.html In theese both fotos the sharpnes seem to be suboptimal, what do You think of it? Dieter Focus is off on mine. I had to shim the non-rotating focusing cam with clear-tape to improve things. I'm not the only one who'll tell you such things. Now, it's okay. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cme4brain Posted November 12, 2007 Share #25 Posted November 12, 2007 Focus is off on mine. I had to shim the non-rotating focusing cam with clear-tape to improve things. I'm not the only one who'll tell you such things. Now, it's okay. I am sorry that Voigt seems to have some quality control issues, as demonstrated by Sean Reid's lens testing and postings such as yours. Perhaps I have been lucky, but my eight Voigt lenses have all been perfect- sharp as a tack, no focus issues, no rattles, no loose rings, etc. Just what I expect them to be. Return it to where you bought it for an exchange. The performance/cost ration compared to Leica is so great, it is worth the effort. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maggie_O Posted November 14, 2007 Share #26 Posted November 14, 2007 The 28mm Color Skopar arrived yesterday and boy howdy, is it ever one little gem of a lens! I put an IR filter on it, but I'm still waiting for my Milich adapter, so it's uncoded. Sharp and nicely contrast-y, I really like how this lens draws. Some shots from yesterday: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlancasterd Posted November 14, 2007 Share #27 Posted November 14, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) The 28mm Color Skopar arrived yesterday and boy howdy, is it ever one little gem of a lens! I put an IR filter on it, but I'm still waiting for my Milich adapter, so it's uncoded. Sharp and nicely contrast-y, I really like how this lens draws. Some shots from yesterday: Welcome to the club Maggie! Like several others on this list, I have both the 28/3.5 and the 28/1.9 and am delighted with the sharpness of both. I did a calculation a couple of days back and worked out that, including the cost of the Milich coded adapters, Milich lens hoods and Leica or B+W filters I've put together a 7 lens Voigtlander line up (12, 15, 28, 28, 35, 50 and 90) for about the same cost as one Noctilux - and I have no complaints about the optical or mechanical quality of any of my Voigtlander lenses... I'm now wondering about a 25... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
DavidStone Posted November 14, 2007 Share #28 Posted November 14, 2007 Welcome to the club Maggie! Like several others on this list, I have both the 28/3.5 and the 28/1.9 and am delighted with the sharpness of both. I did a calculation a couple of days back and worked out that, including the cost of the Milich coded adapters, Milich lens hoods and Leica or B+W filters I've put together a 7 lens Voigtlander line up (12, 15, 28, 28, 35, 50 and 90) for about the same cost as one Noctilux - and I have no complaints about the optical or mechanical quality of any of my Voigtlander lenses... I'm now wondering about a 25... The other one missing from your set is the 21, which is the one I use more than any other. Despite the corner definition problems that others have had, I'm more than happy with mine. 1. Full aperture ISO 640 2. 100% crop David 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/37220-the-sharp-little-28-on-the-m8/?do=findComment&comment=402555'>More sharing options...
cme4brain Posted November 14, 2007 Share #29 Posted November 14, 2007 Welcome to the club Maggie! Like several others on this list, I have both the 28/3.5 and the 28/1.9 and am delighted with the sharpness of both. I did a calculation a couple of days back and worked out that, including the cost of the Milich coded adapters, Milich lens hoods and Leica or B+W filters I've put together a 7 lens Voigtlander line up (12, 15, 28, 28, 35, 50 and 90) for about the same cost as one Noctilux - and I have no complaints about the optical or mechanical quality of any of my Voigtlander lenses... I'm now wondering about a 25... Man, I have the near exact same CV lens line up as you, not having the 12mm but the 75mm. I am wondering about having both the 12 and the 15, I may not be able to justify both. I have the 25mm and am happy with it, but need to get the ring milled. I am hand coding all my wides but should send in those adapters as well. Were it not for the Voigtlander line of lenses, I would not have been able to buy into/wife justify Leica. It has made my pleasurable hobby for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnastovall Posted November 14, 2007 Author Share #30 Posted November 14, 2007 Man, I have the near exact same CV lens line up as you, not having the 12mm but the 75mm. I am wondering about having both the 12 and the 15, I may not be able to justify both. I have the 25mm and am happy with it, but need to get the ring milled. I am hand coding all my wides but should send in those adapters as well. Were it not for the Voigtlander line of lenses, I would not have been able to buy into/wife justify Leica. It has made my pleasurable hobby for me. I just got the 12 and it is rapidly supplanting the 15 in my kit.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maggie_O Posted November 14, 2007 Share #31 Posted November 14, 2007 The other one missing from your set is the 21, which is the one I use more than any other. Despite the corner definition problems that others have had, I'm more than happy with mine. I've had the LTM CV 21mm for a while now and I adore that little lens, too. I used it exclusively on travel days in Europe this fall. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnastovall Posted November 14, 2007 Author Share #32 Posted November 14, 2007 I've had the LTM CV 21mm for a while now and I adore that little lens, too. I used it exclusively on travel days in Europe this fall. How do you us it with the 28mm frame line and does the RF coupling really help. It looked to me like one would want to get the LTM and put a coded converter on it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maggie_O Posted November 14, 2007 Share #33 Posted November 14, 2007 How do you us it with the 28mm frame line and does the RF coupling really help. It looked to me like one would want to get the LTM and put a coded converter on it. I use an external VF with it. I focus with the Leica's VF and frame with the Voigtländer. Here's the rig, back when it was brand new: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jlancasterd Posted November 14, 2007 Share #34 Posted November 14, 2007 The other one missing from your set is the 21, which is the one I use more than any other. Despite the corner definition problems that others have had, I'm more than happy with mine.1. Full aperture ISO 640 2. 100% crop David I had the 21 but found I didn't use it - I tend to go straight to the 15 if the 28 isn't wide enough and have a 21mm v/f permanently mounted on the M8 for that purpose. I traded the 21 on the 12... One man's fish is another man's poisson.... :) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnastovall Posted November 14, 2007 Author Share #35 Posted November 14, 2007 I use an external VF with it. I focus with the Leica's VF and frame with the Voigtländer. Here's the rig, back when it was brand new: Thanks, and just when you think you are over GAS this comes along.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maggie_O Posted November 14, 2007 Share #36 Posted November 14, 2007 I had the 21 but found I didn't use it - I tend to go straight to the 15 if the 28 isn't wide enough and have a 21mm v/f permanently mounted on the M8 for that purpose. I traded the 21 on the 12... One man's fish is another man's poisson.... :) Oui!! When I was at the Eiffel Tower, I met another M8 shooter who had the CV 15 on his camera and we swapped lenses for a bit (I had my 35mm Ultron) and man, that gave me the gas, especially since I've got the 21mm VF... Here's one of my 15mm shots: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
germanlaws Posted November 14, 2007 Share #37 Posted November 14, 2007 Seems you are right, Read: it´s not a question of sharpnes but of contrast with the 1.9 28mm Ultron. I had to learn - as for many other questions with the M8 - to change my way of working; think at least i start to take it (click to enlarge): Here´s a foto of the entrance of my office and I think, it couldn´t be sharper and I´m amazed with the different white colours at the walls: The second shows my gym at the late evening, and here I find the sort of sharpnes I was looking for: Of course, I´m not a Professional fotographer and everything could be done better, but that´s a question of the cv 28 1.9 Ultron. I start to love that glass... greetings from Germany Dieter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
sean_reid Posted November 14, 2007 Share #38 Posted November 14, 2007 Seems you are right, Read: it´s not a question of sharpnes but of contrast with the 1.9 28mm Ultron. I had to learn - as for many other questions with the M8 - to change my way of working; think at least i start to take it (click to enlarge): Here´s a foto of the entrance of my office and I think, it couldn´t be sharper and I´m amazed with the different white colours at the walls: The second shows my gym at the late evening, and here I find the sort of sharpnes I was looking for: Of course, I´m not a Professional fotographer and everything could be done better, but that´s a question of the cv 28 1.9 Ultron. I start to love that glass... greetings from Germany Dieter I think "Read" is me. I'll proceed assuming that. The contrast issue in lenses is important to keep in mind. MTF charts, for example, rely on both contrast and resolution in order to get their results. Thus, the MTF results for a high-contrast lens can imply it resolves more than it really does (and the converse is true for a lower contrast lens). Straight from the camera, a file from a lower contrast lens often seems "soft" to many people and they, mistakenly and understandably, assume that the lens lacks resolution. Among modern lenses, this is the case with the 28 Ultron and, especially, the 35 Ultron. Doing a little with work with file contrast, however, one may soon see that such lenses record far more detail than he or she might have expected (based on looking only at files straight from the camera). I've written this many times, but I tend to prefer lower contrast lenses for contrasty subjects and higher contrast lenses for lower contrast subjects. Otherwise, I tend to like to split the difference with mid-contrast lenses like the Leica 24/2.8 ASPH or CV 35/2.5 Skopar. Cheers, Sean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
germanlaws Posted November 14, 2007 Share #39 Posted November 14, 2007 I think "Read" is me. I'll proceed assuming that. Sorry for my mistake, Sean. you are from now allowed to call me "peter" for three times lg Dieter Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.