Why not a Voigtlander 50mm?

[Vanillasludge]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

3 hours ago, Ko.Fe. said:

Cosina made Zeiss pimple instead of Leica superior tab is joke. But you need to understand what for focus tab is, regarding fast and intuitive pictures taking process. 

A.k.a. Leica fiddling. This is where ergonomics comes to play.

Enormous amount of long spread of aperture clicks is just no go. With Leica lens you change apertures without fighting the aperture ring.     

Not to mention Cosina's cost cuts focus helicoids. Not as smooth as Leica made.  

But what do I know, except how to fiddle Leica lens in the split of the second.

I'm not a reviewer here, just a long time moments of life shooter.

Where are ergonomics allowing me to use Leica the way it was intended for and where is Zeiss build for else.

Keep in mind that the Zeiss lenses were designed in the film era. I recall preferring the 1/3 aperture clicks when I used Velvia as a third over, a third under and dead on were my bracketing ranges.  

The film M cameras didn’t have intermediate shutter settings so being able to fine tune exposure on the lens was nice.  

[Harpomatic]

20 hours ago, Lee S said:

Hi Flávio, I just wanted to say a big thanks to you reviewing all the lenses on your site and providing the content for free.

Nobody in the community has undertaken side by side tests of such a large selection of lenses at the same time. 

Your website has been invaluable for me in picking 35/50mm lenses and I’ve found your reviews comprehensive.

I love what Cosina is doing in general but their random use of focus tabs and third stop apertures in some designs is frustrating for me. This is all personal preference though and does not in any way undermine your competence of assessing and reviewing lenses. 

Keep up the good work!  

Hello Lee, thank you very much for your kind words!

I agree with you about Cosina barrel design being all over the place, I would like less nostalgia and more ergonomics in the lenses, but the selection they have is irresistible to me.

The Zeiss ZM are not a Cosina design, the are a Zeiss design and a legacy from a previous camera system that also had the ‘nubbin’ and same aperture.

If anything, what I really like about the ZM line is that every single lens has the fully ribbed manual focus ring and the nubbin as well, no matter if you’re using a 21mm or an 85mm or anything in between, ergonomic are exactly the same. There is a lot to say for that. If you like those ergonomics then it’s personal opinion and habit.

Thanks again!

[Carlos cruz]

On 4/11/2025 at 12:55 AM, Vanillasludge said:

The film M cameras didn’t have intermediate shutter settings so being able to fine tune exposure on the lens was nice.  

Sorry to interrupt, but m5 definitely had intermediate shutter speeds. As to more precise zeiss f stop I can only agree . 

[Xavier]

I also read part of the review and found it very informative, thanks @Harpomatic for the work!

What interrupted my reading is the release of the 50/2.2 and the realisation that I wanted my 50mm lens to be as small and light as possible, so I skipped reading and bought the 50/2.2 as soon as I could get it... I used it quite a bit already and love it. It shows all CV can do: they propose a lot of choices, which fit very different constraints, and with comparatively reasonable prices.

Edited April 12 by Xavier

[pedaes]

29 minutes ago, Xavier said:

I wanted my 50mm lens to be as small and light as possible

So why not Voigtlander APO f3.5?

[EltonPL]

Or the LLL Elmar 50/2?

 

[Harpomatic]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Xavier said:

I also read part of the review and found it very informative, thanks @Harpomatic for the work!

What interrupted my reading is the release of the 50/2.2 and the realisation that I wanted my 50mm lens to be as small and light as possible, so I skipped reading and bought the 50/2.2 as soon as I could get it... I used it quite a bit already and love it. It shows all CV can do: they propose a lot of choices, which fit very different constraints, and with comparatively reasonable prices.

Hehe, I get it…I don’t need it now, but I’ll get my grubby little hands on one of those 50mm 2.2 sooner or later. I will find a reason to need it, I’m sure.

Thanks for your words by the way!

[Harpomatic]

47 minutes ago, pedaes said:

So why not Voigtlander APO f3.5?

Isn’t the 2.2 actually shorter?

[Xavier]

9 hours ago, pedaes said:

So why not Voigtlander APO f3.5?

Indeed, the f/2.2 is much smaller (30mm vs 45mm!), and lighter too (though versions of the APO f/3.5 vary between 150g and 245g based on what I could find). The main reasons for my choice were size and max aperture. While I did not need faster than f/2, the (slightly more than one) extra stop compared to the f/3.5 helps reducing DoF a bit and in lower light. I see the f/3.5 as a slower lens, but that is optically perfect from corner to corner whereas the f/2.2 is probably not as good until f/5.6 or f/8, but gives more options. For my use, I was looking for the latter kind of feature set rather than the former, so everything was in favor of the f/2.2. It is great CV gives us choices like this!

[kivis]

"i still think the Nokton 1.5 II is the best choice for me, I love using it and took so many good images with it. "

I agree so much, I bought one in chrome. Now my daily go to.

[TomB_tx]

2 hours ago, kivis said:

"i still think the Nokton 1.5 II is the best choice for me, I love using it and took so many good images with it. "

I agree so much, I bought one in chrome. Now my daily go to.

I also agree on the Nokton 1.5 II. I avoided lenses faster than f2 for many decades (Summicron advocate), and with M10 dropped back to 2.5 as my preferred. But shooting film a lot more got this Nokton for an M6 .85 I bought, and tried it on the M10 first. Lovely results on the m10 and M6. Feel the same about their newer 35 f1.5 that adds a nice focus tab missing from the 50.

[jaapv]

3 hours ago, kivis said:

"i still think the Nokton 1.5 II is the best choice for me, I love using it and took so many good images with it. "

I agree so much, I bought one in chrome. Now my daily go to.

A fantastic lens - I have the Bicolor version - it shines on my Monochrom.

[pippy]

On 4/10/2025 at 11:55 PM, Vanillasludge said:

...The film M cameras didn’t have intermediate shutter settings...

This is slightly misleading. Whilst it is pretty obvious that there are no markings for intermediate settings the shutter-speed dial of any M film camera - with the exception of the M7 - can be placed so as to give intermediary speeds.

It seems, however, that there are a couple of places on the dial where the 'betweenies' will NOT offer this option. Most sources cite 1/8 & 1/15 and 1/30 & 1/60 to be the odd-ones-out although there is this, from TomB-tx, which was posted last year to consider;

On 3/22/2024 at 12:59 PM, TomB_tx said:

...The M4 that I bought in 1968 included an insert (dated 7/67) in its Instructions booklet which said: 

"Intermediate shutter speeds may be set between the click-stop settings, except between 1/8sec. and 1/15sec., and between 1/30sec. and 1/60sec.."

The original text in the Instructions said: "Intermediate shutter speeds may be set between the click-stop settings, except between 1/4 and 1/8 sec."

Sounds like the shutter timing mechanism went through some evolution over the years, which should be expected.

The difference might indeed be due to, as stated, a change being made to the mechanism or possibly simply down to a typo in the original text...

For the M5 according to a post made by Michael Geschlecht also dating to March 2024;

"M5's have a slightly different system where the ONLY intermediate shutter speeds that are NOT usable are the space between the "dot" next to the "30" and the "30" and the space between "1/2 Second" & "1 Second".

Whereas the shutter of the above cameras is mechanically controlled the shutter of the M7 is electronically controlled. Whilst this allows for stepless speeds to be used when the camera's dial is set to Auto when in Manual mode only full-steps are available.

Hope that info might be of some use. OK; back to our Scheduled Program!

Philip.

Edited May 19 by pippy

[lct]

I would love to love the Nokton 50/1.5 v2 too but my SC variant exhibits too much color fringing. In the same compact package i use the Sonnar 50/1.5 preferably but its focus shift can be an issue in RF mode and its 0.9m MFD feels too long for a 50mm lens to me. Too bad Leica doesn't make compact 50/1.4 M lenses with close focus capabilities.

[Riccardo.asselta]

Il 50mm è la mia focale preferita. Ho avuto il Summicron IV, venduto a favore del Voigtlander Nokton f1,2 che ho trovato una lente fantastica, forse una delle migliori tra le luminose, venduto per un Summilux Asph che è una lente perfetta, abbastanza sognante fino a f4 e poi clinico quasi quanto un Apo. A questo ho affiancato il Sonnar, ottica bizzarra che può farti sognare o deprimere contemporaneamente. Ultimamente ho venduto il Sonnar e acquistato il Voigtlander Apo Lanthar f3,5, bellissima sorpresa, prestazioni altissime, dimensioni contenute e maf minima a 45 cm, per chi fosse interessato consiglio la versione Silver perché la Nera non viene riconosciuta dalla fotocamera e da un errore di “obiettivo non montato”. Ultimo acquisto di questi giorni è stato un Summicron Rigid II, innamoramento a prima vista, come è possibile che una lente del 1961 sia così perfetta?

 

Volevo ringraziare Arpomatico per la fantastica recensione, e anche se non condivido qualche valutazione, che è prettamente personale, ci hai offerto una visione d’insieme unica visto il gran numero di lenti recensite.

[Vanillasludge]

8 hours ago, pippy said:

This is slightly misleading. Whilst it is pretty obvious that there are no markings for intermediate settings the shutter-speed dial of any M film camera - with the exception of the M7 - can be placed so as to give intermediary speeds.

It seems, however, that there are a couple of places on the dial where the 'betweenies' will NOT offer this option. Most sources cite 1/8 & 1/15 and 1/30 & 1/60 to be the odd-ones-out although there is this, from TomB-tx, which was posted last year to consider;

The difference might indeed be due to, as stated, a change being made to the mechanism or possibly simply down to a typo in the original text...

For the M5 according to a post made by Michael Geschlecht also dating to March 2024;

"M5's have a slightly different system where the ONLY intermediate shutter speeds that are NOT usable are the space between the "dot" next to the "30" and the "30" and the space between "1/2 Second" & "1 Second".

Whereas the shutter of the above cameras is mechanically controlled the shutter of the M7 is electronically controlled. Whilst this allows for stepless speeds to be used when the camera's dial is set to Auto when in Manual mode only full-steps are available.

Hope that info might be of some use. OK; back to our Scheduled Program!

Philip.

Ok, let me hop into my time machine and let 2003 me know 😂

[pippy]

21 minutes ago, Vanillasludge said:

Ok, let me hop into my time machine and let 2003 me know 😂

Eh? I have absolutely no idea what that sentence tries to put across.

My post was intended to clear up any possible misunderstanding regarding the 'in between' shutter-speed availability of film M bodies which might be of some interest to forum members who use such cameras and could, therefore, be quite relevant.

What is the significance - in the context of film M cameras - of a time machine and 2003?

P.

EDIT : Are you saying that in 2003 you had a film M camera and didn't realise that you could use 'in-between' settings for shutter-speeds? If so why do you find that 'new to you' information to be funny?

Edited May 19 by pippy

[Vanillasludge]

Moderators please delete

Edited May 20 by Vanillasludge
😒