Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
thompsonkirk

New CV Ultron 28mm f2 on M8?

Recommended Posts

Hi Kirk,

 

The 35/1.4 wasn't intended to be an improved version of the 35/1.2 but rather a new lens that emulates the Leica 35/1.4 Pre-ASPH. The 28/2.0, however, is intended to replace the 28/1.9 and I'll start testing it as soon as my review sample arrives. I'm hoping that's next week.

 

A good copy of the 28/1.9 should resolve very well even wide open. The lens' tendency to flare, however, can be a particular problem when a filter is mounted to it (esp. when light sources appear in the frame). So what I'd most like to see in the new lens is an improved set of coatings.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

 

Hi Sean,

 

my son is currently working on a project on James Ravilious, an english photographer who died relatively recently. Ravilious believed he could extend the tonal range in black and white by using uncoated lenses and optimising lens hoods to reduce flare. Is it possible that improving the coatings with its beneficial effect on colour performance and flare might increase the contrast produced by the Ultron?

 

Cheers

 

Tony

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just received my cv 28/2.0 Ultron and have little opportunity to try it today. Tomorrow I am going on a trip so I'll be able to try it more extensively. First shot, 100% crop iso160 at f2, focussed on the flower on the right. Sharp enough for you?

 

The only thing that is a little strange is the 'corona' around the oof petals. Don't quite know if that is pleasing bokeh or not. Colour rendition looks excellent, btw.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for posting this. The 'corona' is a strange effect - not what we usually call bokeh, because it seems to be a single double image (if that makes any sense).

 

I don't want to speak prematurely, having seen this in just one image, but.... I'd thought of getting one for my more beat-up body, to use in circumstances where I wouldn't want my more expensive lens at risk. But this effect, if commonplace with the lens, would be a deal-breaker.

 

Maybe this is some sort of offset element in one copy of the lens? I don't wish that on you, but I'd rather you had one copy that could be exchanged, than that all new Ultrons did the same thing.

 

I hope Sean will look into this in a forthcoming review!

 

Kirk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looks like glow at first glance, like in the pic below (Lux 35 pre-aph, f/1.4), but the regularity of the halo makes me think of doubled lines as well suspecting disputable bokeh... Would be great if you could shoot other pics with highlights in the background.

 

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/EPSN4045_14cropweb02.jpg&key=701279ff569fa86a98a42c0a6c1eda03a99702c86021c17d718a874c9f1b06c5">

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just received my cv 28/2.0 Ultron and have little opportunity to try it today. Tomorrow I am going on a trip so I'll be able to try it more extensively. First shot, 100% crop iso160 at f2, focussed on the flower on the right. Sharp enough for you?

 

The only thing that is a little strange is the 'corona' around the oof petals. Don't quite know if that is pleasing bokeh or not. Colour rendition looks excellent, btw.

 

 

If you focused on the flower on the right I'd say it is backfocusing a little. The flower in the middle, slightly behind the one on the right, looks to be more in-focus.

 

Otherwise I hope you like your new lens, good luck with it.

(No comment on the Bokeh, that is a personal thing)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for the responses. Look, I do not want to misrepresent the lens, so here are two shots, full frame rather than cropped down. One is at f8 and the other at f2. I think these are more realistic because how often would you really use a wide angled lens for close-up photography?

 

When I buy a new lens I always pixel peep and this one gives me very sharp results even wide open which has got to be a good thing. I'd also add that build quality feels solid, focussing is nice and smooth and apeture ring is tighter than (say) on my CV50. Build quality reminds me of a zeiss lens and is as good as my CV28/3.5 which in my humble opinion has the best build quality of the CVs I've owned. In fact, it looks like a bigger brother to the CV28/3.5 but with a tab. I won't go further because I'll leave an expert like Sean Reid to give us the full sp.

 

I intend to usethe CV28 Ultron for urban landscape work and as a general walk around lens, especially as the mornings get darker (for those of you who know of my early morning photographic rambles on the way to work).

 

iso160 f8 1/30

 

same but at f2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Abou the "corona"... it happened to me to observe this effect in the developing session of Lightroom... do not remember exactly with which kind of processing ("fill light" ? "vibrance" ?) : how was your image captured and treated ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Abou the "corona"... it happened to me to observe this effect in the developing session of Lightroom... do not remember exactly with which kind of processing ("fill light" ? "vibrance" ?) : how was your image captured and treated ?

 

Luigi

 

Good point about processing steps in Lightroom. I did add 'clarity' (I always put it at 50%) and I also recovered the highlights. However, the strange corona around the leaf edges remains even in the unprocessed RAW file.

 

One thing that does occur to me: could this be from the UV/IR filter? I am using a B+W 486 UV/IR.

 

I have just managed to code the lens using the M-Coder so it will be interesting to see what impact that has on my pictures when I take it out for a spin tomorrow.

 

LouisB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

However, the strange corona around the leaf edges remains even in the unprocessed RAW file.

 

 

LouisB

 

But there are few RAW converts that don't apply some type/kind of processing during the reading of the RAW data to display the image on your computer screen.

LR and ACR (which is what LR uses) have default settings that increase sharpening, contrast and some color correction based on the make and model of the camera the RAW file comes from. Even PS Bridge uses ACR to convert RAW image data into something that can be displayed on screen.

So when you say these coronas are still there even in unprocessed images, there are NO unprocessed images. It all about how much processing is being done.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

OK but whatever raw converter we may use we don't often get this sort of halo do we.

Hence my question above. Would be great to view some more images with highlights in the background. Perhaps it is a true 'glow' after all. Give me this with some smooth bokeh and i order the lens right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You have just found the Leica glow but on a Voigtlander

 

OK but whatever raw converter we may use we don't often get this sort of halo do we.

Hence my question above. Would be great to view some more images with highlights in the background. Perhaps it is a true 'glow' after all. Give me this with some smooth bokeh and i order the lens right now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You have just found the Leica glow but on a Voigtlander

Would love it if i don't get bokeh a la Voigtlander...

/applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/peur.gif&key=2cd5b424ac5e875039370366b5b0c55a596ae0b9f542ea342222c75ca69d2bd8">

Well i'm unfair for my CV 21/4 P and 35/1.4 SC which are quite good OoF wise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good point about processing steps in Lightroom. I did add 'clarity' (I always put it at 50%) and I also recovered the highlights. However, the strange corona around the leaf edges remains even in the unprocessed RAW file.

LouisB

 

Hmm - at first I thought it might be the high clarity value, but I checked on the attached image and even at 100 there was no halo. Maybe it's to do with OOF areas? This shot was with the 35 Summicron mk IV fully open at ISO 160. No halo after LR processing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I just bought my CV Ultron 28mm f2.0, which is a very good lens both in term of quality an d money. The following were taken with M8:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Chris: Never got any glow with the 35/2 IV either.

KC727: Sharp pics but no bokeh. Would be great at f/2 focussing at short distance if you can.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hi Sean,

 

my son is currently working on a project on James Ravilious, an english photographer who died relatively recently. Ravilious believed he could extend the tonal range in black and white by using uncoated lenses and optimising lens hoods to reduce flare. Is it possible that improving the coatings with its beneficial effect on colour performance and flare might increase the contrast produced by the Ultron?

 

Cheers

 

Tony

 

Yes - absolutely. But the 1.9 Ultron can have a problem shooting into the light when it is filtered so I personally would be happy to make the trade off. My test copy of the CV 28/2.0 arrived today. I'm using it for a shoot tomorrow and then will begin formal testing.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Would love it if i don't get bokeh a la Voigtlander... /applications/core/interface/imageproxy/imageproxy.php?img=http://tinyurl.com/rv7w/peur.gif&key=2cd5b424ac5e875039370366b5b0c55a596ae0b9f542ea342222c75ca69d2bd8">

Well i'm unfair for my CV 21/4 P and 35/1.4 SC which are quite good OoF wise.

 

Exactly - with respect to your latter comment. The OOF looks different from one CV lens to another.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Just to give you a bit more of a taste of the results from my CV28/2.0 Ultron here are three more.

 

Be aware that I have post-processed the pictures using my standard procedure, as laid out in Scott Kelby's excellent "7-Point System".

 

Playing the slots: this is an f2 shot in very difficult circumstances but to my mind this is a lovely 'filmic' shot and not just because of the increased grain. The lens has a soft look, which should not be confused with a lack of sharpness. It is very, very sharp. But is has a 'summicron' type feel, imho.

 

Ugly Ducklings: this is a personal thing but again to my eye the colour rendition of the lens is excellent.

 

Light on the water: a difficult test, almost zero contrast, very flat and subtle colours but the lens has, in my opinion coped very well indeed. Definitely a 'summicron' type feel to this picture.

 

Hope this helps

 

LouisB

Share this post


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...
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use. We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue., Read more about our Privacy Policy