Voigtlander vs Leica: A dilemma.

[hamzaaytac]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I used Leica lenses with my M8. Also Zeiss. But I met Voigtlander thanks to a friend. I purchased 50mm 1.5 Nokton, 28mm 1.9 Ultron and 90mm 3.5 APO Lanthar. I am totally impressed. These lenses produce superb quality images. Razor sharp, contrast. After 10-15 days usage, I am waiting 35mm 1.2 Nokton and 15mm 4.5 Heliar.

 

I purchased Leica for its superb quality images. All Voigtlander lenses are priced at 1/8 according to Leica. 400/3200 500/4000 vs...

 

Please share your opinions about these wonderful lenses... Can anyone tell me why these lenses are not popular? Why did you purchase Leica lenses? For brand value? After many shots, I did not think that Leica lenses' image quality is not better than Voigtlanders'.

 

Thanks for all replies.

[Advertisement]

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

[Shootist]

VC lenses are very popular. Many of the members of this whole forum site use them.

I even have 2 of them. A 21P and the new 28 f/2. I also have a whole fleet of Leica lenses.

Why did I buy mostly Leica lenses over any other brand? I'm not quite sure. When I had a Nikon I owned all Nikkor (Nikon) lenses except one. I guess for the same reason, whatever that may be.

[misha]

I used Leica lenses with my M8. Also Zeiss. But I met Voigtlander thanks to a friend. I purchased 50mm 1.5 Nokton, 28mm 1.9 Ultron and 90mm 3.5 APO Lanthar. I am totally impressed. These lenses produce superb quality images. Razor sharp, contrast. After 10-15 days usage, I am waiting 35mm 1.2 Nokton and 15mm 4.5 Heliar.

 

I purchased Leica for its superb quality images. All Voigtlander lenses are priced at 1/8 according to Leica. 400/3200 500/4000 vs...

 

Please share your opinions about these wonderful lenses... Can anyone tell me why these lenses are not popular? Why did you purchase Leica lenses? For brand value? After many shots, I did not think that Leica lenses' image quality is not better than Voigtlanders'.

 

Thanks for all replies.

 

i didnt spend $5k on M8 for the privilege of shooting Voigtlander. That said, cv-15 has been very good to me.

Go figure. happy holidays

[tbarker13]

There are tons of great lenses out there made by Leica, CV, Konica, Canon, Zeiss and Nikon.

People get hung up on one brand or line of lenses for a variety of reasons. But there are stellar performers (it sometimes depends on the type of performance you are looking for) from each of those companies.

Personally, I like having one or two leica lenses in my kit just to have them. But my current favorite is a 35 UC Hexanon by Konica.

Just find glass that make images you are happy with - and don't worry about whose name is on the outside.

[ho_co]

In my book, the main reason for buying Leica is that I don't need to ask whether it's any good. For the most part, Leica lenses are unsurpassed.

 

And they are all extremely well made, relatively compact and generally fairly light.

 

Okay, maybe not always so light weight, but they are comfortable to handle and except for the Summarits, a glance will normally tell me which is which, because each lens has its own appearance.

 

Some Zeiss lenses are better than their Leica counterparts, some aren't. The Voigtländer lenses aren't at top of the heap, but they're not bad either, particularly at the price.

 

You will probably lose money if you later sell a Cosina-Voigtländer lens, and you may make money selling a Leica lens, put it's up to you whether that makes any difference.

 

"Ya pays yer money and ya takes yer choice."

[offshore]

I used Leica lenses with my M8. Also Zeiss. But I met Voigtlander thanks to a friend. I purchased 50mm 1.5 Nokton, 28mm 1.9 Ultron and 90mm 3.5 APO Lanthar. I am totally impressed. These lenses produce superb quality images. Razor sharp, contrast. After 10-15 days usage, I am waiting 35mm 1.2 Nokton and 15mm 4.5 Heliar.

 

I purchased Leica for its superb quality images. All Voigtlander lenses are priced at 1/8 according to Leica. 400/3200 500/4000 vs...

 

Please share your opinions about these wonderful lenses... Can anyone tell me why these lenses are not popular? Why did you purchase Leica lenses? For brand value? After many shots, I did not think that Leica lenses' image quality is not better than Voigtlanders'.

 

Thanks for all replies.

It's really all up to you for the look you want. I've used Leica glass for years and every once in a while try a Voigtlander and end up selling it because the Leitz lenses are sharper, contrastier, more well corrected and just plain better built. That's my opinion.

[thai.charlie]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I see no dilemma. More choice is always welcome! I have and use both Leica and CV glass.

[tobey bilek]

CV lenses are value lenses. Decent for the price, Leica is better.

 

I bought the 15.12 the day they came out. Got a 25 later. They don`t match Leica, but Leica does not make a 12 and 15 at the time and 25 sees limited use.

[ljclark]

I didn't spend $5k on M8 for the privilege of shooting Voigtlander.

 

I take the other side of that coin. I paid $5K for an M8 precisely for the privilege of shooting C/V, Ziess, or Leica. To me, that's the whole point. I select the lens that fits the need. I keep re-reading Sean Reid's reviews, and have a hard time justifying replacing some of my C/V lenses. And in cases like the C/V 35 f/2.5 Skopar, why even try? The next lens I'm buying will be a Zeiss, and after that maybe one or two Leica lenses. But real world performance (not LCD monitor pixel peeping) is the most important factor.

 

With my DSLRs I'm also open. I bought a Tokina zoom to use with my D300s because it was the only f/2.8 lens in the range I wanted, and I got tired of lugging the 70-200 VR around. The Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 might be better for me than my current Nikon 12-24 f/4. Go figure.

 

I'm also pondering a D700, and one of the attractions for that body is the line of Zeiss MF lenses in F mount.

 

So for me, the "dilemma" is not Voigtlander vs Leica. My challenge is to ensure that new purchases actually solve a problem or improve a situation. The brand name painted on the lens is a factor, but not the most significant one.

[luigi bertolotti]

Cosina, revitalizing the Voigtlander brand, has really made a smart move (I should be curios if it has proved smart also in entrpeneurial terms, but this is difficult to know for some Japanese companies) : they have made an intelligent mix of products that fill in some "holes" (15 - 12), some "niches" (35 f1,2 - 40), strike hard on price for the "mainstream" focals (50/1,5, 90, 28/2, 35/f1,4), and even on compactness vs. the Leicas (I am tempted by the so small 28/3,5, for instance). And this, with an optical quality that is, at least, up to what Leica users do ask for, and for a cost that makes it easy for a Leica user the decision to have one of them "just for maybe it can be good": for instance, I like to have a compact and light 90... my old Elmar 90 3 elements fits well.. but can it be that the CV 90 is better ? Wouldn't be strange... it's more modern by decades... why don't have one ?

But, apart image quality, Leica lens have a heritage of mechanical excellence that is legendary and deeply proved by history... my Summicron Dual Range, a rather complex device, still shows a fantastic precidion... my Summarex 85, heavy and 54 years old, still has a fantastic smoothness in focusing: this are qualities that CV lenses probably don't match, or at least, not enough time has passed to prove it: but here is the problem.... the exceptional enduring in time of most Leica lenses, is still an important factor in the digital age ? Must I evaluate that my Summicron 35 asph will have a role in my photo equipment 30 years from now ? That's the digital age dilemma...

[piero]

my personal experience with Leica lenses showed a significant difference between different samples of same lens: a 35 Cron Asph. A difference I wouldn't expect from a lens of that tag price.

 

I also bought 3 CV lenses, the 50 Nokton, the 15 Super Wide Heliar and the 25 f4 Color Skopar. The latter left me amazed for what concerns contrast and resolution.

True that you have to pick a good sample... but given the price it is worth to try.

I would warmly suggest you read Sean Reid reviews to get an idea of what's available and what you might expect.

 

The inherent qualities of Leica lenses are not easily found in other competitors but my personal experience (I say again) makes me curious about the criteria used for quality control, these days.

[pklein]

In general, the faster VC lenses are a little lower contrast than the Leica lenses, and Leica has better build quality. But some VC lenses are just plain wonderful by any standard. The 28/3.5 and the 35/1.2 are absolutely stellar pieces of glass. I'm very fond of my 90/3.5.

 

How a lens draws is much more important that what brand is on the label. Pick lenses by matching their characteristics to the way you see and the kind of pictures you want to take. "Better" rendition of a lens test chart does not necessarily translate to better for you. For some things, it does, and for some things, it doesn't.

 

--Peter

[misha]

I take the other side of that coin. I paid $5K for an M8 precisely for the privilege of shooting C/V, Ziess, or Leica. To me, that's the whole point. I select the lens that fits the need. I keep re-reading Sean Reid's reviews, and have a hard time justifying replacing some of my C/V lenses. And in cases like the C/V 35 f/2.5 Skopar, why even try? The next lens I'm buying will be a Zeiss, and after that maybe one or two Leica lenses. But real world performance (not LCD monitor pixel peeping) is the most important factor.

 

With my DSLRs I'm also open. I bought a Tokina zoom to use with my D300s because it was the only f/2.8 lens in the range I wanted, and I got tired of lugging the 70-200 VR around. The Tokina 11-16 f/2.8 might be better for me than my current Nikon 12-24 f/4. Go figure.

 

I'm also pondering a D700, and one of the attractions for that body is the line of Zeiss MF lenses in F mount.

 

So for me, the "dilemma" is not Voigtlander vs Leica. My challenge is to ensure that new purchases actually solve a problem or improve a situation. The brand name painted on the lens is a factor, but not the most significant one.

 

You are right, of course. I do stand corrected. My post should have really said: When I first bought the m8.....

What I was really saying is that, at least as of today nothing is more "reliable" and versatile (except knowing that competitors have lenses that focus at .3 or .5m vs. .7m leica) than leica glass. At the same time, I am still having a lot of occasional fun lenses like cv-15 and Orion-15 28mm f6...

[spydrxx]

It seems to me there is really no dilemma. You just use the lens which delivers the results you want, regardless of the name on it! All the better if it costs less than the most expensive. I use both Leitz and CV (as well as Nikon & Canon) lenses on both digital and film, and quite frankly couldn't care less whose name is on the lens if it produces the expected results. Yes, the Leitz glass and focus mechanisms are smooth and precise in handling, and pretty dependable and I use them a lot. If I need something special and can't afford the Leica version but a competitor has something which produces in 99% of the cases which are indistinguishable from the Leitz version there's no hesitation to go with the competitor. AND I don't worry if somebody grouses that the picture wasn't taken with Leitz glass - that's their problem, not mine.

[ljclark]

Part of the "argument" here is actually a wonderful situation.

 

When Cosina decided to buy the Voigtlander name and jump into RF lenses and bodies, then followed by Zeiss, we ended up with an embarrassment of riches. The very fact that we toss this many opinions back and forth shows that we have plenty of different contemporary RF lenses. It wouldn't be much fun, or nearly as interesting, if all we could debate was Elmar vs Summicron vs Summilux -- or 1st series vs 2nd series.

 

I kinda wish the M8 was a little less expensive, because I think more people would be drawn to RF photography. But you'd have to be blind or a bit daft not to recognize that the very existence of C/V and Zeiss lenses has been a significant factor in allowing people to use and appreciate the M8.

[Ecar]

Variety is the spice of life - as they say...

Nothing wrong in liking French, Italian and Chinese cuisine - as well as various dishes within each one.

Well, same goes for lenses (apologies to all us lens worshippers here;) ).

Different brands with similar apparent characteristics may render quite differently. I ended up purchasing two or three lenses in each of my favorite focal lenghts (28 and 35 on the M8) and all of them have roughly seen the same usage.

Having said that, if budget is a constraint, or if you want/need a focal length that will not be your most used one, the quality/price ratio of CV lenses is unbeatable. In addition, some of them are so cheap that I wouldn't bother about the resale value: I'd just enjoy them for as long as I can...

Indeed, if you like the output you get from your CV lenses, and don't get better images from Leica or Zeiss "equivalent" ones (or do not *enjoy* using them more), I see little point in buying the brand.

Btw, same goes for cameras IMO.

[Shootist]

What I've come to realize from this thread is the wealth of lenses available for such a small section of the photographic equipment world.

We have 3 top lenses makers supplying lenses for both LTM and M mount cameras.

[sean_reid]

What I've come to realize from this thread is the wealth of lenses available for such a small section of the photographic equipment world.

We have 3 top lenses makers supplying lenses for both LTM and M mount cameras.

 

Yes I agree Ed and LJClark's phrase "embarrassment of riches" is a good description of what we have access to with RF cameras and now the G1.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[wilfredo]

I've been extremely happy with my Konica and Zeiss lenses, and may add some VC lenses for their speed to my collection simply because I can't afford the Leica price tag when it comes to their faster lenses. From my experience it seems that the M8 works extremely well with or without a Leica lens.

 

Cheers

[grober]

CV glass is nothing to sneeze at -- I have their 15, 28/1.9 and 50/1.5 -- but when using Leica glass you can more closely approach what the M-system designers had in mind. My favorites of the latter class are the 21/2.8, 35/2 and 75/2.

 

Don't fall so in love with CV or Zeiss optics that you don't also stretch and buy at least a few Leica lenses.

 

(Hey, it's still Christmas Day as I post this. Someone please hurry and buy me a shiny new 24/1.4!)

 

-g