Voigtländer reissues the Heliar 50 /2.0 and 3.5

[lars_bergquist]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Mark, the CV 75 is a nice lens, with a performance somewhat reminiscent of the dear old 90mm Tele-Elmarit, v.2. The corners are quite soft on the full format at 2.5 and 4, but that is not much of an issue with the M8.

 

My CV is now retired however in favour of a 75mm Summarit, the best of the pack. Puts found it remarkably close to a Summicron. I can believe him--it's a very good lens indeed.

 

The old man from the Brass Age

[Advertisement]

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

[kenneth]

Kenneth,

 

Judging by some of the shots that Biglouis has been producing with his 50mm Elmar, then I don't think you will regret the purchase once you manage to get hold of one.

There was one advertised on the forum (an Ebay ad IIRC) - don't know if it's still there or not.

 

With respect to the 75mm CV lens, what do you find inferior about it? I have one and I get on very well with it, albeit on an M8 rather than film. It's excellent value and produces great results.

 

To be honest, if you were to do a blind side-by-side comparison between the CV and Summarit lenses, I think it would be difficult to tell them apart. I had planned to replace the CV with a Summarit, but I'm happy enough with the results. Good enough is good enough in by book.

 

Best wishes

 

 

Mark

I guess it hasn't got that, you know what I mean. That certain something that only Leica lenses have. I would say it is as good as the Nikon version I used to own but I came back to Leica because of the glass but putting a system together I realised that I could not justify spending whatever a Leica 75mm Summicron or Summarit costs so I plumped for the Cosina Voigtlander which was alot less expensive. My 35mm and 50mm are Summicrons

[luigi bertolotti]

No strange that CV targets again the 50s market .... M9 advent will bring new intersest toward the focal...

[Finnkare]

But it is a bit strange that they again limit the production, this time even more than the last time.

 

Another strange thing is, why is the 3,5 so large compared to the 3,5 Elmar? I could consider of buying it as an ultra-compact lens to complement my ulta-fast 50, but it's about the same size if not even bigger than Leica's 50/2,8s...

[lars_bergquist]

Oh. "That certain something that only Leica lenses have."

 

Please tell me what you mean. What is it? The name? The red dot? Is it something you can put your finger on and name -- or is this just snob talk?

 

I am becoming fed up with this kind of talk about "fingerprints" and whatever. Fuzz, buzz and mushy thinking. Most Leica lenses during the last fifty years -- not all -- have been very good compared to the competition. Some -- not all -- have been outstanding. It is the same with the current offerings. Some are superb, some are wonderful though not perfect, some are very good, but have equals. The point is that those that are indeed superior can be SHOWN to be superior, by tests, not talk.

 

The test that should be done, but will probably never be done because of the animosity it would generate, is to make a number of identical exposures of identical real subjects through Leica and non-Leica lenses of identical focal lengths, subject them to the same minimal but identical preprocessing, print them, and make a standard double blind evaluation. How many of the awowed Leica fanatics (as distinct from normal level-headed Leica users) would be capable of correctly identifying the Leica images?

 

If the results are statistically different from pure randomness, then we can talk.

 

The old man from the Age of the Darkroom

[doubice]

Amen.....

 

Jan

[Sandokan]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Now why is it I have never heard a photographer say "I have too many 50mm lenses?"

 

I think the collapsible might be interesting but I would compare it to a collapsible Elmarit before purchase.

 

Oh yes - this thread made it to 3 posts before the "Nine" was mentioned... shame! I would love to read something without the 9 Sept being mentioned.

[biglouis]

Oh. "That certain something that only Leica lenses have."

 

Please tell me what you mean. What is it? The name? The red dot? Is it something you can put your finger on and name -- or is this just snob talk?

 

 

Lars, I wouldn't normally disagree with you but there is definitely a difference between CV and Leica lenses of the same focal length.

 

When I acquired my CV 50/1.5 (a lens I still think is the best of the CV crop) I tested it as best I could against my Summicron 75 on the same subjects. The 75 was definitely a tad sharper and with a slightly better bokeh at equivalent apertures. However, the difference was so minimal that I decided to sell the 75 and use the money I recovered to buy other glass!

 

I repeated the test when I acquired on an impulse a late version Leica Summulux 50. In this case the CV 50/1.5 was sharper (!) but the CA was more pronounced at the edges than the lux 50. In this respect I began to understand the superiority of Leica glass but it is an advantage which I suspect most photographers would fail to spot unless they were compulsive pixel peepers. Once again, I felt the advantages of the Leica glass were not so great as to justify the capital I tied up in it, so I sold it.

 

Similarly, I got excellent results with my CV15/4.5 - really quite startling but I noticed far better corner sharpness and less vignetting with my WATE. Enough to justify the difference in price? Probably not, on the other hand I bought my WATE second hand for a knock down price so I feel I got a bargain on that one.

 

There is no doubt the CV lenses are very good value for money and offer a real alternative but there are differences in quality if you look for them compared to Leica glass. The bottom line, though is that you have to decide if the inherent optical quality (perfection?) of the Leica glass justifies the difference in price compared to other manufacturers' alernatives.

 

Incidentally, as Mark Pope mentions above - given the ludicrously low price of s/h collapsible Elmar 50/2.8's I would definitely buy one of those ahead of a CV 50/1.5 or Summarit 75 (I find 50 and 75 to be too close on the M8). Extraordinary sharpness and bokeh even at f2.8 and, shucks, it is a Leica lens!

 

LouisB

[Ivar B]

The Heliar 3.5/50 is a gem. According to Popular Photography, this lens was one of the very best production lenses they had ever tested and obtained better results than the Summicron-M 2.0/50. Erwin Puts also conforms that this lens is superb and superior to the Elmar-M 2.8/50.

 

Also, I cannot understand why this lens is being referred to as "large". My specimen is minute with E27filter, it collapses very nicely into the M8 and its performance is truly second to none.

 

I am glad this lens is being released anew, albeit at high prices, but prices are not higher or perhaps even lower than this lens is sold for used.

[lars_bergquist]

Lars, I wouldn't normally disagree with you but there is definitely a difference between CV and Leica lenses of the same focal length [...]

LouisB

Louis, I have never claimed that all lenses are born equal. Not even all Leica lenses are born equal. (No names.) Note that I did replace my CV 75 with a Summarit. Build quality and a coded bayonet versus a screw-on adapter did have a lot to do with it, however.

 

But if we compare, say, a ZM 18mm Distagon with a Leica Super-Elmar, or a ditto 21mm Biogon with a Elmarit ASPH, or a 25mm Biogon with a 24mm Elmarit ASPH, would we be able to reliably identify the optical differences >in the prints,< without subjecting the lenses to the Holy Inquisition on an optical bench? I do doubt that, and I think you would do that too. "That Leica something", as distinct from identifiable and quantifiable performance differences, does probably exist only in the heads of far gone Leica fanatics. Especially if this "something" is supposed to be common to all or even most Leica lenses!

 

I would only like to add that lots of real, important technical differences that do not get quantified in the literature and in discussions, like propensity for flare and internal reflections, could be quantified or at least made clearly visible by apparatus or test rigs that I can easily imagine. But it is not done. Hot air is cheaper, I presume.

 

The old man from the Age of Evidence

[Finnkare]

Also, I cannot understand why this lens is being referred to as "large". My specimen is minute with E27filter, it collapses very nicely into the M8 and its performance is truly second to none.

 

I am glad this lens is being released anew, albeit at high prices, but prices are not higher or perhaps even lower than this lens is sold for used.

 

Yes, well, I'm nitpicking here. I was after some kind of ultimate compactness, point'n'shoot-kind. Really-slip-into-pocket.

 

27mm filters? Bummer, they have to be ordered. Hopefully Heliopan has other kinds too than UVs...

 

Price? Is it the 70000 yen? Yes, it's not very cheap, but if it's the best lens ever, then maybe.

[Ivar B]

The 3.5/50 can now be pre-ordered from Cameraquest, but the price has not been set yet.

 

It appears that the lens will be made in nickel and E39 screw mount, and that there is a limited production run of 600 lenses.

 

Filter size still appears to be E27, but I believe this size can be ordered from Heliopan.

 

The 2.0/50 is also a very good lens. Herbert Keppler of Popular Photography wrote:

 

"Expecting the worst, we subjected the 50mm to SQF tests on Pop Photo's optical bench. The Heliar turned out to be incredibly good, comparable at all apertures to the 50mm f/2 Leica Summicron-M we'd tested in 1996. Wondering how Cosina achieved this, we pressed for the details.

 

Cosina, which produces all or most Voigtländer glass, replied: "Newly developed, super high-index glass reduces all aberrations and allows us to realize a fast (f/2) lens with five elements." The beautifully constructed Heliar costs but a fraction of the Summicron."

[Finnkare]

Yes, Heliopan seems to have most of its products in 27/0,5 and 27/0,75. For example multicoated polarisers aren't available.

 

But which one is "E27", 27/0,5 or 27/0,75?

[veraikon]

Imho E27 =27*0.5

[biglouis]

if we compare, say, a ZM 18mm Distagon with a Leica Super-Elmar, or a ditto 21mm Biogon with a Elmarit ASPH, or a 25mm Biogon with a 24mm Elmarit ASPH, would we be able to reliably identify the optical differences >in the prints,< without subjecting the lenses to the Holy Inquisition on an optical bench? I do doubt that, and I think you would do that too.

 

Lars

 

We are in violent agreement! I was pointing out that in fact, CV lenses have a certain something which often puts the price/performance of Leica lenses into question because the differences are imperceptible to many users. Try a CV Skopar 28/3.5 for example and I guarantee you will not be disappointed at f8 - an gem of a lens.

 

LouisB