Home

Please support mflenses.com if you need any graphic related work order it from us, click on above banner to order!
SearchSearch MemberlistMemberlist RegisterRegister ProfileProfile Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages Log inLog in

Voigtlander 35mm Lenses
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:01 pm    Post subject: Voigtlander 35mm Lenses Reply with quote
I find there is not a lot of posts about Voigtlander lenses. I'm particularly interested in the 1950s RF lenses for Prominent and Vitessa.

I've studied all the available info but I've not been able to find many sample images, so has anyone shot these lenses on film or digital with an adapter?

Some info:

ULTRON f/2 50mm
Gauss (Planar) type lens type for Rangefinder (Prominent) camera, started in production 1950 as 6 elements/ 5 groups lens. The Ultron was also build for small 35mm cameras like Vito/ Vitomatic/ Vitessa as the top-of-line lens. A few were made in Leica screwmount. In the early 1950's this lens had a reputation superior to Leica Summitar f/2 and Summicron f/2 first generation.
Contemporary academic sources wrote about the Ultron as double the resolving power than a Tessar type . The 50mm f/2 Ultron gave "the highest performance yet recorded for a lens of this aperture... at all stops... the resolution given by this lens would be only limited by the resolving power of the film" (Amateur Photographer, 13 February, 1952) If this is true, undoubtly it would be in the league of the ten best standard lenses ever.



NOKTON f/ 1.5 50mm
This was the fastest classical Voigtlander lens ever, started 1951. This was said to be the best f/1.5 lens soon after the war - better than Leica Summarit f/1.5 - at least equals the Zeiss SONNAR...7 elements/ 5 groups Gauss type with front element splitted - the break-through of the Gauss type then in the f/1.4-1.5 speed class.
Most lenses made for the Prominent Rangefinder as the top lens (DM 595,- in 1953 for both). Very few in Leica screw mount, a handful in Contax RF mount.



SKOPARON f/ 3.5/35mm



DYNARON f/ 4.5/100mm



Certainly beautiful lenses and the small size of the Dynaron for a 100mm lens is very appealing, the Turnit would be nice to have too.



PostPosted: Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I wrote a full review about the 2/50 Septon for Bessamatic:
http://forum.mflenses.com/voigtlaender-septon-2-50-for-bessamatic-review-t33501,highlight,%2Bsepton.html

I have the 1.8/50 Ultron lens in the Zeiss Icarex version (made at the time when Zeiss bought Voigtländer).
I don't know how close is the design to the 50s 2/50 Ultron. Probably Klaus has the answer.


PostPosted: Sun Oct 21, 2012 10:25 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks Orio, I remember the Septon review, great lens.

The Icarex Ulton is a bit different:

Voigtlander Ultron 2/50:



Zeiss-Ikon Ultron 1.8/50:



PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 1:23 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ian - I had a Prominent back in the late 1960s when you could buy the camera for next to nothing and the lenses for even less . . . and then another one in the late 70s when the prices were getting higher.

Both my cameras had Ultrons, and both were very good. Using Kodachrome, a Pradovit projector and a 4-ft wide screen they were as sharp as a 50mm 7-element Summicron, although maybe a bit 'warmer' in their colours. The Ultron and the Nokton both had tremendous reputations, although I think when Amateur Photographer tested the Ultron the famous "ship pictures" didn't actually look that good. But it could have been a bad day, looking across the river Thames Smile Although I've no doubt that the Ultron was (and still is) an absolutely splendid lens, I don't think I'd go too far into ecstacy about it being limited only by the resolution of then then available films. Emulsion technologies in the early 50s were a bit less good than they were even ten years later.

The rangefinder/viewfinder on the early Prominents was a bit small and getting the focus dead right was a lot harder than with the Leica (M or screw models). It was much easier on the last version with the 1:1 bright line finder, although sometimes the spring-loaded lens mounting panel would tend to creep back against the pressure . . . so then your shot was ever so slightly defocused and not at all sharp !.

I also had the 35mm and 100mm lenses with the first camera, not that I used them much. They aren't actually that small, because they attach to the camera by means of extenal tabs. Sensible in one way, but also rather cumbersome. An engineer's solution rather than a photographer's. I'm not sure how you'd fix one on a NEX or a Lumix - ! Er, well, if you had a machine shop I suppose you could do it . . .

You sometimes see the 50mm lenses in Leica screw mountings, selling on eBay at astronomic prices. Nice for rich boys (or girls) who can afford to spend recklessly but no way a sound investment for less affluent mortals.

The versions for the Bessa/Ultramatics were different, of course. My boss in the photo shop in the mid 1960s was a Voigtlander devotee who spent his holidays in Braunschweig, genuflecting and salivating outside the factory gates I expect. He assured me that Voigtlander lenses were absolutely the best in the world (. . . although he also thought an Exakta Varex IIb with a Tessar and a set of extension tubes and the autocouple rod was an easier way to take close-ups outdoors than using a Nikon F and a Micro-Nikkor Rolling Eyes) He used to go into raptures about the pains taken to assemble everything correctly, and how cameras and lenses were left to "mature" for months before being shipped out to dealers. More of a business model for whisky and brandy, I would have thought.

My summary - for what it's worth - Ultron 10/10 in the context of the 1950s. And still pretty dam' good today.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
scsambrook wrote:
Ian - I had a Prominent back in the late 1960s when you could buy the camera for next to nothing and the lenses for even less . . . and then another one in the late 70s when the prices were getting higher.

Both my cameras had Ultrons, and both were very good. Using Kodachrome, a Pradovit projector and a 4-ft wide screen they were as sharp as a 50mm 7-element Summicron, although maybe a bit 'warmer' in their colours. The Ultron and the Nokton both had tremendous reputations, although I think when Amateur Photographer tested the Ultron the famous "ship pictures" didn't actually look that good. But it could have been a bad day, looking across the river Thames Smile Although I've no doubt that the Ultron was (and still is) an absolutely splendid lens, I don't think I'd go too far into ecstacy about it being limited only by the resolution of then then available films. Emulsion technologies in the early 50s were a bit less good than they were even ten years later.

The rangefinder/viewfinder on the early Prominents was a bit small and getting the focus dead right was a lot harder than with the Leica (M or screw models). It was much easier on the last version with the 1:1 bright line finder, although sometimes the spring-loaded lens mounting panel would tend to creep back against the pressure . . . so then your shot was ever so slightly defocused and not at all sharp !.

I also had the 35mm and 100mm lenses with the first camera, not that I used them much. They aren't actually that small, because they attach to the camera by means of extenal tabs. Sensible in one way, but also rather cumbersome. An engineer's solution rather than a photographer's. I'm not sure how you'd fix one on a NEX or a Lumix - ! Er, well, if you had a machine shop I suppose you could do it . . .

You sometimes see the 50mm lenses in Leica screw mountings, selling on eBay at astronomic prices. Nice for rich boys (or girls) who can afford to spend recklessly but no way a sound investment for less affluent mortals.

The versions for the Bessa/Ultramatics were different, of course. My boss in the photo shop in the mid 1960s was a Voigtlander devotee who spent his holidays in Braunschweig, genuflecting and salivating outside the factory gates I expect. He assured me that Voigtlander lenses were absolutely the best in the world (. . . although he also thought an Exakta Varex IIb with a Tessar and a set of extension tubes and the autocouple rod was an easier way to take close-ups outdoors than using a Nikon F and a Micro-Nikkor Rolling Eyes) He used to go into raptures about the pains taken to assemble everything correctly, and how cameras and lenses were left to "mature" for months before being shipped out to dealers. More of a business model for whisky and brandy, I would have thought.

My summary - for what it's worth - Ultron 10/10 in the context of the 1950s. And still pretty dam' good today.


Thank you Stephen.

Ilustrative, informative and fun. 10!10.


PostPosted: Mon Oct 22, 2012 8:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
sonyrokkor wrote:
scsambrook wrote:
Ian - I had a Prominent back in the late 1960s when you could buy the camera for next to nothing and the lenses for even less . . . and then another one in the late 70s when the prices were getting higher.

Both my cameras had Ultrons, and both were very good. Using Kodachrome, a Pradovit projector and a 4-ft wide screen they were as sharp as a 50mm 7-element Summicron, although maybe a bit 'warmer' in their colours. The Ultron and the Nokton both had tremendous reputations, although I think when Amateur Photographer tested the Ultron the famous "ship pictures" didn't actually look that good. But it could have been a bad day, looking across the river Thames Smile Although I've no doubt that the Ultron was (and still is) an absolutely splendid lens, I don't think I'd go too far into ecstacy about it being limited only by the resolution of then then available films. Emulsion technologies in the early 50s were a bit less good than they were even ten years later.

The rangefinder/viewfinder on the early Prominents was a bit small and getting the focus dead right was a lot harder than with the Leica (M or screw models). It was much easier on the last version with the 1:1 bright line finder, although sometimes the spring-loaded lens mounting panel would tend to creep back against the pressure . . . so then your shot was ever so slightly defocused and not at all sharp !.

I also had the 35mm and 100mm lenses with the first camera, not that I used them much. They aren't actually that small, because they attach to the camera by means of extenal tabs. Sensible in one way, but also rather cumbersome. An engineer's solution rather than a photographer's. I'm not sure how you'd fix one on a NEX or a Lumix - ! Er, well, if you had a machine shop I suppose you could do it . . .

You sometimes see the 50mm lenses in Leica screw mountings, selling on eBay at astronomic prices. Nice for rich boys (or girls) who can afford to spend recklessly but no way a sound investment for less affluent mortals.

The versions for the Bessa/Ultramatics were different, of course. My boss in the photo shop in the mid 1960s was a Voigtlander devotee who spent his holidays in Braunschweig, genuflecting and salivating outside the factory gates I expect. He assured me that Voigtlander lenses were absolutely the best in the world (. . . although he also thought an Exakta Varex IIb with a Tessar and a set of extension tubes and the autocouple rod was an easier way to take close-ups outdoors than using a Nikon F and a Micro-Nikkor Rolling Eyes) He used to go into raptures about the pains taken to assemble everything correctly, and how cameras and lenses were left to "mature" for months before being shipped out to dealers. More of a business model for whisky and brandy, I would have thought.

My summary - for what it's worth - Ultron 10/10 in the context of the 1950s. And still pretty dam' good today.


Thank you Stephen.

Ilustrative, informative and fun. 10!10.


+1, Cheers Stephen


PostPosted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 12:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
An Exakta rig like that would have been the functional equivalent of a contemporary Nikon rig, if the Nikon lacked the meter prism.
The Nikon would have looked less funky, but there are no obvious advantages.
As for worshiping at Voigtlanders gates and "seasoning" the product - well, we all h
ave our eccentricities I suppose.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 1:46 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
luisalegria wrote:
An Exakta rig like that would have been the functional equivalent of a contemporary Nikon rig, if the Nikon lacked the meter prism. The Nikon would have looked less funky, but there are no obvious advantages.


Mmm, I bet you've never used a Varex with the wonderful screw-apart tube set and the fiendish autocouple rod Very Happy Let's just reprise how it all worked . . .

Let's go out and shoot some wild flowers when we take the dog out for its walk. I'll take my Varex IIb and its 50mm f2.8 auto iris Tessar lens and my extension tubes set that comes in five pieces and my autocouple rod to let me retain auto diaphragm control, whilst my neighbour brings his Nikon F and his Micro Nikkor Auto 55mm f3.5. Ahh, here's a nice English Bluebell (they bloom in Scotland too), I'll get set up:

I have to decide which extension tube combination is needed. I guess #1 and#2 will be okay, so I unscrew the lens bayonet part and separate tube #3 from the others, and then screw the bayonet part back on. Then I remove the lens from the body, mount the tube set and then replace the lens, and then the assembly back on the camera. Then I take the four part autocouple rod assembly, offering the rear bracket portion up to the camera shutter release and retaining it by screwing in the push button part (aka "faustknopf"). Then I take the rod itself, slide it into the bracket and tighten up the retaining screw. Then I take the front release unit and slide it over the rod, adjusting it so its plunger enages the release arm on my 50mm f2.8 Tessar auto-iris lens and tightening the retaining screw to hold the whole assembly in place. Excellent, now I can compose and focus . . . aw, whoopsadaisy, I actually needed tube #3 and not #1 and #2 together, I'll just, er um, disassemble the whole thing and start over. Great! all done now, but it's a pity the sky has clouded over and it's started to rain. Anyway, now I can take my meter reading and then work out how much extra exposure I need for the long tube I'm using and then CLICK! All done. Eat your heart out, Cartier Bresson.

So what's my pal doing with that Nikon F and his 55mm Micro Nikkor, the one that focuses from infinity down to half size. Er, he takes a meter reading, raises camera, focuses and arranges composition, lens opens its diaphragm automaticallyto compensate for extension and then CLICK! Job done. Gosh he's shot a half life size image, one of the entire plant AND got the alien space ship that just whizzed overhead . . . all while I was unscrewing my front release unit. [THINKS: "Japanese rubbish, it'll never replace German craftsmanship"]

It's been a long, long time since I had the outfit, but I'm pretty sure that's how it worked. No offense to Exakta fans - I still have an Exa (but no tubes Wink )


PostPosted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 2:40 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
"ExaKtly", Stephan, as you said, it was.

A lot of social photographers in the 60's in Uruguay were fans of the voigtlander bessamatic and the contaflex super B. My father was one.
And with few exceptions, the lenses were average ones, specialy the teles.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 2:47 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The more I shoot with Voigtländer lenses, the more I like them.

I have three of them (Heliar 15, Ultron 28, Skopar 50) already and one more is on the way (Color Skopar 2.5/75).


PostPosted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 2:55 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
LucisPictor wrote:
The more I shoot with Voigtländer lenses, the more I like them.

I have three of them (Heliar 15, Ultron 28, Skopar 50) already and one more is on the way (Color Skopar 2.5/75).


Only the skopar 50 (if it's the 2,8 or 3,5 version) is a voigtlander lens. The others not. Voigtlander was dead in 1964.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
scsambrook wrote:

Mmm, I bet you've never used a Varex with the wonderful screw-apart tube set and the fiendish autocouple rod Very Happy Let's just reprise how it all worked . . .
.....
[THINKS: "Japanese rubbish, it'll never replace German craftsmanship"]


Laughing Laughing That was a great read. Doesn't it look a bit like us v AF lens users though?


PostPosted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Hi Fermy !

Yes, I suppose it does! Part of the attraction of the Exakta was the endless array of quirky accessories, and that the system was attractively priced in Britain in the early and mid 1960s. Even winding up the slow speeds on the Varex cameras was fun.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 3:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ah, but I do in fact have a lot of Exakta equipment including all the tubes, etc.
Fact is when one is hunting flowers you are normally dealing with a fixed focus situation.
Or very close to it.
The really useful features for flower and other such moderate macro work are auto aperture and TTL metering, plus a larger aperture and a really good magnifying finder.

Thats why I qualifiedby specifying a Nikon without a meter head.
In such a situation you can have an Exakta with a short extension tube, an f/2.8 lens (vs f/3.5) for brighter and more exact focus, with some focus ability for framing.

What you lose with this Exakta rig is the ability to go for non macro targets of opportunity. But if thats not a consideration you lose nothing.

Now, Exaktas did also have both proper Macro lenses and TTL meter heads, so one could easily rig one to match any Nikon F.
And one thing Exaktas did have was better macro finders than any Nikon. Nikon didnt have something to match the Magnear, and even the ubiquitous Exakta vertical finder was enormously better than any right angle magnifier. Equivalent stuff for the Nikon was scarce.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 5:03 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
sonyrokkor wrote:
LucisPictor wrote:
The more I shoot with Voigtländer lenses, the more I like them.

I have three of them (Heliar 15, Ultron 28, Skopar 50) already and one more is on the way (Color Skopar 2.5/75).


Only the skopar 50 (if it's the 2,8 or 3,5 version) is a voigtlander lens. The others not. Voigtlander was dead in 1964.


Depends on how you define what a Voigtländer lens is!
Was it made by the traditional Voigtländer manufacture? Or does it bear the name Voigtländer?

In this case it's very different from "Rollei" digicams, which are basically crap.
New Voigtländer lenses are fantastic, very close to the performance of Leica glass!!

So, since the quality level (built and IQ) still is valid, It would be pedantic to say that only the old ones are "real" Voigtländer lenses.

Lenses made by Leitz Canada still are Leicas!

And Zeiss lenses made my Cosina still are Zeiss lenses!


PostPosted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 9:12 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I think we should apologise to Ian for rather highjacking his really sensible thread about how the "old" Voigtlander lenses actually work. I guess there simply aren't enough Prominent lenses around to justify anyone making a NEX or similar adapter for the 50mm Ultron and Nokton, unlike the Bessa/Ultramatics. Crying or Very sad


PostPosted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 10:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
It shouldnt be too difficult to make a custom adapter for Voigtlander Prominent lenses to NEXT.
Here is a Prominent - Contax RF adapter - out of stock, but maybe ?

http://cameraquest.com/VoigtPromAdpt.htm


PostPosted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 11:08 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Here's another - to Leica M39 with RF coupling.

http://www.ebay.com/itm/Voigtlander-Prominent-Leica-L39-adapter-RF-COUPLED-/310220555663

These are expensive, mainly I think because of the need for the mechanism to translate the RF coupling.

A NEX adapter should be much simpler. I suspect this could be made from one of the NEX RF lens adapters with a new sheet aluminum insert cut with the right lugs for the Prominent bayonet. A drilled and tapped hole in the adapter with a screw to lock the lens on and there you are.


PostPosted: Tue Oct 23, 2012 11:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Wait a minute - does the Prominent system have the focus helical or any essential part of that system on the body ?

If so, thats a truly difficult adaptation. You would be better off getting one of those Kipon Leica adapters, and adapting that to NEX.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 12:26 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
scsambrook wrote:
I think we should apologise to Ian for rather highjacking his really sensible thread about how the "old" Voigtlander lenses actually work. I guess there simply aren't enough Prominent lenses around to justify anyone making a NEX or similar adapter for the 50mm Ultron and Nokton, unlike the Bessa/Ultramatics. Crying or Very sad


Any and all things Voigtlander is fine by me, it's a subject that doesn't get enough discussion.


PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 11:34 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
luisalegria wrote:
Wait a minute - does the Prominent system have the focus helical or any essential part of that system on the body ?

If so, thats a truly difficult adaptation. You would be better off getting one of those Kipon Leica adapters, and adapting that to NEX.


Yes, indeed, The Prominent body incorporates the focusing mechanism. When you remove the 50mm lenses, all you have in your hand is the optical part - pretty much as with the Contax/Nikon cameras.

I can't quite follow what you say about the Kipon Leica adapter, though . . . maybe I should "go googling" !


PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 2:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Voigtlander Prominent uses a camera body focusing system that when the knob on the left hand side of the body is turned, the part of the camera body where the lens is mounted would move forward or backward to achieve focusing. So the most common lenses, 35mm, 50mm and 100mm all do not incorporate focusing helicoid. Some lens mount adapter makers now offer adapters for these Prominent lenses on Sony Nex and M4/3 cameras in which a focusing helicoid is built in. The early adapters for Leica M or LTM would not work on 35mm or 100mm lenses as those two lenses mount on the outer part of the platform, quite similar to RF Contax cameras. Unfortunately this type of adapters are expensive because of the helicoid mechanism and the need for two types of lens mounting....


PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 5:32 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I recently came across a Voigtlander Ultron zoom in Nikon mount. 19-35/3.5-4.5
Anyone had any experience with this one?


PostPosted: Wed Oct 24, 2012 7:16 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
That's a rebadged Cosina Lena, seen in other brands too including Vivitar.


PostPosted: Fri Oct 26, 2012 11:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Lena wrote:
I recently came across a Voigtlander Ultron zoom in Nikon mount. 19-35/3.5-4.5
Anyone had any experience with this one?

If it's the same "Voigtländer" 19-35 I know it's not as good as the modern standard 18-55 kit lenses on APS-C

These Voigtländers have nothing to do with the good&old Voigtländer lenses.

LucisPictor wrote:
sonyrokkor wrote:
LucisPictor wrote:
The more I shoot with Voigtländer lenses, the more I like them.

I have three of them (Heliar 15, Ultron 28, Skopar 50) already and one more is on the way (Color Skopar 2.5/75).


Only the skopar 50 (if it's the 2,8 or 3,5 version) is a voigtlander lens. The others not. Voigtlander was dead in 1964.


Depends on how you define what a Voigtländer lens is!
Was it made by the traditional Voigtländer manufacture? Or does it bear the name Voigtländer?

In this case it's very different from "Rollei" digicams, which are basically crap.
New Voigtländer lenses are fantastic, very close to the performance of Leica glass!!

So, since the quality level (built and IQ) still is valid, It would be pedantic to say that only the old ones are "real" Voigtländer lenses.

Lenses made by Leitz Canada still are Leicas!

And Zeiss lenses made my Cosina still are Zeiss lenses!


For me Zeiss lenses produced by Cosina are still Zeiss lenses because they are made by Zeiss calculations and Zeiss quality&quality control standards.

Calling the modern Voigtländer lenses "Cosina-Voigtländer" has the reason that they have nothing to do with Voigtländer at all. They were caluclated by Cosina, produced by Cosina and have Cosina quality standards.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page 1, 2  Next
Page 1 of 2