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: Are they as good as Zeiss & Leica?
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 6:46 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Interesting warm-up. Wink

If I wouldn't have the CV 35/1.7 Ultron already I would certainly evaluate the 2.5 Skopar instead.
Seems to be a very capable lens and F2.5 is good enough for most circumstances.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 8:07 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The CV Skopar 35/2.5 is an excellent performer on film . The only major weakness on film I notice are vignetting at WO.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 8:30 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thomas it would be very good on you Ricoh.

Stock A7x does not like it.

For "street" on the M9, as you can see, it's excellent. This is supposedly a knock-off of the Canon LTM 35/2, with newer glass and coatings.

As with so many lenses, the warts come to light in landscape work, infinity with distant details. In those shots, on the M9 subtle waves of higher and lower rez appear accross the frame, aka "mid-zone dip".

That surprised me because these closer street shots are really impressive to me. But I shoot tons of landscapes, as you guys know, so I read up and choose the ZM 35/2, which many feel is the cleanest landscape 35 for the M9. Lately I wonder if might prefer a 35/2 asph Leica, which is way better at F/2 but does have some waves in stopped down landscape mode: on the charts anyway. However the samples are very good, and the lens is nice and tiny like this skopar.

2 other RF 35s I crave:
35/2 v1 8 element Leitz
35/1.4 ZM

But I'll hold fire Smile

But on this interesting subject:


L1006291 by unoh7, on Flickr


L1006287 by unoh7, on Flickr


L1020030 by unoh7, on Flickr

Some call this one the sharpest of all the voigtlander RF lenses, the 90/3.5 APO, a small light 90. These run about 350 used, and are superb as I hope you can see here. I would but the best Leica 90s: most recent cron, Summarit, and Macro-Elmar, just a tad ahead.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 9:17 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
uhoh7 wrote:
Some call this one the sharpest of all the voigtlander RF lenses, the 90/3.5 APO, a small light 90. These run about 350 used, and are superb as I hope you can see here. I would but the best Leica 90s: most recent cron, Summarit, and Macro-Elmar, just a tad ahead.


I'd like to put that Voigtlander and those Leicas up against my ISCO 2/95 Ultra Star HD and Schneider 2/90 Super-Cinelux projector lenses.

Throw in a Planar 1.4/85 and Sonnar 2.8/85 as yardsticks.

Just curious as the ISCO and Schneider are amazing and cost 3-4k USD new, 40-50 USD secondhand on ebay.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 9:34 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
uhoh7 wrote:
Some call this one the sharpest of all the voigtlander RF lenses, the 90/3.5 APO, a small light 90. These run about 350 used, and are superb as I hope you can see here. I would but the best Leica 90s: most recent cron, Summarit, and Macro-Elmar, just a tad ahead.


I'd like to put that Voigtlander and those Leicas up against my ISCO 2/95 Ultra Star HD and Schneider 2/90 Super-Cinelux projector lenses.

Throw in a Planar 1.4/85 and Sonnar 2.8/85 as yardsticks.

Just curious as the ISCO and Schneider are amazing and cost 3-4k USD new, 40-50 USD secondhand on ebay.


And how would we use any of those on a rangefinder camera? And do the projector lenses have iris diaphragms? An interesting thought, Ian, though hardly one that's practical, is it? But please, do let us see some comparisons from within your own collection - those projector lenses are strangers to me and, I expect, to many other people who look at this forum.


PostPosted: Mon Sep 14, 2015 10:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
uhoh7 wrote:
Thomas it would be very good on you Ricoh.

Stock A7x does not like it.

For "street" on the M9, as you can see, it's excellent. This is supposedly a knock-off of the Canon LTM 35/2, with newer glass and coatings.

As with so many lenses, the warts come to light in landscape work, infinity with distant details. In those shots, on the M9 subtle waves of higher and lower rez appear accross the frame, aka "mid-zone dip".

That surprised me because these closer street shots are really impressive to me. But I shoot tons of landscapes, as you guys know, so I read up and choose the ZM 35/2, which many feel is the cleanest landscape 35 for the M9. Lately I wonder if might prefer a 35/2 asph Leica, which is way better at F/2 but does have some waves in stopped down landscape mode: on the charts anyway. However the samples are very good, and the lens is nice and tiny like this skopar.

2 other RF 35s I crave:
35/2 v1 8 element Leitz
35/1.4 ZM

But I'll hold fire Smile

But on this interesting subject:

Some call this one the sharpest of all the voigtlander RF lenses, the 90/3.5 APO, a small light 90. These run about 350 used, and are superb as I hope you can see here. I would but the best Leica 90s: most recent cron, Summarit, and Macro-Elmar, just a tad ahead.


Well, my CV 35/1.7 Ultron isn't bad either on my Ricoh and it can easily stop down a little bit. Wink

I was thinking already about the CV 90/3.5 but so far I'm fine with my Elmarit 90/2.8 instead. Though, a direct comparison would be at least interesting. Maybe I'll buy it sometimes as well when I can't resist a bargain offer as it's actually the last "classic" LTM CV lens still missing in my collection at least in terms of FL. A couple of weeks ago one was offered for only apprx. 200 Euro and I was very close to buy it. However, my Topcor 90/3.5 in M39/LTM isn't really bad as well and very handsome too. Maybe I'll test it directly against my Elmarit sometimes. So for me the question is certainly also: How many 90mm lenses do I really need in LTM besides some other quite nice lenses in similar FL for SLR already on hand?


PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
I had the CV 90/3.5 and sold it for reasons which seemed sensible at the time but now are less understandable . . . I think it was because I wanted faster lenses for low light pictures.

It was by far the brightest and sharpest lens I've ever had in the 85 - 100mm region in Leica fitting, and at equal apertures and distances was better than my Tamron SP 90 or my Sigma 105 on a mirrorless camera. So far as 'real world' results go, it was as good as the macro lenses when used on extension tubes. Thomas - if you have the last version of the Leica 90mm Elmarit (the Elmarit M) then from what I've read that's probably a bit better still, but if you have any of the earlier Elmarits or Tele Elmarits then the Voigtlander lens may be worth trying. Especially if you can get one for under 200 euros !

The head of the statue on uhoh7's post is exactly the kind of result I got - superb.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 10:16 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thomas, your ultron should be better yet, but alot bigger Smile

I started with a TE 90/2.8, which I loved on APS-C, but it was quite meh on the M9. For FF application the Tele-Elmarit is well below the top tier, where I would include the CV90. But I loved it on the Nex 5, so I imagine it's great on your Ricoh. Very nice to have 2.8 and such a small package. Smile

But equally small and also top tier is, as you likely know, the CV 75/2.5:


lips by unoh7, on Flickr


Blackened Fir by unoh7, on Flickr


PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 10:42 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
scsambrook wrote:
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
uhoh7 wrote:
Some call this one the sharpest of all the voigtlander RF lenses, the 90/3.5 APO, a small light 90. These run about 350 used, and are superb as I hope you can see here. I would but the best Leica 90s: most recent cron, Summarit, and Macro-Elmar, just a tad ahead.


I'd like to put that Voigtlander and those Leicas up against my ISCO 2/95 Ultra Star HD and Schneider 2/90 Super-Cinelux projector lenses.

Throw in a Planar 1.4/85 and Sonnar 2.8/85 as yardsticks.

Just curious as the ISCO and Schneider are amazing and cost 3-4k USD new, 40-50 USD secondhand on ebay.


And how would we use any of those on a rangefinder camera? And do the projector lenses have iris diaphragms? An interesting thought, Ian, though hardly one that's practical, is it? But please, do let us see some comparisons from within your own collection - those projector lenses are strangers to me and, I expect, to many other people who look at this forum.


The Schneider has a 19 bladed iris - I fitted one. The ISCO doesn't and would need extensive lathe work to fit one so it will stay a fixed f2. I mounted them in helicoids so they can be used on my a850, if suitable donor barrels with cams were used, they could work on an rf camera.

The IQ does make the effort worthwhile.








PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 11:20 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Looks fine Ian, love the boats shot, but not sure what your post has to do with Voigtlander, Zeiss or Leica?

Rangefinder coupling looks problematic as well, but I'd love to see such a lens adapted with an Iris and cam. However, until that happens....

There are many fine lenses in the world of all descriptions. So many that we make topics........


PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 11:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
uhoh7 wrote:

But equally small and also top tier is, as you likely know, the CV 75/2.5:


I know! Wink
From my Ricoh:




PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 12:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ian - very impressive ! Nice to see those photos - thank you. Apologies for making a diversion from the theme of the thread, everyone - it's not Ian's fault, he's just responding to my request earlier in the thread.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 12:43 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
My thoughts were simply that the Leica and Voigtlander options (which look very appealing) are outside my price range and the budget options I have like the Jupiter-9 2/85, Konica Hexanon 2.8/100, Minolta Rokkor 3.5/100 and Sankor 2.5/105, while all very good lenses, aren't at that level. However, I have been continually impressed with the projection Schneiders and Iscos and so my mental process wandered into wondering how they would compare to those options I can't afford.


PostPosted: Tue Sep 15, 2015 9:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The super wide CV 15mm III is amazing and very compact!



PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2015 12:25 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Gorgeous Nordento.

Everyone knows by now, but that lens is good on un-moddified Sony A7 series. At that FL best seems to be either 1635 Zoom (best in the corners), your lens, sharper in the centers, and the WATE, which is still a tad better, but very slightly. Of course it's so cheap.......Wink

@ Ian, my bad, did not realize you were responding with those. I took a closer look (red boat my Fav) and you see big sharpness loss at the edges and these are APS-C? Of course they are WO so maybe with an Iris you would get good edges stopped down.


PostPosted: Wed Sep 16, 2015 4:12 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
No problem, all good by me.

The boat pic is wide open on my FF a850, not sure where the point of focus was.

Here's another wide open example:



Here's one at f5.6. I didn't keep a corner crop, just a central one but I think it's pretty evenly sharp across the frame. The image circle is big enough to cover 56x56mm so corners even on FF should be good.




PostPosted: Fri Sep 18, 2015 2:48 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Honestly, I think there are some people who get WAY out of hand with specs. Specs are great and all from a tech point, but a good image is a good image. I like my fair share of tech info, but I do not base my opinion on spec sheets alone. I like judging a lens by it's quality as I see it with my own two eye's. I bet there isn't a person on this board who could call out what lens shot what image if I posted 50 images to chose from. So, as cool as the specs are, as informative as the specs are in quality of build, they become irrelevant when put to the "match photo to lens challenge".

Use your judgment based on your eye.

As photographer's we learn hundreds of formulas' for figuring out different uses for our gear. That's all great, the knowledge and all, but how useful is it in the field? Who has time to stop, break out a calculator, adjust their gear, then shoot? It just isn't practical to rely solely on specs.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Goto page Previous  1, 2
Page 2 of 2