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

Voigtländer Prominent Ultron 50mm f2
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
View previous topic :: View next topic  


PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 3:12 pm    Post subject: Voigtländer Prominent Ultron 50mm f2 Reply with quote
I borrow the adapter for testing this lens. This lens has some imperfections but it does not seems affect the performance. The color rendition of seems different from the Nokton and Septon.

Photos taken in overcast day with exposure/white balance adjust only with standard setting on NEX 5N.

Edit:
Please go to this thread for processed photos: http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1333444.html#1333444

#1

#2

#3

#4

#5

#6

#7

#8


Thanks for viewing!

Last edited by calvin83 on Sun Jul 28, 2013 11:38 am; edited 1 time in total


PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 4:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
Looks like it lives upto it's great reputation, congrats Calvin. I would say these pictures would greatly benefit from having the brightness turned down a little bit, the NEX always does this to me too - slight overexposure. I also see the same weakness that my Skoparex 3.4/35 has - the Voigtlander coating, while very hard and long-lived as a result, lack a little in contrast. With a bit of PP I reckon these shots will look fantastic (not that they don't already look nice). Shame they never did a version of the Ultron with T* coating. I think the later Color-Ultron is just a Planar 1.8/50 in disguise.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 8:56 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
The results are beautiful. Great rendering from this lens and good photos and subjects too.


PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 10:33 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
low overall contrast, flare on number 3


PostPosted: Sat Jul 27, 2013 11:24 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
hifisapi wrote:
low overall contrast, flare on number 3


I think that's being too critical. Just because a lens doesn't have SMC coating, doesn't make it a bad one! Wink

Very few lenses make shots that don't benefit from a bit of PP. Smile


PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:14 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Ian has right about PP, if you don't know lens , probably say nothing special at least, I see this Smile


PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2013 2:53 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Results look good to me, kinda looks like veiling flare in some shots, was a hood used?
Thanks for sharing.


PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2013 11:36 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Thanks for all the comments!

I agree with Ian that the NEX seems like to slightly add exposure especially with manual lens. Many times the photos taken with looks grey because the exposure is a bit over.

Many old lenses looks dull on modern camera if you shot raw and convert with the normal setting. I put the unprocessed photos here for easy comparison across different lenses. Check the processed photos here http://forum.mflenses.com/viewtopic,p,1333444.html#1333444 .

I always use a hood when testing and I take #3 with my left hand as extra hood. For me, the flare do a peaceful feel inside the Nunnery.


PostPosted: Sun Jul 28, 2013 1:06 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
I agree Calvin, nice to see the pics unprocessed and I also like that flare - it adds a sense of light and dimension imho.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2013 1:33 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Nice shots! I have this lens on a Voigtlander folding Vitessa - haven't shot it in ages - probably a very similar lens. I remember it being very sharp. I agree that your images as presented here, and those with pp have a different character than images I have made with a Deckel mount Septon (Bessamatic version). Perhaps it has something to do with the design trade-offs between a lens designed for an SLR (Septon) and one designed primarily for RF (Ultron) cameras. Someone more knowledgeable might know for sure, but I think they are both 7 or 8 element double gauss (Planar) type designs.

Relative to post processing, showing both straight-the-from the camera and post processed images is instructive, but the post processed images are the most important to me - I can't think of very many situations (if any) where I would use a raw image right from the camera. In a similar way, I would never have used a "straight print" back in film days where I didn't select the proper contrast grade of paper (or filter if I was using variable contrast paper), or dodge and burn, bleach, tone, re-touch, etc. when required. Further, the un-processed images probably say more about the camera, its software and sensor than the lens, since I am sure the Ultron is out-resolving the sensor anyway. The bottom line, is that in the hands of a good photographer who knows the craft, like yourself, this lens can produce great results with a distinctive character!

All the best,

Paul


PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2013 1:40 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
The Septon is 7 elements, the Ultron 6. The Septon was the first attempt at making an Ultron type for an SLR - they added another element to increase the flange-focal distance. They dropped the Septon and introduced a new Ultron that achieved the longer ffd via a concave front element when they dropped the leaf shutter SLRs.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2013 2:23 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
What Paul says is similar to what I think. I will include both processed and unprocessed version next time.

The unprocessed photos is used for easy evaluation across different lenses on the same camera/sensor/software combo. The photos of a good lens taken with proper exposure may looks bad on the raw file/film because the information recorded are not organized in a proper manner. As long as the information is their, we one bring it back as proper processing technique.

Thanks again for the useful comments and feedbacks. There is a lot for me to learn in the world of photography.


PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2013 2:54 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
iangreenhalgh1 wrote:
The Septon is 7 elements, the Ultron 6. The Septon was the first attempt at making an Ultron type for an SLR - they added another element to increase the flange-focal distance. They dropped the Septon and introduced a new Ultron that achieved the longer ffd via a concave front element when they dropped the leaf shutter SLRs.


Great info, Ian. The leaf shuttered SLRs were definitely an interesting transitional design - an evolutionary dead end. The Zeiss Contaflex series with exchangeable front lens elements was fairly long lived and quite good. The true interchangeable lens models like the later Kodak Retina Reflexes and the Bessamatics/Ultramatics were high end, competent designs with high quality glass (Rodenstock, Voigtlander, etc.). These were much different then the Nikkorexes, Kowas, Aries, Canon Ex, Topcon Unis, etc. that were low-cost entry-level models.

So we should see some differences in rendering and character between RF versions (Ultron - Prominent), Leaf-Shutter versions (Septon), and Focal-Plane-Shutter versions (Ultron for Rollei/Voigtlander VSL type).

paul


PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2013 3:22 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yes, different designs so different renderings.

Ultron 2/50 for Prominent, Vitessa, Vitomatic etc:



Ultron 1.8/50 for Icarex:



Color-Ultron 1.8/50 AKA Rollei Planar 1.8/50 HFT:



Septon 2/50 for Bessamatic/Ultramatic:



PostPosted: Mon Jul 29, 2013 4:41 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote
is this lens multi-coated ?


PostPosted: Tue Jul 30, 2013 12:47 am    Post subject: Reply with quote
Yahvel wrote:
is this lens multi-coated ?

It is single coated.
Post new topic   Reply to topic
Home   Manual Focus Lenses
Page 1 of 1