Fujitsu
Well-known
Who has experience with the 12mm and 15mm Voigtlanders on Micro 4/3? I often hear they dont work well but have not seen pictures yet.
Thanks
Thanks
back alley
IMAGES
send me an adapter and i'll give mine a try...
squirrel$$$bandit
Veteran
Soft corners. I don't have many photos handy, but there are examples around the internet. It's pretty extreme.
That said, the pictures can still look good--I'm not hugely bothered by soft corners at times. I have mostly been using my 15 on the M8.
That said, the pictures can still look good--I'm not hugely bothered by soft corners at times. I have mostly been using my 15 on the M8.
DRabbit
Registered
I've enjoyed the combination honestly. Yes, sometimes you get blurry corners, but I can't exactly predict when and why (and I don't pay that close attention).
Here's a few... E-P1 and 15mm Heliar
(this one I added the blurry edges - LOL)
Here's a few... E-P1 and 15mm Heliar
(this one I added the blurry edges - LOL)
dng88
Dennis
Very good pics. Wonder if stabilization is on?
I wonder also whether GF1 would have the same quality, given the same lens. Might be a good way to compare given this challenge of this angle of view.
I wonder also whether GF1 would have the same quality, given the same lens. Might be a good way to compare given this challenge of this angle of view.
kbg32
neo-romanticist
I don't think they perform well at all. Results have been spotty with my G1 and GF1. I tried the 12 and the 15. I was greatly disappointed. The lenses that were designed for the system perform the best and give fantastic results. Besides, I want my wides to be wides and not doubled in their focal lengths.
DRabbit
Registered
Thanks.
They should, in theory, produce similar results. The sensor is the same, it's the in-camera software that's different.
Can't answer about IS... I usually turn it on and off as needed, but there are certainly times I forget. I try to be pretty sure I have the IS set to the right focal length, but I've made the mistake of forgetting to do that from time to time.
They should, in theory, produce similar results. The sensor is the same, it's the in-camera software that's different.
Can't answer about IS... I usually turn it on and off as needed, but there are certainly times I forget. I try to be pretty sure I have the IS set to the right focal length, but I've made the mistake of forgetting to do that from time to time.
ZeissFan
Veteran
Drabbit -- excellent work with the lenses. Very dramatic photos. They really work for me!
f16sunshine
Moderator
Amy those look pretty Dang(rabbit) good. Most I've seen online have been much worse. Maybe folks just want to show those more often.
Fujitsu
Well-known
Drabbit, have you compared the 15mm Heliar to one of the 4/3s kit zooms? The EP1 and GF1 start with a 14/3.5(...) which is faster and cheaper than the Voigtlander.
vnukov_pk
Established
I will mount my tokina 12-24 for nikon on my GF1 via adapter as soon as I get it from China (ordered on ebay). If the results will not suit me, I will get 9-18 digital zuiko.
sebastel
coarse art umbrascriptor
does your adapter support setting the aperture like the one made by novoflex?
keep in mind, that the tokina does not offer an aperture selector itself.
vnukov_pk
Established
yes, I know that. My adapter comes from jinfinance, and it is usable with G lenses.
bronney
Established
Guys, here're some of mine with the 15.
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=gf1 heliar&w=10447341@N05
It's adequate if you need the 30mm, but having shot the 15 on film, I'd say it's totally another world.
http://www.flickr.com/search/?q=gf1 heliar&w=10447341@N05
It's adequate if you need the 30mm, but having shot the 15 on film, I'd say it's totally another world.
AJShepherd
Well-known
Here's one of mine with the 15mm Super-Wide Heliar. Mine's the old L39 mount, so I attached it using the thread mount adaptor on the M mount adaptor.
There's a set here from when I tried it.
I liked the results, but I'm not entirely convinced I'd choose to use that in preference to the Olympus 17mm pancake.
There's a set here from when I tried it.
I liked the results, but I'm not entirely convinced I'd choose to use that in preference to the Olympus 17mm pancake.
borrel
Børre Ludvigsen
There some samples here: http://abdallah.hiof.no/photography/EP2-LTM/index.html. E-P2 and CV 12/5.6 on the bottom row along with some samples from the CV 50/1.5, ZM 21/2.8 and ZM 20/2.8.
- Børre
- Børre
LeicaFoReVer
Addicted to Rangefinders
that blurred example is extreme. Any explanation why that happens??
borrel
Børre Ludvigsen
Pop the camera out of the box, whip on the 12/5.6 and take the picture handheld! Being mindful of the 1600 ISO, the centers appear reasonably sharp at 100% magnification, but the corners are badly blurred and with the tiny sensor area compared to the 135 format, it makes you wonder what both Epson (R-D1) and Leica have done with their sensors to maintain sharpness on much larger sensors. As soon as we get lighter days up here, I will try some more. But I agree that the CV 12/5.6 really doesn't look very encouraging.
- Børre
- Børre
MXP
Established
I read his explanation that he added the blurred edges after the picture was taken? ......so in this case not the lens?
borrel
Børre Ludvigsen
No, the images are JPEG unaltered conversions from the ORF RAW files.
I have made another set of tests here: http://abdallah.hiof.no/photography/EP2-ZM28-CV12/
The results are really not very encouraging for either the Zeiss or the Voigtländer.
A bit disconcerting as the diagonal of a 4/3 chip is 22.5mm compared to 69.7m (correction: 43.3)* for a 35mm 24x36 film frame which these lenses are designed to cover. One would assume that the best center portion of these lenses is being used. Is the sensor pixel density to high for lenses designed for silver rather than the anti-aliasing filters and sharpening software that mask these things from us? The pixel density of the E-P2 is 5.1MP/cm2 as opposed to the 1.6 of the Epson R-D1 or the 2.1 of the Leica M8 and M9 all three of which handle these lenses very nicely.
- Børre
* The number is wrong. The correct diagonal for 24x36 is 43.3mm. Thanks to rxmd for pointing this out.
Last edited: