Slumgullion
Well-known
I have a 28/1.9. It doesn't have haze. I like its image quality quite a bit. Compared to modern Voigtlander lenses, the build quality is fine, but slightly more work-in-progress (the aperture detents feel too stiff and there is play in the guides). Its look is more 'medium contrast' with some SA wide-open...which isn't a bad thing. Distortion is low. Bokeh is very pleasant.
Jenny by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
House Plant by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
Jenny by Jim Fischer, on Flickr
That being said, modern Voigtlander lenses just keep getting better and better. Build quality is exceptional. There is now a consistent focus on delivering high-performing lenses at a reasonable size (there are trade-offs that come with that as well). I assume that they worked out whatever issues they were having with balsam haze and chalk that up to unfortunate growing pains.
Jenny by Jim Fischer, on FlickrHouse Plant by Jim Fischer, on FlickrJenny by Jim Fischer, on FlickrThat being said, modern Voigtlander lenses just keep getting better and better. Build quality is exceptional. There is now a consistent focus on delivering high-performing lenses at a reasonable size (there are trade-offs that come with that as well). I assume that they worked out whatever issues they were having with balsam haze and chalk that up to unfortunate growing pains.
ecowarrior
Established
Growing pains? On their website it says "BUILT TO CREATE since 1756". How long do they want? 
KoNickon
Nick Merritt
On the other hand, my 35/2.5 pancake (one of the first batch of the Cosina Voigtlanders) is fine.
santino
FSU gear head
My Super wide Heliar too!
ChrisPlatt
Thread Killer
Cosina did not start with the Voigtlander line, introduced around the Millennium.
By then they were experienced making cameras and lenses for several decades.
In my experience lens shopping all older lenses may have some haze.
Specific models of various manufacturers may be more prone than others.
Sometimes haze can be removed easily by a technician; sometimes not.
Chris
By then they were experienced making cameras and lenses for several decades.
In my experience lens shopping all older lenses may have some haze.
Specific models of various manufacturers may be more prone than others.
Sometimes haze can be removed easily by a technician; sometimes not.
Chris
Last edited:
Erik van Straten
Veteran
My most used Voigtlander lens, the Color-Skopar 50mm f2.5 - after about 20 years of intensive use - does not have any haze or scratches on the glass.
Out to Lunch
Ventor
Even though 'anecdote' is not 'data', my Nokton 1.1/50, 1.2/35, Super-Wide Heliar 4.5/15, and Nokton 1.4/40 (or is a newer lens) do not have haze. And I live a good part of the year in Saigon where humidity levels are always high. In comparison, the sensor in my Leica M-E was fine while I lived in Central Europe but went on the blink after six months in Saigon.
Coldkennels
Barnack-toting Brit.
According to Skyllaney, what's happening to the early CV lenses (in LTM and S mount) isn't haze, it's an issue with the glue/cement between some of the elements. This makes it unrepairable without separating the elements, cleaning, repositioning, and recementing them - not impossible, but close enough that it might as well be.
I have the original 15/4.5, 21/4, and 28/3.5 lenses in LTM. My 21mm is definitely slightly "hazy", the 15mm seems fine, and the 28mm is clear as a bell. I'm not sure what causes the cement to go cloudy, but it does seem like a bit of a roll of the dice. I've seen a lot more of the LTM 35mm Color Skopars with "haze" than anything else, for what it's worth.
As for performance: these early lenses all have issues on digital Ms when used for colour photography (the "Italian flag" effect), where the new ones don't. Rendering and sharpness is solid across the board, even with the mildly hazy 21mm.
I'm always impressed with how rectilinear the 15mm Super Wide Heliar is (just pay attention to the angle of the camera to avoid converging verticals), and it's surprisingly good at the corners:
(Leica M240)
The 21mm has some barrel distortion, but in most scenarios, it's not noticeable. This is very much worst-case scenario - and you can see the "glow" from the "haze" here:
(Leica Ic, Fomapan 100 in Rodinal)
The 28mm Color Skopar is my favourite of the lot. It's a lot more manageable than the 28/1.9 Ultron (which I thought was huge on a screwmount Leica, and has a lot of finder blockage on an M, from what I remember) with a short 90º focus throw and a little focusing "nub", making it very fast to use. Contrast is predictably a tad higher than my other LTM lenses, but nothing overwhelming. It's a pretty solid all-purpose lens; I generally prefer 50mm as a focal length, but I've never used the 28mm Color Skopar and thought "well, that looks terrible". For comparison, it's a lot better edge-to-edge than the Pentax SMC 28mm in K-mount I used to use on the KX and MX years ago, and when I did some informal side-by-side comparisons with the 28mm Color Skopar at f/4 on film with Fuji's X-mount 18/2 on an X-Pro 2 at the same aperture back in 2020, I found the Skopar was better in the corners there, too. It's a fantastic lens, and I'd be curious to see how the new f/2.8 version compares with the original side-by-side.
(Leica Ic, Rollei Retro 400S in LC29)
(Leica Ic, original - i.e. non-Kentmere - APX 100 in Rodinal)
Just bear in mind that both the 21mm and 28mm Color Skopars (and I believe the 25mm Snapshot Skopar, if I remember right) have a weird "hood" that's just a thin metal ring. This is the worst part of these lenses - it's small, compact, and looks tidy, but they're such thin rings that trying to remove them by gripping them like a normal hood to unscrew them will typically cause them to deform and bind on the threads, making them feel stuck. The secret is to grip them all the way around and avoid squeezing them at all; you need a super-light touch, and when you're trying to remove them in a hurry to swap a filter out, it's easy to forget this. They're all so flare-resistant that you probably don't need the hoods, but not using them leaves a weird exposed thread and prevents the cap from fitting correctly - not ideal.
wlewisiii
Just another hotel clerk
I had a Skopar SC 35/2.5 that I loved. I like my 21/4 LTM and my early Nokton 50/1.5 asp LTM but Sonnar Brian used to hear me complaining about the Ultron 35/1.9 constantly. Ended up trading it to him a while back. Most of the CV lenses I've looked at on E-Prey since then are SC mount and have tended to be haze damaged or out of my range.
piero2025
Established
Does nobody have photos with the new Voigtlanders? Are we all old here?
Shac
Well-known
I must be lucky, my Color-Skopar 50mm f2.5 and Color-Skopar 35mm f2.5 have no haze just a little dust. I did recently have mild haze from inside my Summitar.
I wonder if lenses suffer from haze more when used in hot &/or humid climates. I notice on the bay that lenses offered from Japanese sellers very frequently have haze listed.
I wonder if lenses suffer from haze more when used in hot &/or humid climates. I notice on the bay that lenses offered from Japanese sellers very frequently have haze listed.
38Deardorff
Established
Piero, the photo community is a weird bunch. There are those who buy what they need/want and use it long term. There are the collectors with drawers and shelves full of boxes and shiny things & there are those who visit camera stores regularly and ask "what's new"....and constantly flip for the better/newer cameras & lenses. You may have to wait for praise of the latest from Cosina/Voiglander...Does nobody have photos with the new Voigtlanders? Are we all old here?
robert blu
quiet photographer
My first RF lens was the CV 35/1.7 Ultron, which I bought with a Bessa R whan they arrived on our market, not sure which year.
Than I bought other lenses included a 35 cron asph which I used as my main 35.
Around one ear ago I was curious to see how the old Ultron performed on the M10 but I discovered thelens was hazy.
I brought it to my repair man with many doubts because I read it was almost impossible to disassemble the Ultron but with my surprise the lens was cleaned and now it is ok -)
This is one shot with the M10
Than I bought other lenses included a 35 cron asph which I used as my main 35.
Around one ear ago I was curious to see how the old Ultron performed on the M10 but I discovered thelens was hazy.
I brought it to my repair man with many doubts because I read it was almost impossible to disassemble the Ultron but with my surprise the lens was cleaned and now it is ok -)
This is one shot with the M10
Last edited:
robert blu
quiet photographer
Again M10 + CV 35/1.7 ltm Ultron
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
Again M10 + CV 35/1.7 ltm Ultron
I have one of these, too, and think it is a very good lens. Good color, good accuracy and a good overall image "feel" make it a good 35 to use. I am surprised it is not more popular.
38Deardorff
Established
B....there are so many choices these days.
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
True, but they are not all equals. This Ultron has charms that my CV and Canon do not. There is a softness about the image. The Canon and CV, and J-12, are nice lenses, but the Ultron just does it for me. It came from a trusted and reliable source and is a testament to that source. Just a gem. As always, YMMV.
38Deardorff
Established
If we're talking Leica rangefinders you have the Elmar 3.5cm, then the Summaron 3.5 & 2.8, the the Summicrons from the 8 element to the "bokeh king" & the most recent ASPH, then the Summilux from the Steel Rim to the ASPH & steel rim reissue....then the Canon lenses w LTM to M adapter...... & the Nikkor LTMs & then your various 7 Artisan, T Artisan & Light Lens Lab ..... & Voigtlander Cosina with what? seven or eight 35mm lenses. Each one with their special charms.....all for a very small market segment.... & each one of us might choose a particular lens for any number of reasons.
Last edited:
boojum
Ignoble Miscreant
I was not saying the Ultron is the best 35. I only said I like mine a lot and the reasons. In this photo I like how the light and color are handled.
38Deardorff
Established
B, i was answering this statement of yours " I am surprised it is not more popular."..... I've. had 2 CV 21mm, 2 CV 28mm f3.5, a 35mm 2.5, 35mm Vll 1.4 and the 50mm 2.5. I still have a 21and the 50. Though i really liked the character of the 35mm 1.4......i'm holding out for another Summilux.I was not saying the Ultron is the best 35. I only said I like mine a lot and the reasons. In this photo I like how the light and color are handled.
