In the 1980s, the German Mag "Color-Foto" Ranked ~ fifteen 50mms. #1 Shocked the Photographic Community

[NickTrop]

And the winner is???? The Voightlander Color Ultron 50mm f1.8. I can not post pics as I have one on its way in the mail... Below is a Gemini AI summary on the article/lens:

The Giant Slayer: How the Color-Ultron Topped the Charts​

In the early 1980s, the German magazine Color-Foto conducted a rigorous technical bench test of approximately fifteen 50mm lenses. To the shock of the photographic community, the Voigtländer Color-Ultron 50mm f/1.8 (specifically the version produced by Rollei) took the #1 spot, outperforming the legendary Leica Summicron-R 50mm f/2 in several key metrics.

1. The "Planar" DNA​

The secret to its success wasn't actually a "Voigtländer" design in the traditional sense. By the time this lens was released, Zeiss had taken over Voigtländer and eventually sold the brand to Rollei. The Color-Ultron is effectively a Zeiss Planar 50mm f/1.8 in disguise. It utilizes a 7-element, 6-group design that was optimized for maximum center-to-edge resolution.

2. Superior Contrast and "Snap"​

While Leica lenses of that era (like the Summicron-R) were famous for their smooth micro-contrast and "Leica Glow," the Color-Foto tests prioritized MTF (Modulation Transfer Function) scores—essentially how well a lens maintains contrast as details get finer. The Color-Ultron exhibited:

• Extremely high wide-open sharpness: Unlike many contemporary 50mms that needed to be stopped down to f/4 for critical sharpness, the Ultron was biting at f/1.8.
• Color Correction: As the name implies, it was specifically optimized for the "Color" era, with multi-coatings that produced punchier, more saturated reds and blues than the more "natural" (some would say clinical) Leica R rendering.

3. Resolution vs. Character​

The Leica Summicron-R 50mm was (and is) a masterpiece of balanced aberrations, providing a very "plastic" 3D look. However, the Color-Ultron simply moved more "lines per millimeter" onto the film. In a laboratory environment, the Ultron’s ability to resolve fine detail across the entire frame—even into the corners—was statistically superior to the Leica.

---

Technical Snapshot: Voigtländer Color-Ultron 50mm f/1.8​

Feature	Detail
Optical Design	7 elements in 6 groups (based on the Zeiss Planar).
Unique Trait	Some early versions featured a concave front element, though the "Color-Ultron" version tested by Color-Foto usually had a flat or slightly convex front.
Mounts	Most commonly found in M42 screw mount or Rollei QBM.
Rendering	High contrast, saturated colors, and very "modern" sharpness for a vintage lens.

Why it "Shocked" the Community​

In the 80s, Leica was the undisputed king of optics. For a magazine to rank a "consumer" lens (which could often be found on more affordable Rollei SL35 cameras) above the professional Leica R system was heresy. It proved that computational lens design (which Zeiss was mastering at the time) could occasionally out-resolve the hand-assembled, "character-first" philosophy of Leitz.

 

[yanchep_mike]

No shock here, Zeiss has always been there with the best.
Just my opinion, do not shoot me.
mike

 

[NickTrop]

I should add that I scored one -- a beater (barrel-wise) but the glass (in pics) looked clean for $72 shipped. This is a low price for this lens. I'd say that they average around $100-120-ish US. The lens has a repution, also, for excellent micro-contrast and "Zeiss 3D pop". Hype or an overlooked gem? We shall see.

 

[p.giannakis]

Is there a link to the rest of the article?

 

[NickTrop]

Is there a link to the rest of the article?

There is no link because it's from a 40-something archived article of a German photo mag. The rankings were discussed in several photographic forums, and I used Gemini AI to do a summary of the findings. Truth in advertising. There is -- as always, a lot of info on the web about this particular lens... Zeiss design by Dr. Albrecht Tronnier,, among the 1st lenses to use computer-aided design, has HFT (T*?) coating, the rare/sought-after original "Ultron" (sans "color") had a strange concave front element, originally produced in Germany, later produced in Singapore... etc. It's a Zeiss lens that was rebranded as Voightlander and Rollie, flies under the radar, and is relatively cheap compared to vintage Zeiss and Leica (obviously). Even though the I can't cite the original article, I've seen it referenced ofen enough that I find it credible. Plus, it's a somewhat obscure lens to be referenced in this way. I have a beater one I got cheap coming, actually, tomorrow. But the pictures on Flickr are really, nice... Definitely has that certain, special "something" of high-end glass imo.

Voigtlander Color Ultron 50/1.8

Only pictures taken with the Voigtlander Color Ultron 50/1.8 only.

www.flickr.com

 

[hilltime]

There are two different lenses in what you are referencing. The Carl Zeiss Ultron 50/1.8 was designed for the Zeiss Icarex and is the one with the concave front element.
The Voigtlander Color-Ultron 50/1.8 was originally done for the Voigtlander VSL-1 which eventually became Rollei and also was no doubt the Carl Zeiss Planar 50/1.8 for Rollei QBM. I have both of these, the CZ Ultron mounted on a Zeiss Ikon SL706 and the Voigtlander Color-Ultron mounted on an original Made in Germany VSL-1.

I would definitely give the edge to the Carl Zeiss Ultron as it is potentially the sharpest 50 I have ever had, and I've got alot. It also is considerably more expensive than the Voigtlander Color-Ultron. Both have 42mm thread mount as the Carl Zeiss also was made with a Zeiss Icarex Bayonet mount.

So many lenses, virtually all with similar names and from the same time periods.

 

[santino]

Yeah, it is the lens I am looking for in M42 mount for years. As always, cameras related to Zeiss (Rollei/Voigtländer QBM) are not that great, but their lenses are superb.

 

[NickTrop]

There are two different lenses in what you are referencing. The Carl Zeiss Ultron 50/1.8 was designed for the Zeiss Icarex and is the one with the concave front element.
The Voigtlander Color-Ultron 50/1.8 was originally done for the Voigtlander VSL-1 which eventually became Rollei and also was no doubt the Carl Zeiss Planar 50/1.8 for Rollei QBM. I have both of these, the CZ Ultron mounted on a Zeiss Ikon SL706 and the Voigtlander Color-Ultron mounted on an original Made in Germany VSL-1.

I would definitely give the edge to the Carl Zeiss Ultron as it is potentially the sharpest 50 I have ever had, and I've got alot. It also is considerably more expensive than the Voigtlander Color-Ultron. Both have 42mm thread mount as the Carl Zeiss also was made with a Zeiss Icarex Bayonet mount.

So many lenses, virtually all with similar names and from the same time periods.

The Ultron (sans "color" was very rare from what I read. Short production run, hard to find. Thanks for the info! The Color-Foto rankings, from what I read, rated the Color Ultron. Yes, I have (and have had) a lot of 50s. Looking forward to receiving this one sometime today. Mirrorless was the best, or worst, thing for those afflicted with vintage lense obcessions. Thanks for sharing your knowledge and experience with this lens.

 

[NickTrop]

Yeah, it is the lens I am looking for in M42 mount for years. As always, cameras related to Zeiss (Rollei/Voigtländer QBM) are not that great, but their lenses are superb.

QBM mount seems much more prevailant. Didn't matter to me as I'll be using this on a mirrorless camera and the adapter already arrived.

 

[splitimageview]

I ran the text from @NickTrop ’s first post thru ChatGPT for a sanity check.

RFF is currently drafting an AI policy for the site, as we want to make sure RFF content is free from AI warp, if that is possible, hence this test.

This is in no way meant to contradict anything in this thread but it is illustrative of how AI is susceptible to inaccuracies.

Here are the results: sorry for the length but if you don’t want to read it all here is the short answer:

Short answer: there is no solid, verifiable primary-source evidence (digitized or cited in reputable publications) confirming that specific Color-Foto test or its exact ranking. What you’re seeing is a persistent secondary claim that circulates in forums and enthusiast spaces—but it’s not well documented.

ChatGPT - Voigtländer Color-Ultron Test Claim

Shared via ChatGPT

chatgpt.com

Full text: question - - can you verify this article?

In the early 1980s, the German magazine Color-Foto conducted a rigorous technical bench test of approximately fifteen 50mm lenses. To the shock of the photographic community, the Voigtländer Color-Ultron 50mm f/1.8 (specifically the version produced by Rollei) took the #1 spot.

"Short answer: there is no solid, verifiable primary-source evidence (digitized or cited in reputable publications) confirming that specific Color-Foto test or its exact ranking. What you’re seeing is a persistent secondary claim that circulates in forums and enthusiast spaces, but it’s not well documented." -ChatGPT

[EDITED]

To read the full analysis, click the link above.

 

[trix4ever]

Is this really the Rangefinderforum? I hardly recognise it. Oh boy my ignore list is going to get very long.

 

[splitimageview]

What’s that mean, @trix4ever ?

Share your thoughts please.

 

[trix4ever]

Now that Ai sourced questions are acceptable, followed by Ai sourced responses, I fail to see how the original Rangefinderforum which was based on members sharing their experience to help others relates to what I see now.
The Leica camera forum has banned all Ai in posts or responses so I am using that rather more, it seems more human.
I am on the road at the minute. When I get back to my computer I may give a more considered response.
I have greatly enjoyed this forum over the years, but I will probably just stop visiting, I simply don't enjoy reading computer generated output. Please do not take this as a personal criticism, we're all different and many others may well enjoy the way this forum is going, maybe for me it's time to move on.
All the best, Mark

 

[splitimageview]

@trix4ever It seems you have not read the important parts of the above post. I include them here:

RFF is currently drafting an AI policy for the site, as we want to make sure RFF content is free from AI warp, if that is possible, hence this test.

I refer you to this thread from January where it was requested that members report suspected AI posts.

and second, as the synopsis shows, the article referencing the 50/1.8 lens can't actually be verified.

As you can see, the conclusion of the 50/1.8 being #1 was gleaned from forum posts, among other sources, and it's not known if this was the conclusion from the actual magazine.

Not everyone is up to speed on AI, so the post was made to illustrate how AI can be highly inaccurate.

The length of the post is unfortunate but it hopefully sheds light on the process to the uninitiated.

As such, we don't want these kinds of posts on this site to further propagate such inaccuracies.

I hope this clarifies things for you and is to your satisfaction.

 

[trix4ever]

@trix4ever It seems you have not read the important parts of the above post. I include them here:

RFF is currently drafting an AI policy for the site, as we want to make sure RFF content is free from AI warp, if that is possible, hence this test.

I refer you to this thread from January where it was requested that members report suspected AI posts.

and second, as the synopsis shows, the article can't actually be verified.

As you can see, the conclusion of the 50/1.8 being #1 was gleaned from forum posts, among other sources, and it's not known if this was the conclusion from the actual magazine.

Not everyone is up to speed on AI, so the post was made to illustrate how AI can be highly inaccurate.

The length of the post is unfortunate but it hopefully sheds light on the process to the uninitiated.

As such, we don't want these kinds of posts on this site to further propagate such inaccuracies.

I hope this clarifies things for you and is to your satisfaction.

Thank you for that.

I could not possibly read all your post, life is too short and for me getting shorter.

I look forward to your review of Ai policy. It is really important going forward.

Until then I will stick to my policy of adding anyone who posts Ai to my ignore list. Not including you...
I have always appreciated and respected the work you do for this site. Thank you.

I think I will back off for a bit until this is resolved.

 

[splitimageview]

I removed the full text from the post. Anyone that wants to read the full ChatGPT analysis can click the link.

@CameraQuest and the mods have been discussing AI policy, should be completed shortly.

 

[NickTrop]

Firstly, thanks for taking the "AI test" bait—this thread was not about the lens, really (fairly obviously, no)? (And is it any wonder I have gotten blocked from RF over the years? LOL. No, I'm not a troll, think of me as a "heel" in the Ric Flair, Ravishing Rick Rude, and George "the Animal" vein who has come back to the RF territory after a lengthy tour in the Japan AJW circuit...)

I really wanted to see how the mods/community would react to it... a little group psychology and nouveau trolling (er... heeling) in the burgeoning (or "burgeoned"?) AI era. Now. As for the content, Gemini AI (which, incidentally, is supposed to be better with research than other LLMs, as I understand it) confirmed emphatically that the Color-Foto test is true, though it couldn't directly cite the source because "of course it can't" from a 40-year-old consumer Euro photo mag. ChatGPT is more skeptical of it but doesn't refute it. So, it comes down to what LLM you use and which you choose to believe. Here is the Gemini AI answer:

Prompt: Is it accurate that Color-Foto magazine ranked the Voigtlander Color-Ultron the best 50mm lens, topping the Summicron-R in one of their editions in the 80s?

Gemini AI:
Yes, it is widely reported as accurate that in the 1980s, the German photography magazine Color-Foto ranked the
Voigtländer Color-Ultron 50mm f/1.8
as the #1 lens in a test of approximately fifteen 50mm lenses, famously placing it ahead of the
Leica Summicron-R 50mm
.

Key Details of the Ranking

• The Result: To the surprise of the photographic community at the time, the
  Color-Ultron was found to be statistically superior to the Leica in a laboratory environment, specifically regarding its ability to resolve fine detail across the entire frame—even into the corners
  .
• Performance Metrics: The lens was noted for:
  • Resolution: Moving more "lines per millimeter" onto the film than its competitors.
  • Sharpness: Extremely high wide-open sharpness at f/1.8, whereas many contemporary 50mm lenses required stopping down to f/4 for similar results.
  • Color Correction: Optimization for color film with multi-coatings that produced more saturated and "punchier" colors compared to the more clinical rendering of the Leica R.

Historical Context of the Lens

• Design: The
  Voigtländer Color-Ultron 1.8/50
  was a rebranded Carl Zeiss Planar design. It was one of the first lenses designed using computer-assisted optical design.
• Versions: The version that achieved this ranking was typically the one produced by Rollei (often referred to by collectors as the "Singapore version").
• Legacy: Because of this specific test result, the lens gained a reputation as a "giant killer" and remains a highly-regarded vintage optic for its sharpness and color performance
  ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
  
  As for the actual item, received in the mail yesterday. Some initial observations:
  
  1. Really nice build quality. Buttery smooth focus ring, nice non-rickety solid aperture clicks (unlike the Canon nFD 50/1.4). I have. It's sensible. It's solid, feels great in the hand but isn;t unduly heavy like most Nikkor primes of the era that seemed to sell their lenses by the pound, like fishmongers weighing herring on a scale.
  2. I took a since-deleted picture of a random object on an end table -- a plastic vacuum cleaner attachment. When I looked at the photo, I noticed that the plastic had a subtle texturing that I never noticed with my n'ked eye/... is this superior microcontrast? I want to believe...
  3. I'm shooting this on a Lumix S5II full-frame mirrorless camera. More so than any manual focus prime in my collection (I have scads of them: Nikkon 105/2.5 pre-AI Sonnar, Canon 50/1.4 nFD, Nikkor 28/2.8 AIS... and on and on), the focus peaking seems to go nuts and shimmers. I thought it was my imagination but I queried AI (a few different LLMs -- I have access, as a PT LLM trainer, to all of the frontier models), which verified that this is due to how the focus peaking algorithms do their thing and it's likely caused by the superior microcontrast of this lens.
  4. The lens is, indeed, sharp wide open; 1.8 is a usable aperture. No "dreamy glow" as far as I can tell. It's almost as sharp, I'd say, as my "Panacron"—Panasonic S 50mm f1.8 ("Panacron" because it's the same optical formula and form factor as the non-APO Leica S 50mm f2).
  5. Shout out to Robert's Camera. Sold in "fair" condition but the barrel is fine, glass is perfect... 30-day return, free shipping, reputable dealer. I'd sell this lens as "excellent" or maybe "near mint." I've gotten several good deals from these folks. $76 US bottom line price, inc. tax. (They go for about twice this at regular auction, which is still a deal.
  6. There may be others but this is the only lens I'm aware of that has a "ring of fire" flare, which indicates to me there's something unique going on here.
  
  My expectation will be this will be my main mirrorless manual 50. I've never heard of this particular lens, and I've had this addiction for most of my life and have owned at one time or another, all the "usual suspects" in terms of vintage glass: Pancolars, Taks (radioactive and otherwise), Nikkors, even a Leitz (Summar), Jenas, and so forth and so on. So I ask the LLM, why isn't this lens more well-known? Why is it a "sleeper" rather than sought after and at inflated "R" prices? The LLM's logical response is it's because the QBM mount is not that popular or well-known and it has a fussy pin that some adapters don't play nice with, which, if not depressed, will cause the aperture to remain wide open (my Photasy adapter has no issue), messy branding issues—Voightlander, Zeiss, Rollei, etc. Oh, and it was produced in Singapore, not Germany.
  
  My expectation: a best-of-both-worlds lens. It has modern wide aperture sharpness thanks to its computer-aided/Zeiss design. But will have the vintage "look" due to its not-over-corrected regular 7/6 traditional double Gauss design. And it already seems to display excellent microcontrast along with some interesting quirks, like ring-of-fire flare.
  
  Still there? I know TL;DR but I post these rants over a cup of joe. Time for my second. Later.

 

[splitimageview]

It’s unfortunate that these discussions tend to become TL;DR. 😅

There are pros and cons to every LLM. I’ve used several, including Gemini when it was first released two years ago. That launch was a bit of a debacle.

In this case Gemini is coming to the same conclusion as ChatGPT...basically, there is chatter about a supposed test from the mid 80s, but there is no direct reference to the printed article. No confirmation.

This is a case of how forum chatter can become fact, over time, without any evidence..and exploits the inherent flaws of LLMs.

@CameraQuest and the moderators have been working on a forum AI policy, as we believe it’s important to keep the discourse here personal and human-created.

That said, there are clearly valid uses of AI on the forum — for example, spelling and grammar correction, translation for non-native speakers, and other assistive uses that help members communicate their own thoughts more clearly. So it may not make sense for AI to be banned altogether.

There are strong arguments in favor of AI as a writing aid, but not as a content generator.

We want to arrive at a policy that is easy to follow, easy to understand, and (hopefully) easy to moderate.

 

[NickTrop]

It’s unfortunate that these discussions tend to become TL;DR. 😅

There are pros and cons to every LLM. I’ve used several, including Gemini when it was first released two years ago. That launch was a bit of a debacle.

In this case Gemini is coming to the same conclusion as ChatGPT...basically, there is chatter about a supposed test from the mid 80s, but there is no direct reference to the printed article. No confirmation.

This is a case of how forum chatter can become fact, over time, without any evidence..and exploits the inherent flaws of LLMs.

@CameraQuest and the moderators have been working on a forum AI policy, as we believe it’s important to keep the discourse here personal and human-created.

That said, there are clearly valid uses of AI on the forum — for example, spelling and grammar correction, translation for non-native speakers, and other assistive uses that help members communicate their own thoughts more clearly. So it may not make sense for AI to be banned altogether.

There are strong arguments in favor of AI as a writing aid, but not as a content generator.

We want to arrive at a policy that is easy to follow, easy to understand, and (hopefully) easy to moderate.

Grammar corrector? Why would you ban that? But AI is also a summarizer; again, why would you ban that? I used AI as a summerizer here. As far as accuracy? Up to the reader to decide. It is unreasonable to believe that one can link to an archive of a 40+ year old consumer gernam photo mag. However, there is such a thing as corraborated anecdotal evidence. "Evidence" being the key word here. Why would unrelated individuals recall that some rather obscure 50mm lens placed first in bench tests in a geerman photo mag? It is remembered precisely because the result was unexpected. I could see banning AI slop spam. Sure. But here, I used AI as part of a post to summarize many links of internet content about this item. I say that is -- or should be, inbounds.

 

[NickTrop]

TL;DR/Net-Net

The Voightlander Color Ultron 50mm f1.8 purportedly beat the Leica-R equivalent in MTF bench testing and was the #1-ranked 50mm prime according to the German Color-Foto magazine in an issue published in the early 80s. This 40+ year old edition is not currently available for 100% verification but it has been independently confirmed, anecdotally online, by old photodogs posting on forums along with LLMs, specifically Google Gemini. This is not a far-fetched claim, as the lens has Zeiss pedigree; effectively, it is a rebadged Zeiss and was among the first optics to incorporate computer-aided design. It offers the best of both worlds—modern sharpness at all apertures, including wide-open at f1.8, but also exhibits "character" as its traditional double Gauss seven-element/six-group design is not "overcorrected" and allows for vintage character, such as unique "ring-of-fire" flare. It has been called the "giant killer" by those in the vintage lens know. It is known for great color rendition, high microcontrast, and Zeiss "3D pop." It also has excellent build quality.

So. If you have a mirrorless camera and want what was "probably," technically, the "best-of-the-best" of the fast nifty-fifty vintage lenses but do not want to pay the Leica "red dot" tax (I paid $76 US bottom line shipped from a reputable dealer), as Rod Sterling was known to say, "submitted for your approval," I give you the Voigtländer Color Ultron 50mm f1.8.