D
DHK
Guest
Does anyone have a comparison of Voigtländer 15mm 4.5 version iii for e mount on an a7ii compared to the SWC? I’m trying to replace my SWC and wonder how the lens performs.
15mm Heliar III compared with SWC
- Thread starter DHK
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 12
- Views 3K
raid
Dad Photographer
The SWC can not be replaced by any camera or lens.
D
DHK
Guest
This makes me feel good and bad.
raid
Dad Photographer
It seems that the Heliar is corrected for digital sensors. If using such wide angle lenses is meant for a digital camera, then this Heliar may be an excellent choice. It is not equivalent to using the SWC.
Gregm61
Well-known
I picked up a version III 15mm Heliar not too long ago. I already had a 18mm f3.8 Super Elmar-M and, on comparing images captured with both on my M262 prefer the image quality, even if not as wide, of the Super Elmar, which is much more consistent into the far corners, with little to no fringing. The Heliar can be downright blurry along the edges. I'd rather have a less wide, better quality image.
Given the option and ability to afford either, I'd pick the SWC over a Heliar every time.
Given the option and ability to afford either, I'd pick the SWC over a Heliar every time.
D
DHK
Guest
Could I make the argument that corner sharpness is not relevant? To compare to the SWC, the sides would be cropped (even a little off the top and bottom too since it looks like 16mm is the true equivalent.)
Gregm61
Well-known
Sure, you could argue anything (LOL), but the lens is sold as a 15mm, and at 15mm the edges are "not good"...
The SWC is great as-is.
The SWC is great as-is.
shawn
Veteran
I have the M mount version and posted some shots (1:1) on a A7RII in this thread.
https://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=168783&highlight=SWC
If you put up the square grid in the EVF it gives you perfect 1:1 framing. Just use the middle 4x4 boxes. Also perfect for 3:1 using the middle two rows.
Shawn
shawn
Veteran
Godfrey
somewhat colored
I haven't used this lens; I had the first version of the CV Heliar 15/4.5 and it was pretty awful at corners and edges. I understand the model III is much improved, but no direct experience.
The closest in FoV and overall look/feel/bokeh I've come to the Hasselblad SWC on 35mm FF (cropped to square) has been the Leitz Super-Elmar-R 15mm f/3.5 on the Leica SL or M-P typ 240. This is essentially a Zeiss Distagon 15mm built to Leica requirements and standards for the R system cameras, so it makes sense that it would image similarly to the Zeiss Biogon on the SWC.
I'm also finding the Voigtländer HyperWide 10mm f/5.6 ASPH when used on the Leica CL (cropped to square) has a great deal of the same character as SWC imagery. (This is a 24Mpixel APS-C sensor and gives the same field of view as the Super-Elmar-R listed above.)
Both of these give a little bit more FoV than the SWC, but the difference is small represented by the orange border in this framing comparison vs the green border:
The sample photo this is based on was made with the Leica CL + 10mm lens. It's not adjusted in any way other than being cropped to square.
The biggest issue with all of these equivalences is that 24x24mm or 16x16mm format are both much smaller than the SWC so there's very little room for the aperture to make much difference in focus zone and diffraction sets in very quickly, killing the sharpness across the board. I don't use the 10mm past f/8, and the 15mm I usually use at f/5.6 to get a feel more similar to the SWC @ f/8-11.
I'm very encouraged by what I see with the Hasselblad X1D using their XCD 21mm lens. The 33x33 mm square format (cropped, of course) is much closer to the SWC original 56x56 and the 21mm lens nets results in about the same FoV as the other two combinations I've been using but has a bit more of the focus zone control that the SWC does. It's not an inexpensive equivalent, and I'm sure it won't be 'identical', but it looks like it's about as close as you can get with currently available all-digital capture equipment.
G
hap
Well-known
Raid
The earlier Heliars were not corrected sufficiently for digital sensors with thicker glass , hence vIII. Maybe not "equivalent" to swc, but tool that could get most of the job done. I have a M240, so for 600$ can get a pretty nice 15mm that I can use on my film cameras too.
At least that is my rationalization. We all are pretty good at that when we want something.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
This is a bit like comparing a Jeep Wrangler Sahara to a BMW sports car, or a Rolls Royce. They are each at the top of their class, but they do different jobs! The SWC is a first-class optic. It covers a horizontal angle equivalent about 25mm for a 35mm camera, or an M9 or M240. If that's all you want, and you are OK with the viewfinder, get the SWC. If you need the 15mm field of view of the Voigtlander, get that one. There are other lenses in between! Something this discussion leaves out is the ease and comfort of using each type of camera. I finally sold my SWC when I got tired of squinting through that distorting finder to frame the shot. I'd rather use my 24mm or 21mm on the Leica, or even the 28mm. I'd rather use the 15mm, 18mm, 20mm, or 24mm Nikkors; or the 25mm f/2 Carl Zeiss on the Nikon. Or the 17-35mm Nikkor.
Make your choice.
Make your choice.
Larry Cloetta
Veteran
I’ve got both and don’t think that the Voigtländer 15mm can be made to be “the same” as the 38mm Biogon no matter what you do with it. If I thought that, I would have sold the SWC and happily pocketed the difference.
I like the 15mm as well, and probably won’t be selling that either as they’re different enough that it’s not a duplication.
For a given individual, maybe the 15mm is more than close enough.
To the OP, the Voigtländer is pretty cheap, maybe just buy one and use both before you sell the SWC, so you will know for sure what best suits your desires. If the 15mm does everything you need then you will be happy to get the money from the sale of the SWC. If it doesn’t, you will lose hardly anything if you have to sell the Voigtländer. On the other hand if you dump the SWC first, then get the VC and decide it’s inadequate, that’s going to likely be more expensive to remedy.
Trying both yourself, simultaneously, will tell you more than listening to internet people like me.
I like the 15mm as well, and probably won’t be selling that either as they’re different enough that it’s not a duplication.
For a given individual, maybe the 15mm is more than close enough.
To the OP, the Voigtländer is pretty cheap, maybe just buy one and use both before you sell the SWC, so you will know for sure what best suits your desires. If the 15mm does everything you need then you will be happy to get the money from the sale of the SWC. If it doesn’t, you will lose hardly anything if you have to sell the Voigtländer. On the other hand if you dump the SWC first, then get the VC and decide it’s inadequate, that’s going to likely be more expensive to remedy.
Trying both yourself, simultaneously, will tell you more than listening to internet people like me.
Similar threads
