15mm vs.12mm

[Paul C. Perkins MD]

I already havea 15mm Voigtlander and have bee toying with the notion of replacing it with a 12mm. Plus - Wider coverage. Minus - The wider coverage comes with a higher price tag and slower speed (F:5.6 vs. F:4.5). Has anybody done this and did they find it worthwhile? TIA

Paul

 

[Bill Blackwell]

It is commonly stated the 12 does not perform as well as the 15. Since the 15 barely performs to my satisfaction, I have personally never been motivated to try the 12. Although, being a super-wide fanatic, I must admit if the price were right I would try one anyway (but it isn't).

 

[mfogiel]

I have been surprised at how good the 12mm is, actually... My take is, these lenses are SO far away in coverage, that they really suit different purposes - the 12mm without some sort of leveling will just throw distortion at you , the 15mm is still marginally useable handheld... I have both and will keep both.

 

[Sam N]

I believe the 12 has less light falloff in the corners. If you have an R-D1 that could be particularly important to you. Other than the falloff, the 15mm's performance is excellent on the R-D1. I usually use it between F8 and F11, so the speed difference wouldn't be a big issue.

 

[Hephaestus]

I am not convinced that there is a meaningful difference in image quality between the C/V 12mm and 15mm, and the 12mm perspective is noticeably wider. However, because of my inability to get consistently acceptable results with the 12mm by hand holding, and because of its slower maximum aperture and increased size (note that the 12mm viewfinder is MUCH larger than the one for the 15mm) I find the 15mm much more useful.

Ryan

 

[johnastovall]

I have both and use the 12mm far more than the 15mm. I like its look and always use it hand held.

I find it's lens that asks for creativity.

 

[robert blu]

I did it: in my opinion the 12 can give stunning images but is MUCH more difficult to use. The 15 is more versatile, the 12 is special: if you do not make mistakes in framing, tilting, exposing you'll have special pictures. here is a sample, other are in my gallery. But at the end if I had to choice it to day I would go for the 15, just my opinion.
robert

 

[pkuglin]

I prefer the 12mm. Much more creative lens. I often shoot hand held and tilt it for effect. I normally shoot landscapes with Kodak HIE IR. For that it is simply wild. Boy was it fun in the sand dunes of Death Valley. The 15mm just doesn't give the wow of the 12. Distortion is part of the wow for me. Also, the 12 has a readily available filter mount (77mm). You can adapt it for the 15mm though.

 

[kbg32]

These were taken with the 12mm Heliar. I find it to be quite sharp. Fall-off is mine, not the lens.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=71477

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/photopost/showphoto.php?photo=69962

 

[Paul C. Perkins MD]

Thans for your responses. I think I'll hang with the 15mm. I've been delighted with it thus far and haven't encountered any situation it couldn't cover.

Paul

 

[Al Kaplan]

I've always been a sucker for ultra-wides starting with the original 19mm Canon on my Leica IIIf back in 1968. http://photos1.blogger.com/blogger/6344/1997/1600/Blog 71 e.jpg is with the 19mm and an orange filter on Ektachrome Infrared. Now the cute young lady is pushing 60 and the mini-dress is back in style.

Ever since I bought a 15mm Heliar a few years ago I hardly shoot with anything else unless a paid gig requires it. The fall-off isn't any more than I'd get by "edge burning" a B&W print. You soon get used to the wild perspective and learn to work with it. It may not be "Summicron Sharp" but it's plenty sharp enough for a good 11x14. I just leave the focus set at one meter all the time. Depth of field will cover you even at f/4.5. There must be at least a couple of hundred other 15mm shots on my blog www.thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com and they're pretty easy to recognize. I'm usually in the photograph. I operate the camera in one hand at arm's length, the framing is mostly from experience, and the pose and facial expressions are just acting. The unruly mop of hair is real.

 

[Fotohuis]

You can also adapt a 4,5/15mm SW Heliar with a 72mm filter adapter. It has been especially made by the Dutch Hasselblad repair guy Wilco Jansen.

 

[Fotohuis]

And in case you want a full distortion free and very high sensitive wide angle lens maybe you should try the new Leica Summilux-M 1,4/21mm asph. lens which has been just introduced at the Photokina 2008 in Cologne/Köln.

http://www.imx.nl/photo/Analysis/page118/page118.html

 

[oscroft]

I just leave the focus set at one meter all the time. Depth of field will cover you even at f/4.5

Yep, I've had various failures with my CV 15 - wonky horizons, fingers in the shot (even my nose once!), bad exposures - but I've never had a shot out of focus.

 

[Sparrow]

Only got the 12 and I hadn’t realised it was inferior to the 15, or so difficult to use

link

 

[Sparrow]

and black'n white

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Wow. Great use of wides. I have both and use the 15 marginally more. It is small and easy to keep in the bag. I have never had an image quality issue with either lens and think either is a fantastic value for the money. Ten years ago all there was in this area was an astronomically priced Hologon. Last weekend I took both to NYC and used the 12, no the 15. Hey. Maybe you need both lenses. . .

Ben Marks

 

[robert blu]

@ sparrow: real excellent pictures ! bravo !
robert