I agree, the quality of the lens is completely in line with that of the other Contax G lenses in terms of tonality and sharpness, due partly because of the T* coating, but of course also because of the quality of the whole thing, the few glass elements and all that.
Erik.
Unfortunately I never tried the Contax G lenses other than the Hologon. My only experience with Zeiss lenses are Rolleiflex, Hasselblad and the Contax 645 lenses.
As far fetched as it may be there can be observed some similarities in image quality between say comparing monochrome photographs from a stopped down Zeiss 80/2 in Contax 645 mount on a digital Leica S2 and photographs shot with the original Leica MM and Hologon. These two sensors are indeed of the same generation, also both having minimal sensor cover glass layers (as does the M8 sensor btw), helping those sensors to show the most possible detail from these lenses.
The Hologon belongs into this rare group of optical designs that stand out in image quality - it also is a very exotic design but it does stand out on image qualit alone.
The 15/4.5 CV vII I have also used sparingly on digital sensors does not stand out - it may be entirely different on film but I admit not having used it much on film.
The main characteristics were the 15/4.5 CV and 16/8 Hologon differ are:
- resolution (sharpness and detail across the entire frame)
- contrast and tonality (the CV is a very blunt tool here, while the Hologon has this wonderful very precise separation between tones which especially in monochrom images stands out)
- obviously distortion
I especially like lenses with this beautiful widespread tonality, not looking aggressively contrasty but separating tones across the entire range.
Lenses as the Planar on the Rolleiflex or the 35/2 UC Hexanon or the 50/1.1 Nikkor-N or the 50/1.5 CZJ clearly do that and are standing out for this feature. The Hologon belongs into this special goup of lenses.
In my archives I found this one:
Contax G1, Hologon 16mm f/8, Tmax400. Talking about quality.
Erik.
I always liked how the Hologon rendered lightsources - it looks so natural. This is really beautiful Erik!
Thank you very much, Dirk, for your detailed comments on the Hologon lens. They make me even more anxious to use this lens once I get it back from DAG. I could use it with the M9 for B&W and with the M8 for color, if this is needed to avoid some strange looking color effects in the edges with digital camera sensors. The fine tonality will be a major treat!
Thank you, Erik, for your posted examples with it. The last image is superb looking.
You will especially like the look of the Hologon on the M8 sensor Raid.
The M8 sensor behaves almost identical to the orignal MM sensor and shows MUCH finer detail than the M9 sensor ever could as of the entirely different sensor glass package (what made the M8 so unsuited to true color photography with it’s IR contamination also makes it’s detail so crisp as of the lack of thick sensor glass packages as on the M9 sensor).
It also becomes a much more useful 21mm equivalent with the M8 and really shines on it.
You just have to meter with a handheld meter and if you can, shoot the full bit depth RAW files, using the service menu hack and conversion software to normal DNG files for full fidelity.
If you are into wide angle lenses you will love the Hologon!
When you get the lens back from DAG just make sure you run some tests with it. Although it is such a very wide lens with such a deep DOF it is VERY sensitive to the slightest mis calibration (optical cell to sensor) during conversion that any misalignment is easily visible ( infinity performance).
A friend who bought a converted sample some time ago was never happy with it and after having had it redone the lens really came to life!
I wouldn't mind seeing a direct comparison image between the Hologon and Voigtlander lenses discussed by menos above. I haven never used a Hologon, but I have the Voigtlander (ver1, Nikon F mount version) and it is one of my favorite lenses. I use it on my Nikon RF and Leica cameras (including the M9, which it works well on with the 16mm WATE profile). It is a fine lens and has plenty of sharpness and micro-contrast as far as I can see on TMX and high-rez scans.
The 15/4.5 CV I have is a vII M-mount sample. I believe it has the same optical design as the v1 in LTM mount, only a changed barrel design and addition of a filter thread and focus coupling.
I never used it much on film and never took similar photos with it to make a comparison with the Hologon.
Sadly I also do not have that beloved orignal MM any longer (BEST camera I have ever used and I miss it. ery much) - mine fell sick with sensor corrosion and my only option back then was to side-grade to the newer M246 which is horrible in almost every respect compared to the original MM.
I may do some side by side shots once I am back in the office.
I only have very old shots online, but here is something from the Heliar:
... and something from the Hologon:
It’s hard to show it in these small mangled flickr jpgs but the high res original on a calibrated screen or in a print the dark tones really separate precisely with the Hologon while I never saw that same precision in tones with the Heliar.
The claim is that CV 15/4 III is corrected very well for digital cameras.
This might actually show a very different behavior again, as the v1 and vII Heliar behaved badly (actually worse than the 12mm) on digital cameras.
Contax G1, Hologon 16mm f/8, Tmax400.
Erik.
Beautiful Erik! The f8 fixed aperture really allows for these layered images - great composition!
