Dan States
Established
I've been using an Ultron 28mm for a few weeks now, and after running a boat load of Acros through it I thought I'd share my USERS impressions as a former 28 Summicron owner.
I'll start by mentioning that for the years I owned one, the Summicron 28 was for me, the BLE (best lens ever). It was only because I had migrated to the Hasselblad that it was sold off.
I'll also mention that my previous experiences with Voigtlander lenses has been, frankly, the pits. I had owned three other VC lenses. A 90, and TWO 50mm Skopars. The 90 was ok, but the Skopars were rubbish. The first was defective and the second was just a lousy lens.
When I bought the Ultron I braced myself for dissapointment. In fact the results have been truly eye opening.
I've actually found that for all practical purposes the Ultron is the equal of the Summicron from F2.4-16. It is LESS prone to flare, and most importantly, does not vignette like the Summicron. Used on an M6 with Fuji Acros developed in stock D76 for 7:30 at 68F the results are in most cases the equal or better of the much more expensive lens.
Flatness of field is outstanding for both lenses. FYI The Ultron is better at the corners of full frame prints than the highly regarded Biogon ZM 35mm F2! Performance at the corners of the fram is excellent for both the Summicron and the Ultron.
(For those who are wondering, I print all my photos at 7-11 times enlargement, and use a 25x magnifier for grain focus and sharpness confirmation.)
Recently there have been comments about the Ultron being a "medium contrast lens". I have to say I just don't see that with uniformly developed black and white negative film. On identical film with identical development my Ultron shots are printing at the same contrast setting on the Leica V35 enlarger that the Summicron shots were at apertures 2.4-16
I know some of the contrast comments come from Sean Reid's comparisons of histograms from the RD1. It's important to remember that the light falloff of the Summicron causes portions of the frame to look artificially dark, extending the histogram. I would like to see histograms of tight center crops from both lenses to wash out the strong light falloff from the Summicron.
The Summicron IS a bit smaller, and probably better constructed. However in operation both are outstanding to the touch. Focus and aperture are butter smooth and sure.
To sum this up, at all apertures from 2.4 on the Ultron is at least the equal on black and white fine grain film. MOST IMPORTENTLY, the Ultron is less prone to vignetting and flare.
At F2 the Summicron is truly unbeaten. It is crystal clear, where the Ultron has a bit of a "fog" around highlights. That said, it's hard to justify the price difference of the two lenses. When the Summicron came out I paid about $1799 for a new one. Today that same lens lists for the absurd price of $2995. At $444 the Ultron is not only the value winner, but a performance peer!
Best wishes
Dan States
I'll start by mentioning that for the years I owned one, the Summicron 28 was for me, the BLE (best lens ever). It was only because I had migrated to the Hasselblad that it was sold off.
I'll also mention that my previous experiences with Voigtlander lenses has been, frankly, the pits. I had owned three other VC lenses. A 90, and TWO 50mm Skopars. The 90 was ok, but the Skopars were rubbish. The first was defective and the second was just a lousy lens.
When I bought the Ultron I braced myself for dissapointment. In fact the results have been truly eye opening.
I've actually found that for all practical purposes the Ultron is the equal of the Summicron from F2.4-16. It is LESS prone to flare, and most importantly, does not vignette like the Summicron. Used on an M6 with Fuji Acros developed in stock D76 for 7:30 at 68F the results are in most cases the equal or better of the much more expensive lens.
Flatness of field is outstanding for both lenses. FYI The Ultron is better at the corners of full frame prints than the highly regarded Biogon ZM 35mm F2! Performance at the corners of the fram is excellent for both the Summicron and the Ultron.
(For those who are wondering, I print all my photos at 7-11 times enlargement, and use a 25x magnifier for grain focus and sharpness confirmation.)
Recently there have been comments about the Ultron being a "medium contrast lens". I have to say I just don't see that with uniformly developed black and white negative film. On identical film with identical development my Ultron shots are printing at the same contrast setting on the Leica V35 enlarger that the Summicron shots were at apertures 2.4-16
I know some of the contrast comments come from Sean Reid's comparisons of histograms from the RD1. It's important to remember that the light falloff of the Summicron causes portions of the frame to look artificially dark, extending the histogram. I would like to see histograms of tight center crops from both lenses to wash out the strong light falloff from the Summicron.
The Summicron IS a bit smaller, and probably better constructed. However in operation both are outstanding to the touch. Focus and aperture are butter smooth and sure.
To sum this up, at all apertures from 2.4 on the Ultron is at least the equal on black and white fine grain film. MOST IMPORTENTLY, the Ultron is less prone to vignetting and flare.
At F2 the Summicron is truly unbeaten. It is crystal clear, where the Ultron has a bit of a "fog" around highlights. That said, it's hard to justify the price difference of the two lenses. When the Summicron came out I paid about $1799 for a new one. Today that same lens lists for the absurd price of $2995. At $444 the Ultron is not only the value winner, but a performance peer!
Best wishes
Dan States
Last edited:
Davor
Established
Thanks for your great review. I have been considering getting this lens for quite some time, and it looks like it's going to get up on my "things-i'm-going-to-need-in-2008"-list. It does look a bit big tough, how do you find the size of it to be?
Dan States
Established
The size is really quite reasonable for a lens of this spec. Without shade it's marginally larger than the Summicron without the hood. It's important to remember that the hood for the Summicron is jumbo, and not much fun to have on. It is also quite necessary because the Summicron is prone to flare under direct light. I like the smaller profile of the Ultron hood, and the fact that it is metal, not plastic. Either lens will intrude in your RF field of view. That is just a fact of RF life I am afraid, unless you can live with slower lenses.
Best wishes and thanks,
dan
Best wishes and thanks,
dan
Rafael
Mandlerian
Thanks for the detailed review Dan. I have been eyeing this lens for a while now.
summilux
Well-known
Dan, that combo looks cool!
willie_901
Veteran
Thanks so much for your post.
The Ultron 28/1.9 will be my next lens purchase (in about a year!)
willie
The Ultron 28/1.9 will be my next lens purchase (in about a year!)
willie
T
tedwhite
Guest
Desert Shooter, an RFF member, has one and he loaned it to me. I shot half a roll on my Bessa R with my Canon 50/1.8 and the rest of the roll with the Ultron 28/1.9. The Ultron was equal in contrast to the Canon (a contrasty lens) and it had no discernible edge fall-off. Film was Plus-X developed in D76 1:1.
For some reason I had no trouble framing with the wider lens using the 35mm frameline as the frameline doesn't quite go to the edges of the viewfinder, so I figured what was beyond it might be close enough.
I would buy this lens in a heartbeat if I had the money.
For some reason I had no trouble framing with the wider lens using the 35mm frameline as the frameline doesn't quite go to the edges of the viewfinder, so I figured what was beyond it might be close enough.
I would buy this lens in a heartbeat if I had the money.
BrianPhotog
Well-known
mfunnell
Shaken, so blurred
Interesting review and set of views. 28mm is wider than I normally go, so I wasn't too keen to spend a lot of $$ to get one . Also, my primary application for a 28 is indoors in low-ish light. So, the Ultron f1.9 seemed the ideal compromise. In practice, though, I've found it much better than I expected, and in a wider range of circumstances. Not a compromise at all, in fact (except, perhaps, in size).
I haven't tried it yet with colour - thats my next set of tests , but I'm hoping it will do well there too.
...Mike
I haven't tried it yet with colour - thats my next set of tests , but I'm hoping it will do well there too.
...Mike
suzi_q
suziq.nu
Thanks for a review. I was looking for hexanon 28 but it's more $$$ then I like(in new perchase).
It's really good to know ultron is quite a performer with faster speed. I hope someone would review hexanon 28 & ultron 28 comparison though...
I love other hexanon lenses and never used voigtlanders... although ultron looks amazing based on reviews by others too here in RFF,, it will be my next perchase consideration, I guess .
It's really good to know ultron is quite a performer with faster speed. I hope someone would review hexanon 28 & ultron 28 comparison though...
I love other hexanon lenses and never used voigtlanders... although ultron looks amazing based on reviews by others too here in RFF,, it will be my next perchase consideration, I guess .
raid
Dad Photographer
This is an interesting report. Thanks. We are waiting for the photos.
Raid
Raid
Joe Mondello
Resu Deretsiger
I am delighted with my small cadre of CV lenses (see my sig). I shoot digital RF and certainly have "lens lust" for more expensive Leitz and Zeiss glass, but in point of fact, I picked up FOUR seriously fine CV lenses for less than $1500 (2 new, 2 used).
In a very real sense the CV lenses allowed me to afford an M8.
Next on my list (to consider) are the 35/1.2 Nokton and the 50/1.5 and eventually a 21, too!
One day I'm going to stand the 28/1.9 Ultron next to my 28/1.4 AF-D Nikkor just to remind folks how wonderfully SMALL it really is!
In a very real sense the CV lenses allowed me to afford an M8.
Next on my list (to consider) are the 35/1.2 Nokton and the 50/1.5 and eventually a 21, too!
One day I'm going to stand the 28/1.9 Ultron next to my 28/1.4 AF-D Nikkor just to remind folks how wonderfully SMALL it really is!
Last edited:
anhtu
Member
I'm very happy with my 28 ultron too. I dont have a 28Cron to compare it with, but I do have a 28Elmarit (70s version) and it is a better performer than that lens. Sizewise, I dont find it too big for my Ms but it does look big when you mount it on a CL. Definitely most bang-for-bucks candidate.
here's a pic of it wide open.
more pics ...
here's a pic of it wide open.
more pics ...
R
Robert
Guest
I have just bought an M8 and will be buying CV lenses. At the minute I use the 25/4 but the 28/1.9 and 15/4.5 will follow soon.
As good as Leica lens are, for my type of photography I just can't justify them. I couldn't afford them anyway.
As good as Leica lens are, for my type of photography I just can't justify them. I couldn't afford them anyway.
suzi_q
suziq.nu
Great Photos anhtu,,,, Now I really want this lens on my hexar rf.
Joe Mondello
Resu Deretsiger
Robert said:
Ne meither! ANd I predict you will be surprised, pleased perhaps even delighted with them!
0bli0
still developing...
i actually decided to get one on friday (and picked it up today) as i wanted a faster 28mm before China/Tibet. i'm sure the skopar will still have its uses (it's great for bessa L in the pocket snapshots and i like the way it vignettes on the r-d1).
the ultron is suprisingly big for a 28 (especially compared to the nokton 40mm 1.4 with hood). i'm glad they give you the 'optional' focus knob - it feels much nicer and quicker with it in place. i don't mind its vf intrusion on the r4a. sizewise, it is pretty noticeable on the body. the wife immediately noticed - 'you got a new lens..' but suprised it was only a 28. it will be interesting to see if it's more noticeable on the street.
there is a real balance difference between it and any of the other lenses (even the 85mm jupiter). it's not so noticeable on the r-d1. i'm sure after a day of shooting i won't even feel it.
the shots i took on the r-d1 looked nice. i look forward to developing a few rolls of film over the next few days. thanks, Dan for your review.
btw - looking at the blades and the difference between the detent f/2.0 and f/1.9 is pretty laughable!
the ultron is suprisingly big for a 28 (especially compared to the nokton 40mm 1.4 with hood). i'm glad they give you the 'optional' focus knob - it feels much nicer and quicker with it in place. i don't mind its vf intrusion on the r4a. sizewise, it is pretty noticeable on the body. the wife immediately noticed - 'you got a new lens..' but suprised it was only a 28. it will be interesting to see if it's more noticeable on the street.
there is a real balance difference between it and any of the other lenses (even the 85mm jupiter). it's not so noticeable on the r-d1. i'm sure after a day of shooting i won't even feel it.
the shots i took on the r-d1 looked nice. i look forward to developing a few rolls of film over the next few days. thanks, Dan for your review.
btw - looking at the blades and the difference between the detent f/2.0 and f/1.9 is pretty laughable!