CV15 4.5 III or 21 1.8 Ultron?

[Jan Pedersen]

Will soon be in the marked for one of the two lenses but which one?
The lens must perform well on both the Sony A7II and the M246
Apart from the difference in focal length and speed I am curious if any of the members here have experience with both?

The new CV15mm is attractive and reviews suggests that it performs very well on the A7II but 15mm is very wide.
21mm I am more familiar with, I already have the 21 f4 Color Skopar and I am not sure I need anything wider. The Color Skopar does unfortunately not work on the A7II but I could sell it and buy the 21 1.8 Ultron if it will work on the A7II.
Which of the two have the least amount of color cast on the A7II and which one have the most even sharpness across the field stopped down a bit?
The Ultron is reported to have some CA.

I am not so concerned about the size and weight of the 21 1.8 and I can live with the slow speed of the 15mm 4.5.
Performance is really the decisive factor.

Any good suggestions or recommendations?
Thanks.

 

[Rob-F]

. . . but 15mm is very wide. 21mm I am more familiar with . . .

Any good suggestions or recommendations?
Thanks.

I think you may have answered your question. You don't sound comfortable with a lens as wide as a 15. Yes, 15mm is very wide and will call attention to the picture having been taken with a wide angle lens. Not that a 21 won't, but the effect is less extreme. In my view, the widest lens that doesn't call attention to itself is about 24 to 25mm. I use the 15mm CV on my Leicas, and the 15mm f/3.5 Nikkor on my Nikons, but then I'm a wide-angle kind of guy. But I don't have the 21mm CV to compare with my 15mm CV. I think you still need answers to your questions about the relative performance of the two lenses, before deciding; but if you don't know what you need a 15mm lens for, it could be a mistake.

 

[michaelwj]

Will soon be in the marked for one of the two lenses but which one?
The lens must perform well on both the Sony A7II and the M246
Apart from the difference in focal length and speed I am curious if any of the members here have experience with both?

To start, I don't have experience with either of those. I did use a 15/4.5 v1 for a month or so, and it is sooooo much wider than 21. If 21 is wide, 15 is ultra ultra ultra wide. 21 is much more versatile, while 15 is very niche. With the original 15 on an M6, I have my knuckles in a few shots, feet in lots.

To me, the difference between 15 and 21 is huge!

My advice (not that it's worth much) is to decide on the focal length, and then talk about models. Of course, if you want a 15, you don't have much choice! If you want a 21, do you want to use it on the A7 or M primarily? i.e., does it need to be RF coupled?

 

[Jan Pedersen]

Thanks for the good advice and observations.
I should have mentioned that I know what a 15mm image looks like, I have the Nikon 14-24 f2.8 and agree that the difference between 15 and 21 is huge.
I also should have mentioned that I am a wide angle user, don't often use 50 or longer for street photography which is what this lens will be used for.
The lens will be used on both the A7II and the M246 so rangefinder coupling is a must and so far I don't know if there are any other lenses than the two in question that will work on the A7II. On the M246 I think all RF lenses will work just fine. Even the little CV21 f4 makes nice images on the M246 but I think the 21 1.8 would be even better.

 

[michaelwj]

So then do you want a 15 or 21?
If you want a 15, then there is no point discussing how good it it, or the problems it has, because it's the only one.
If you want 21, The 21/2.8 Zeiss might also be a contender.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

Well you are asking the right questions. First off, I wouldn't put a mechanical 15 on that Sony unless I knew for certain that there wouldn't be a light fall off issue that I couldn't live with. I would search Flickr or some other photo site for the camera lens combo you are interested in.

These folks liked the combo:

http://photoncollective.com/voigtlander-15mm-f4-5-heliar-iii-lens-review

This guy likes it too:

http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/04/06/a-change-of-perspective-the-voigtlander-15mm-f4-5-iii-by-alan-schaller/

OK. So the web says it works. Now the question, particularly with the A7II's low-light capabilities, is what one lens will give you that the other doesn't. You already have a 21 and the fact that it is a slow lens doesn't seem to bother you. I'd get the 15, because it gives you an ability to frame the world that you don't already have. If you get the 21, you'll just have. . . . two 21's.

I have an earlier generation of the 15. I find it a very useful lens -- really shows the world in a manner that is different from anything else in my bag. It is tiny and easy to carry around. I use it about 5% of the time. My 21's get a lot more use. But there are times when the 15 will produce an image that the slightly longer lenses just won't.

You probably already suspect what the real answer is: sell your 21/4 and buy both lenses you want. You know you are going to do it anyway.

 

[Jan Pedersen]

If the 21 1.8 really would work on the A7II without color fringing or soft corners, i most likely would settle on that lens but again, i am looking for the lens that performs best on that camera. focal length has secondary importance, might sound strange but i can live with both just not poor corner performance.

If i only had the M246 to buy a lens for it would be the 21 Super Elmar but that is not a Winner on the A7II.
Ideally i should replace the A7II with an M240 but that would be a future option.

 

[Jan Pedersen]

Buying both is of course an option but not right away so in that sense, buying the 15 4.5 and then have the 21 1.8 in mind for later would make most sense.

I have seen both reviews and there are some really good samples there and,
i agree that a 15mm really does show the world differently.
The slow speed is not a concern on a WA lens, especially with two cameras that handles low light very well.

 

[michaelwj]

Ideally i should replace the A7II with an M240 but that would be a future option.

I'm confused. Is the lens to go on an A7 now, and maybe a M240 later?
If it's just for an A7, then what about the 21/2.8 Loxia? Early reviews seem promising.

Edit: I see now you have the 246. disregard.

 

[Jan Pedersen]

Nothing have changed since the first post, the lens must perform equally well on the 7II and the M246. If it does, it will also perform well on an M240

 

[michaelwj]

Nothing have changed since the first post, the lens must perform equally well on the 7II and the M246. If it does, it will also perform well on an M240

Yep, got it. I get confused easily 🙂

 

[Jan Pedersen]

Yep, got it. I get confused easily

Perfect match, i confuse easily 😀

 

[Gregm61]

The 21/1.8 looks good enough on the Sony A series bodies to me...

http://sebimagery.com/blog/2014/6/5/sony-a7r-voigtlander-2118-ultron-cv21

Since I also have the 21mm f2.8 ASPH I don't use my CV 21mm f1.8 as much as I should, but it's not because it does not perform, because it does, very well. After the UPS man comes Tuesday, I'll be giving it a spin on an M262. He's certainly right about the non-existent distortion. Lines are rendered arrow-straight everywhere.

 

[Jan Pedersen]

Thanks Greg, great imagery.
I am now curious to hear about your experience with the 21 2.8 ASPH on the A7 series.
Did not consider this lens until now.

 

[Gregm61]

My view of the CV on Sony bodies is strictly from viewing images others have captured, like that site I linked. Wish I could say I took those, lol. My non-Leica outfit is mirrorless, but a less than full-frame Olympus E-M1 that is going to be fighting for bag time with the arrival of the M262.

 

[rscheffler]

The new 15/4.5 III will be less problematic on both platforms. It has zero color shift and while I've only used it on digital Leicas, the results I've seen with it on Sony a7 cameras indicates it is sharp into the corners and does not have color shift problems. If anything, it seems to perform slightly better on Sony a7 cameras digital the Leicas.

The 21/1.8 I'm less sure about, but I had it for a while on the M9 and thought it was a good lens. By f/4-5.6 I didn't see much difference between it and the Super-Elmar, though the SEM does have a flatter plane of focus. The tests I've read of the 21/1.8 on Sony cameras indicate to me that it has some edge smearing problems compared to use on Leica digital Ms. Don't remember about color shift as that can be fixed in post (though of course is an additional step). FWIW, the 21/1.8 does exhibit some distortion, but it is fairly simple barrel vs. the more complex mustache type of the Leicas and ZM21/2.8. It should have much less color shift problem than the 21/4.

 

[Peter_S]

I have not used the 15mm (waiting for the 10 mm), but use the 21mm f/1.8 on the M8.
Since I do, I hardly use anything else. It is among VL's best lenses, if not the best (apart from the Heliars in the Bessa III series), and certainly is VL's hidden star.

It comes down to FL preference. As others said, the difference is substantial.

 

[Abbazz]

Hi Jan,

I have the 21 Ultron and the 12 UW-Heliar (not he 15) that I use on my Sony A7. They are real really different beasts.

I view the 21 as a multipurpose wide, very useful for street photography, architecture, low light candids and social events. Image quality is very good on the A7, with only minimal corner smearing decreasing gradually from F/1.8 to F/5.6 and no color shifts. From F/8, it is very sharp corner to corner. I guess the results could only be better on the A7II, which is more tolerant with RF lenses (although the Ultron is in fact a retrofocus lens).

The 12 is a more specialized lens. The huge angle of view makes it harder to use compositionnally speaking. There is some heavy vignetting and also color shifts (mainly magenta corners) on the A7 but very little smearing (it should be better on the A7II and the version III of the 15mm seems to be safe anyway). Depth of field is amazing: set it to F/11 and 0.5 meter and you will never need to focus because everything will be sharp from 0.25m to infinity.

I will post some sample images taken with the Ultron later.

Cheers!

Abbazz

 

[Jan Pedersen]

Thank you all for your input. I am now much more confident than ever that it will be one of the two lenses.
Wait, that was always the plan :bang:

 

[Abbazz]

Here are a few pictures taken recently with the 21 Ultron on the Sony A7 (full size images available by clicking on the pictures below):


[F/8 - No correction of vignetting or distortion: pretty good result for a 21mm lens!]


[F/8 - Against the setting sun's light: great flare resistance]


[F/8 - Sun is almost in the window frame]



[F/1.8 - Slight correction of perspective]

As for the 15mm on Sony A7, you can download full size samples on Ron Scheffler's Techtalk blog: http://www.ronscheffler.com/techtalk/?p=224

Cheers!

Abbazz