raid
Dad Photographer
I bought this year a Zeiss Hologon 16/8 in Zeiss G mount and in unused condition. I reviewed many images online that were taken with such a lens and I obtained feedback from photographers online on whetehr they would in 2018 still buy this lens or not. The overwhelming view was not to buy it unless you use it with a film camera since digital cameras will display color smears and vignetting due to the closeness of the rear glass to the sensor. I felt like accepepting a challenge hgere, so I bought the Hologon and I asked Don Goldman to adapt it to M mount. Total cost in the end was less than $2000 for a "new looking" 16/8.
The first few images from the lens were very disappointing to my eyes, but with more use and additional results I was able to see some possibilities with this lens. I found out that using some software, such as Cornerfix, can reduce greatly any color smearing or vignetting, but I have not gone into such software use yet.
Using the Hologon on the M8 have convenient images in colr and without blemishes with a 21mm crop. Using the M9 with this lens required some extra care. The purple "smear" in the lower edges can be reduced with careful PP. Even the vignetting (with the special ND filter) was heavy, and in PP it is possible to add some light to the edges. "results are not that bad".
I did not spend $2000 to get results that were not that bad.
In the end, I am more and more getting fond of this lens. I like the B&W images from it when used on the M9. There is no distortion, but I learned that I should not use ISO 160 (as I am used to with other lenses) when using this lens. I now regularly use ISO 1000.
I could have bought a CV 15mm III that is highly corrected for digital cameras for "nice looking wonderful color images witthout color blemishes or vignetting" but I have other wide angle lenses that work well too. I want to use the Hologon. It is a special lens.
So, did I waste my $2000 on this lens or not? This may be a question that different photographers would answer differently. I have this lens in my camera bag for ready use each week. With it is a 50mm/1.4 Planar lens and a second camera. I like using pairs of lenses.
I hope that I have conveyed how I feel about buying this lens.
Links:
With M9:
https://raid.smugmug.com/Europe2018Hologon/
https://raid.smugmug.com/New-M9-Hologon/
With M8:
https://raid.smugmug.com/HologonM8-HurricaneGordon/
https://raid.smugmug.com/HologonM8-HurricaneGordon/
The first few images from the lens were very disappointing to my eyes, but with more use and additional results I was able to see some possibilities with this lens. I found out that using some software, such as Cornerfix, can reduce greatly any color smearing or vignetting, but I have not gone into such software use yet.
Using the Hologon on the M8 have convenient images in colr and without blemishes with a 21mm crop. Using the M9 with this lens required some extra care. The purple "smear" in the lower edges can be reduced with careful PP. Even the vignetting (with the special ND filter) was heavy, and in PP it is possible to add some light to the edges. "results are not that bad".
I did not spend $2000 to get results that were not that bad.
In the end, I am more and more getting fond of this lens. I like the B&W images from it when used on the M9. There is no distortion, but I learned that I should not use ISO 160 (as I am used to with other lenses) when using this lens. I now regularly use ISO 1000.
I could have bought a CV 15mm III that is highly corrected for digital cameras for "nice looking wonderful color images witthout color blemishes or vignetting" but I have other wide angle lenses that work well too. I want to use the Hologon. It is a special lens.
So, did I waste my $2000 on this lens or not? This may be a question that different photographers would answer differently. I have this lens in my camera bag for ready use each week. With it is a 50mm/1.4 Planar lens and a second camera. I like using pairs of lenses.
I hope that I have conveyed how I feel about buying this lens.
Links:
With M9:
https://raid.smugmug.com/Europe2018Hologon/
https://raid.smugmug.com/New-M9-Hologon/
With M8:
https://raid.smugmug.com/HologonM8-HurricaneGordon/
https://raid.smugmug.com/HologonM8-HurricaneGordon/
raid
Dad Photographer
The lens is a fixed aperture 8.0 lens, which with the ND filter is a lens with fixed aperture 16. It has a lot of depth of field.
Godfrey
somewhat colored
So: "Did you waste your money?" Only you can be the judge of that.
In the sets of photos you presented, not much of the color work appeals to me, but some of the B&W work is truly excellent.
I had one of the Hologon 16/8 T* when I had the Contax G2 camera. I see this adapted to Leica mount in the same way I see my Color-Skopar 28mm f/3.5: Outstanding on film, quirky and difficult on digital. The Hologon's ultra wide FoV presents additional difficulty in use. Used to your satisfaction, it's a kick to get really nice photos with it. Used sloppily and you don't get anything worth showing.
Nothing wrong with quirky and difficult as long as you're willing to work the issues and enjoy it. Keep making those photos that sing, and everyone will tell you it was worth every penny.
G
In the sets of photos you presented, not much of the color work appeals to me, but some of the B&W work is truly excellent.
I had one of the Hologon 16/8 T* when I had the Contax G2 camera. I see this adapted to Leica mount in the same way I see my Color-Skopar 28mm f/3.5: Outstanding on film, quirky and difficult on digital. The Hologon's ultra wide FoV presents additional difficulty in use. Used to your satisfaction, it's a kick to get really nice photos with it. Used sloppily and you don't get anything worth showing.
Nothing wrong with quirky and difficult as long as you're willing to work the issues and enjoy it. Keep making those photos that sing, and everyone will tell you it was worth every penny.
G
PRJ
Another Day in Paradise
If you lost the money and lost the lens, which would you miss more?
There is your answer...
There is your answer...
raid
Dad Photographer
Money comes and leaves, but happiness remains. :angel:Emile de Leon
Well-known
I like that last image you took with the Holo as well as some others..
A lens like this needs to stay put..even if you don't use it for periods of time..as there will always be a time to put it on the cam in the spur of the moment..and go for it..!
A lens like this needs to stay put..even if you don't use it for periods of time..as there will always be a time to put it on the cam in the spur of the moment..and go for it..!
raid
Dad Photographer
Emile: I have had thoughts of removing this lens from the camera and to use the Rigid Summicron or the pre-asph Summilux instead. It is lens that may work best on my M3 or M6 with film in the end. We shall see what develops.
............................. [a few minutes later]:
In fact, I have just removed the Hologon off my M9, and I replaced it with my pre-asph V2 Summilux 35/1.4. Once I get back my M8 from New Jersey, I will put the rigid Summicron on the M8 and I will set aside my M 4/3. I now have a good feel for when the Hologon could be used effectively for good looking results. I can quickly grab this lens when needed.
............................. [a few minutes later]:
In fact, I have just removed the Hologon off my M9, and I replaced it with my pre-asph V2 Summilux 35/1.4. Once I get back my M8 from New Jersey, I will put the rigid Summicron on the M8 and I will set aside my M 4/3. I now have a good feel for when the Hologon could be used effectively for good looking results. I can quickly grab this lens when needed.
helen.HH
To Light & Love ...
Me thinks You crazy Raid ... 😋
Love that one b&w photo posted above
Beautiful & Atmospheric , yummy good !
Love that one b&w photo posted above
Beautiful & Atmospheric , yummy good !
raid
Dad Photographer
Hello Helen,
Why does Helen think me crazy?
Would you keep on using the Hologon with film?
Why does Helen think me crazy?
Would you keep on using the Hologon with film?
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
It is interesting project to spend money on. I would never have this much available for it, so it is nice you did it.
Pictures don't feel extremely wide.
As for me, I have three times less expensive, AF, three times faster SLR lens. No heavy vignetting or distortions. 16-35 f2.8 L.
Pictures don't feel extremely wide.
As for me, I have three times less expensive, AF, three times faster SLR lens. No heavy vignetting or distortions. 16-35 f2.8 L.
peterm1
Veteran
"In the end, I am more and more getting fond of this lens."
I am with you Raid....I like quirky lenses. (Though maybe not $2000 quirky though )
This lens was THE thing about 20 years ago and I recall my camera guy trying to sell me one. But I seldom go this wide and passed on it. I would be interested to see more of your images.
I am with you Raid....I like quirky lenses. (Though maybe not $2000 quirky though
)This lens was THE thing about 20 years ago and I recall my camera guy trying to sell me one. But I seldom go this wide and passed on it. I would be interested to see more of your images.
raid
Dad Photographer
I could do it, and I wanted this lens, so I got it. It is a unique lens.
It is a 16mm lens without distortion. It is a very tiny lens. How large is your 16-35/2.8? Is it tiny and light? Does it have zero distortion?
raid
Dad Photographer
"In the end, I am more and more getting fond of this lens."
I am with you Raid....I like quirky lenses. (Though maybe not $2000 quirky though
This lens was THE thing about 20 years ago and I recall my camera guy trying to sell me one. But I seldom go this wide and passed on it. I would be interested to see more of your images.
Yes, it is an old design lens, but it is unique, Peter. I have so many other lens, so it is not replacing any lens that I have. It is a special applications lens that is challenging to use with a digital camera.
raid
Dad Photographer
I still have two Contax G1 cameras with 28mm, 45mm, and 90mm lenses.So: "Did you waste your money?" Only you can be the judge of that.
In the sets of photos you presented, not much of the color work appeals to me, but some of the B&W work is truly excellent.
I had one of the Hologon 16/8 T* when I had the Contax G2 camera. I see this adapted to Leica mount in the same way I see my Color-Skopar 28mm f/3.5: Outstanding on film, quirky and difficult on digital. The Hologon's ultra wide FoV presents additional difficulty in use. Used to your satisfaction, it's a kick to get really nice photos with it. Used sloppily and you don't get anything worth showing.
Nothing wrong with quirky and difficult as long as you're willing to work the issues and enjoy it. Keep making those photos that sing, and everyone will tell you it was worth every penny.
G
Yes, it is a very expensive quirky lens, but it costs less than some Leica wide angle lenses.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
It is 16, 21, 24, 28 and 35 all f2.8 lenses in one. If you put those as primes on one bag it is not going to be tiny, nor light.
Mine at 16mm and f2.8 isn't much fisheye:
But would I take this lens on the trip? No, I would go with M-E and as small as possible lens. More I take pictures with Leica and SLRs, more I realize what here is no practical reason to chaise quality with Leica. It is achievable more effectively with anything else.
But Leica gives something else. Would it be street or travel or just goofing around. I'm thinking of selling some less used gear (this how I get money for new gear) and get couple of pancakes for my rangefinders. Minitar and one of MS Optical one. I've been thinking about it for sometime now...
raid
Dad Photographer
This is a very interesting lens that you have. Is it a Leica lens with 5 focal lengths?
There is no distortion that I can detect in your posted images here.
There is no distortion that I can detect in your posted images here.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Not Leica, it is underdog of these days. Professional Canon L series lens. Used is now under $800 lens.
Rockwell shows its distortions at 16mm right. Far from zero.
https://kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/16-35mm-ii.htm
Rockwell shows its distortions at 16mm right
. Far from zero.https://kenrockwell.com/canon/lenses/16-35mm-ii.htm
raid
Dad Photographer
"The distortion of the Canon 16-35mm II is typical for any ultrawide zoom: complex barrel distortion at the widest end and pincushion at the longer end."
It is a Canon SLR lens, so it cannot provide a Leica M experience as the Hologon does.
It is a Canon SLR lens, so it cannot provide a Leica M experience as the Hologon does.
Corran
Well-known
Raid, modern digital cameras fix simple distortion in-camera (or via RAW editing). So the manufacturers design the lenses without worrying about it. Consider the Leica Q that has hard vignetting in the corners, not to mention distortion, before Leica's in-camera "software" fix.
You know my opinion already but I will say your first image is good. The fall-off at the periphery makes it work. I would print it in the darkroom if I were you and if it was on film...
I do still think the Voigtlander 15mm provides basically identical performance without nearly as much cost or the speed penalty - the better choice for most users. The older I and II models are still very small.
You know my opinion already but I will say your first image is good. The fall-off at the periphery makes it work. I would print it in the darkroom if I were you and if it was on film...
I do still think the Voigtlander 15mm provides basically identical performance without nearly as much cost or the speed penalty - the better choice for most users. The older I and II models are still very small.
raid
Dad Photographer
Corran, I read about the CV 15/4.5 III being an excellent lens. Believe it or not, but I am not a fan of wide angle lenses. I find the Hologon to be an intriguing lens. Its clout as a unique lens from the past was the main attraction for me. I don't care much for modern lenses. I like old lenses.
M9 and color:
M9 and color: