Native m4/3 lenses from Voigtlander? What do you think?

[250swb]

Its quite simple, 4/3 and m4/3 lenses are designed to be as near telecentric as possible (delivering a straight light path onto the sensor).

It is generally accepted that any legacy '35mm lens' wider than 40mm still have enough of the outer edges of the frame included in the 4/3 sensor area, despite the 'crop', to show softening at the corners due to the acute angle of the light reaching it. Otherwise the IQ at the centre is usually extremely good. So its not really possible to make a 35mm lens work perfectly on 4/3, nor the other way around. They are two different lens designs. That said, the IQ is superb when a longer lens is used.

But as m4/3 grows, and it's fundamental design is flexible and able to accept many MF lenses, then it would be great to see CV designing some dedicated lenses. I'm sure Olympus and Panasonic are chipping away at developing a pretty amazing system and its only a matter of time before somebody else joins in.

Steve

 

[laptoprob]

baffles

baffles

Well, the wides don't do so well in the corners. And making native lenses could allow faster glass at smaller sizes.

I smell new GAS creeping in... Small, fast Voigtlander m4/3 superwides...

As for 'regular' M or LTM wides: adding a baffle helps a lot. I made a baffle out of a black plastic envelope with a rough cut circle of approx. Ø9mm and clamped it on the rear lens of my Ultron 35. It is clamped in the rear screw thread. This makes the corners nice and sharp.
The Canon 25 needs a much smaller hole, still trying that out.

 

[Avotius]

how does the baffle improve corner sharpness? I have a run of the mill m-m43 adapter and my friend has an elephoto m-m43 adapter which has a baffle inside the adapter, using the same lens on the ep1 we didnt notice any differences of any kind.

 

[laptoprob]

The only explanation I can think of is it eliminates most of the excess straying light coming into the camera. The hole in the baffle should be small enough to shut out a maximum amount of light yet big enough to allow the needed light to pass.
It took me some trials to get to the right size for the Ultron 35. As I wrote, I am still working on the Canon 25mm.
Maybe it doesn't work on superwides, don't know and don't need since the Panny 7-14 does so well.

 

[Avotius]

oh I see you have put it behind the rear element. The baffle in my friends lens is inside the adapter which seems to be for reducing reflections of the mount.

 

[user237428934]

They're extremely well suited to manual focus. Superior to most 35mm-format SLR's in fact.

It's easier to confirm focus in my G1's EVF than my F2a's OVF.

The ease of focusing is one major reason why they make such a good platform for adapting lenses to.

Hm. I think focussing with the G1 and the magnifier mode is very precise but very slow. First you have to press the two buttons to get into the magnifier mode and then you need some time to focus. But if you have it, it's super precise.

 

[Tuolumne]

Hm. I think focussing with the G1 and the magnifier mode is very precise but very slow. First you have to press the two buttons to get into the magnifier mode and then you need some time to focus. But if you have it, it's super precise.

I find manual focusing accurate but tedious and no fun with these cameras. But my eyes are old and I wear tri-focals. So, I would have no interest in dedicated m4/3rds manual focus lenses. But I really like the auto-focus primes. The 20mm f1.7 auto-focus is great to use, and I mostly use it these days. I'd like a fast telephoto prime now, but auto-focus please. If CV wants to make that I'd buy it in a flash.

/T

 

[shadowfox]

Given the lack of enthusiasm that Olympus shown for their prime lens offering (actually the word lethargic or even pathetic is more appropriate), this may be the kick in the b*tt that they needed.

If Cosina were to come out with a quality 24 or 28mm lens or a pancake 35 or 40mm Ultron/Nokton designed for m4/3rd, I'd be happily surprised.

 

[bmattock]

I find manual focusing accurate but tedious and no fun with these cameras. But my eyes are old and I wear tri-focals. So, I would have no interest in dedicated m4/3rds manual focus lenses. But I really like the auto-focus primes. The 20mm f1.7 auto-focus is great to use, and I mostly use it these days. I'd like a fast telephoto prime now, but auto-focus please. If CV wants to make that I'd buy it in a flash.

/T

I agree. The idea of magnified focus is nice if your subject is standing still and you're on a tripod. However, I like manual focus on the fly, when my subject is not going to sit around and wait for me to fiddle and then recompose after I finish focusing.

This was from last Saturday - Pentax-A 50mm f/1.7 at f/8. Click on it and take a look at 100% to see how sharply in-focus that is. Shot on a dSLR with split-ring focus screen installed. If I could do that on a G1, I'd be all over it.

 

[gho]

First you have to press the two buttons to get into the magnifier mode and then you need some time to focus. But if you have it, it's super precise.

I had the idea of projecting a small, magnified focussing image into the EVF, while the whole scene is still visible. Should be possible. Or something like a split screen.

 

[Tikkis]

Hmm how wide are we talking about you say the corners suffer?

I had the idea in my head to pick up a CV 28/f2 for my 35mm needs and if I ever picked up a m4/3 body I could turn the 28 into a fast 56mm lens.

Would that setup give trouble in the corners with a 4/3 body?

According to my depressing experience with Leica Elmarit-M 2,8/28 mm Asph. I would presume that you will not like the corner performance of that lens in a m43-body.

Cheers,
Tikkis