Should I buy a Heliar 50/2?

Unless you really, really, really want to have a collapsable lens, I'd second the Hexanon idea. Far better lens, maybe only Summilux is better. I think even Summicron is not as good, yet very close, to Hexanon. And if you look - you can find Hexanon within your budget. Heliar does look cool though.
 
I' am a Heliar Classic owner. It's a good 50mm lens.

Some of my night-shot photos for your reference.

By Voigtlander Bessa R2M , Heliar Classic 50mm F2 , Fujifilm Fujicolor superia 200

2017957261_7593ae0457.jpg


2017954859_0b9827e59d.jpg


2017952785_2bab32cd2d.jpg


2018733630_6fde1429cb.jpg


2017929537_e9d0d9bd6f.jpg


2017924213_82565f7253.jpg
 
Thanks Kevin!
I already bought a Zeiss Planar...

BTW, I'm amazed how good night shots with color film look like.
I did a lot of color night shots with digital (30D) and always had white balance issues.
Somehow, it seems to me that film handles the color shifts of artificial light much better than digital

Am I right?
 
Thanks Assaf!

Wow! Zeiss Planar,a really good stuff! congratulation.

And I have the same experience with DSLR for the night shot.

I use Canon 30D , too. It has good quality for high ISO speed but has WB issue that you mentioned.

So I usually shot RAW file that I can adjust WB in computer.

I found RF camera(I am a freshman of RF) with high ISO film do well at night-shot.

We have the same viewpoint. :)
I
 
kevinlin1013 said:
Thanks Assaf!

Wow! Zeiss Planar,a really good stuff! congratulation.

And I have the same experience with DSLR for the night shot.

I use Canon 30D , too. It has good quality for high ISO speed but has WB issue that you mentioned.

So I usually shot RAW file that I can adjust WB in computer.

I found RF camera(I am a freshman of RF) with high ISO film do well at night-shot.

We have the same viewpoint. :)
I
Click to expand...

What film speed did you use? I opined that you didn't use flash, right?
 
I love Heliar OOF Rendition (SOFA? Bokeh? as you wish...)
I'm having a really bad GAS crisis..
Rob.
 
BillP said:
Rubbish.

I have had an Elmar-M for years. Never had a moment's trouble pulling it out, hoodless.

Regards,

Bill
Click to expand...
Agreed.

I have both the Heliar 50/2 and Elmar-M 50/2.8
I bought the Heliar first,
Initially I used it alot, and I enjoyed it.
But it's quite soft wide open at F2, even the center object is soft,
and there are blue color fringes, color shifts whatever you call it.
Contrast and saturation is low also.

This may not appear on film, but on the M8, it is evident.
So evident, I would avoid using the Heliar wide open,
Someone with experience would pick it out right away.
Stopping down to F2,4 or about around F2,8 gives much more improved results.
And the color fringes are harder to spot if not totally gone.
So my verdict?
The Heliar design did not translate well for digital RF's.


Then I bought the Elmar-M 50/2.8 recently
With the Elmar, the current version.
It's sharp and offers lovely brokeh wide open at F2.8
No color fringes appear (or barely any) when shooting wide open.
So I am now shooting the Elmar everyday, and the Heliar stays at home.

The build of the Heliar is excellent.
but build is not so important as compared to optical quality.
So even if the Heliar has an extra stop, but an extra stop of what?
Color fringes and softness.

Remember, Voigltander could not have pull off a better design that Leica could not make.
Leica managed F2.8 with their Elmar-M 50,
and did you think that Voigltander could have done the impossible
with better glass and gained an extra stop with the Helair Classic?


http://viking-manfred.blogspot.com/2007/07/voigtlander-heliar-classic-50mm-f2.html


Any enough with all the talk, here are some images:
All shot with the Heliar at about F2.4-F2.8.
These should give you a basic idea about the balance of brokeh, contrast offered by the Heliar.


#1.
1394307167_1ba6e4f606_o.jpg


#2.
2198511171_654ee9fdf1_b.jpg



#3.
2208227864_60be76f29e_b.jpg



#4.
2208206430_97daed7523_o.jpg




Cheers, Manfred
My blog: http://viking-manfred.blogspot.com/
My flickr: http://www.flickr.com/photos/10782783@N02/
 
Last edited:
Heliar fit to Leica bodies

Heliar fit to Leica bodies

Has anyone experienced a more than tight fit on Leica bodies with this lens?
 
Regarding softness in the 50mm Heliar Classic by Voigtlander:

I agree with many of the posts on this list in apparently contradictory ways.

Stopped down , this is an amazing lens, offering superb sharpness and extraordinary color rendition. You can see some technically good images taken with it on my flickr site:

http://flickr.com/photos/blahgspot/tags/voigtlandercosinaheliarclassic502/

However, wide open, I am continually disappointed by this lens. The image with the cats on the bed shows this weakness. At first, on the R3M I owned, I figured it was a limitation of the camera viewfinder (focusing seemed confusing and difficult near the close focus distance). But now that I am shooting with a Leica M6 TTL, whose viewfinder seems *much* more accurate and sharper up close than the R3M, I continue to get very soft images at f/2.

While I love this lens, I am losing too many shots and I think that I am going to end up putting this little beauty on fleabay and end up getting a summicron or similar. More expensive, but worth it considering how much low-light shooting I do. It is frustrating, knowing how good the lens CAN be, but seeing how in practice it ends up losing my shots!
 
I don't see the point of spending $400 on a 50mm lens

I don't see the point of spending $400 on a 50mm lens

KirkH said:
Assaf,

For some reason my embedded pbase photo is not showing up. Here is the link to the gallery (all shot with R-D1 and CV 50/2 Heliar):

http://www.pbase.com/kirkh/eedp9

Cheers,
Kirk
Click to expand...

Particularly on one that functions no better than my $90 Nikon.
http://www.pbase.com/kirkh/image/68751806 Just look at that hard edged bokeh. That's not smooth, it's jarring. Admittedly, I can't mount my Nikon on a rangefinder, but I still don't see the point of this lens. So then I start looking at Leitz glass, and see the prices aren't intended for photographers, but for people with more money than sense. This whole rangefinder thing is starting to look more like a club some people want to join than a useful tool. I was going to get myself an R2a for Xmas, but I think I'll save my money for something else.
 
The Heliar Classic 50/2 is one of my favorite lens. Mine is certainly not soft wide open and I never had any problems with colour rendition on film or with the R-D1/M8.

2893532175_5acabac966_b.jpg


More examples can be found HERE.
 
emjaysea said:
Particularly on one that functions no better than my $90 Nikon.
http://www.pbase.com/kirkh/image/68751806 Just look at that hard edged bokeh. That's not smooth, it's jarring. Admittedly, I can't mount my Nikon on a rangefinder, but I still don't see the point of this lens. So then I start looking at Leitz glass, and see the prices aren't intended for photographers, but for people with more money than sense. This whole rangefinder thing is starting to look more like a club some people want to join than a useful tool. I was going to get myself an R2a for Xmas, but I think I'll save my money for something else.
Click to expand...

Seriously? That's your first post on a forum dedicated to rangefinder cameras?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom