Hacker
黑客
The only Voigtlander that I ever owned was a 125mm Macro SL for my Canon 5D. The pictures were kinda pastel like and was something I could not live with (probably low contrast) but acceptable for portraits (not that I used the lens to take portraits). Absolutely no way better than the Canon 180L or the Leica 100 Macro.
Since owning the M8, I have only always read how good the CV lenses are, but only in the context of price (when compared to the Leica equivalent). My question therefore is, are there any CV lenses that are leaders in its respective focal lengths? For example, the Zeiss 15/25/35 are leaders regardless of price. Same with the Hexanon UC-35 and M-50. Different, but not worse off, and possibly better in some areas.
For example, will a CV15 be better in some areas or equivalent than the ZM15 or even the WATE? Or it is only better in price? I'm asking this as a general question as I have avoided CV since the only value proposition seems to be the dollar value when purchased new, not necessarily better in terms of long-term value (does it hold its value or depreciates like crazy secondhand)?
I'm asking this as I'm looking for example, at the Nokton 40mm (appears to be the leader among 40mm lenses in sharpness), but am told that I cannot change the mount to bring up the 35mm frame line without a technician's skill except by filing.
Thoughts on this will be appreciated.
Since owning the M8, I have only always read how good the CV lenses are, but only in the context of price (when compared to the Leica equivalent). My question therefore is, are there any CV lenses that are leaders in its respective focal lengths? For example, the Zeiss 15/25/35 are leaders regardless of price. Same with the Hexanon UC-35 and M-50. Different, but not worse off, and possibly better in some areas.
For example, will a CV15 be better in some areas or equivalent than the ZM15 or even the WATE? Or it is only better in price? I'm asking this as a general question as I have avoided CV since the only value proposition seems to be the dollar value when purchased new, not necessarily better in terms of long-term value (does it hold its value or depreciates like crazy secondhand)?
I'm asking this as I'm looking for example, at the Nokton 40mm (appears to be the leader among 40mm lenses in sharpness), but am told that I cannot change the mount to bring up the 35mm frame line without a technician's skill except by filing.
Thoughts on this will be appreciated.
cme4brain
Established
Hacker said:
I have all Voigtlander lenses for my M8 and couldn't be happier, and I bet a double blind test of which lenses took which identical picture would show that at least 50% of the time no photog could pick out a Leica lens pix from a Voigtlander one. Subscribe to the www.reidreviews.com and you will have all the info you need. The CV lens line has sharpness and resolution close (very close, possibly not noticed in real life shooting) to Leica standards, and in come cases (75mm, 50mm Nokton, 28mm skopar) for some issues, they exceed the Leica Glass. The 75mm for example has better corner resolution than the Leica. The 28mm skopar is razor sharp in corners wide open. Zeiss lenses are great as well, but no where near the bargain of CV at one tenth the price of Leica. As far as the 15mm lenses are concerned, depending on what matters to you, the CV is better than the WATE (it is a prime lens of course) for some resolution with better corner sharpness than the Zeiss. The new Zeiss 18mm is sharper in the center than the Leica WATE, but its corner sharpness is very wanting compared to center sharpness.
As far as resale in concerned, when I have sold my little used CV lenses, I have always gotten near-new prices.
ernesto
Well-known
I have bought a Voightlander Bessa R3, together with the Heliar 12 mm, because i needed really wide architectural lens. The quality of the optic is GREAT, I must say it is PERFECT, no distortion at all, I couldn´t believe it at the time I saw the first pictures.
The camera is great too, very well done. Of course it is not a Leica, but it is the best for the money. In case of the Heliar 12 it is simplier, it is the best, because there is none other brand 12 mm full frame lens with this performance!!!!!!
In other words I am VERY happy!
Ernesto
The camera is great too, very well done. Of course it is not a Leica, but it is the best for the money. In case of the Heliar 12 it is simplier, it is the best, because there is none other brand 12 mm full frame lens with this performance!!!!!!
In other words I am VERY happy!
Ernesto
Ronald M
Veteran
CV lenses are competition for Mandler era glass, ie 1970/1980 in optical quality, not mechanical. ZM zeiss is the current competitor for optics.
The only thing CV lenses have in common with current Leica glass is they mount on M bodies, how long the mount will last is anybodies guess. That is why I prefer the CV screw mount lenses. I still have several sets of s/m Leica adapters made by Leitz so I know they were made correctly.
The only thing CV lenses have in common with current Leica glass is they mount on M bodies, how long the mount will last is anybodies guess. That is why I prefer the CV screw mount lenses. I still have several sets of s/m Leica adapters made by Leitz so I know they were made correctly.
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
I'm using two CV lenses at the moment that I love.
The CV15 and the CV35 Nokton.
Both great lenses.
(I've also used and loved the 35 PII, 50 Nokton and 75 heliar)
The only CV lens I haven't been happy with on my M8 was the 40 Nokton. It is the only lens (of the 25 or so various lenses of various brands that I've tried) that presented focusing problems when used wide open. And since I buy every lens to use wide open, that made me sad.
The CV15 and the CV35 Nokton.
Both great lenses.
(I've also used and loved the 35 PII, 50 Nokton and 75 heliar)
The only CV lens I haven't been happy with on my M8 was the 40 Nokton. It is the only lens (of the 25 or so various lenses of various brands that I've tried) that presented focusing problems when used wide open. And since I buy every lens to use wide open, that made me sad.
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
is the CV 15 a required lens on the M8? is anyone besides me completely uninterested in this superwide?
cme4brain
Established
Ronald M said:
I have to disagree here with your CV lens assessment, as does the objective Sean Reid. CV glass is nearly (99%) equal to usually and in some cases exceeds leica glass! Did you read the above references? The CV 75mm out-resolves in the corners the Leica, for example. Leica glass, while great, is ten times the price but not ten times the glass. I would bet you my car payment you could not tell the difference in a double blind test more than half the time, as noted above. If you think CV glass is only worth lenses of an era gone by, where is your proof? How do you explain the objective findings of various sites that say the otherwise?
cme4brain
Established
cmogi10 said:
Not many! Most M8 owners seem to have this great little lens.
cmedin
Well-known
cmogi10 said:
Those that are probably don't feel the need to post about it.
Hacker
黑客
cme4brain said:
Thanks! This is exactly what I'm looking for. However, the MTF charts do not show the CVs being better. Of the 3 lenses you mentioned, the 75mm Heliar has always intrigued me (I already have the 75AA) and the 50 Nokton (have the Lux ASPH and the M-Hexanon 50). But for the 28, I have ordered the Cron, and am deciding between the Hexanon 28 (no way to code permanently) and the Skopar, but reviews are few and far in between of the latter.
Can anyone share more about the 28mm Skopar? Samples and links (This vs That)?
principe azul
Ian
Sometimes we forget - me included - that Voigtlander prices are pretty much normal prices for equivalent Nikkor primes, say, and that they're not 99 buck superzooms...
On film, I wouldn't shoot a 15mm enough, even with 2.8 to tempt me, to warrant the Zeiss. So there's only one choice. But it's a fine choice, from what I've seen so far.
On film, I wouldn't shoot a 15mm enough, even with 2.8 to tempt me, to warrant the Zeiss. So there's only one choice. But it's a fine choice, from what I've seen so far.
Hacker
黑客
tbarker13 said:
Sigh, and I thought that the Nokton 40mm was something that CV was offering that was up there with the best and I do not have any 40mm (can't find a Rollei yet
). I know about the "coarse bokeh", but am not bothered by it as there are ways to work around that.
Avotius
Some guy
I have looked into the 15mm cv lens for a little while and have been attempting not to give into gas. I have another cv lens, the 35 skopar PII, its shocking good and the price is right. Frankly....how can you go wrong? Most people cant properly extract the resolution from lenses anyway so in real life for the most part you cant tell.
MartinL
MartinL
I have an M8. I can afford some Leica glass, but I'm not reckless, and I'm not about to buy "several" in one jump. I decided that until I was in a groove of how I'd use the camera ----length, speed, size, and image quality priorities----, I'd use CVs while on that learning curve. So I have the CV 21, 28-1.9, 40-1.4, and 75. All (as I recall) for under $1500.
I still feel no compelling reason to select a Leica or Zeiss lens or commit to a length, since my favorite or "most used" continues to shift on a weekly basis. When things settle, I'll make my move. Maybe.
My 2 cts.
I still feel no compelling reason to select a Leica or Zeiss lens or commit to a length, since my favorite or "most used" continues to shift on a weekly basis. When things settle, I'll make my move. Maybe.
My 2 cts.
Hacker
黑客
cme4brain said:
A fellow forummer here has the CV 28 F/1.9 and has known that I have been looking for the 28 Cron for a time. He raves about it and keeps asking me to get it, even willing to loan me on a recent 2 week vacation. When I came back, he had a Cron and the CV 28 f/1.9 was on sale! The only reason he got it was because he tried to contact me to tell me about the availability of the 28 Cron, but I was on a plane at that time. He bought the lens instead. I can tell you that both of us are interested in quality and are not brand loyal (we are photo enthusiasts), and he is quite insensitive to prices!
Back to the Skopar 28, more info from the rest?
etrigan63
Rangefinder Padawan
My entire kit is CV lenses including the 40 Nokton. I had it's mount adjusted to bring up 35mm framelines and coded and it works like a champ! Nothing wrong with CV glass. I am hoping Mr. Kobayashi will issue a 50mm Nokton f/1.0 in M-mount next year. My flickr gallery is all M8 + CV as is the M8 section fo my Zenfolio gallery. See my sig for links.
Hacker
黑客
etrigan63 said:
What do you code your Nokton 40mm as? 35 or 50mm? Or something else?
etrigan63
Rangefinder Padawan
Coded as a 35mm Summilux. With the modified mount that works best. I don't know why everyone thinks it is the "lens from hell", I find it incredibly versatile and easy to use with these simple modifications.
Last edited:
etrigan63
Rangefinder Padawan
cmogi10 said:
I'm with you Carl.
What is everyone's fascination with this lens?
rxmd
May contain traces of nut
Well, a CV lens costs less than the amount by which a new Leica lens depreciates when you open the box, so depreciation is not an applicable category IMHO.Hacker said:
Well the latter is definitely true, due to the limitations of the M mount, but the operation is relatively simple, and/or you could have someone like John Milich do the filing and code the mount for the M8 for a two-digit dollar amount.Hacker said:
I have two CV lenses, the 21/4 and the 40/1.4. Regarding the Nokton I can't say very much yet because I haven't had it for very long, but it seems like an excellent lens - well made, I like the rendering, and the apparent sharpness is outstanding. People write a lot about its "unpleasant bokeh" and so on and illustrate this with downscaled sample shots, but then again you can find positive or negative examples for the rendering of any lens on Flickr, so this is again a highly subjective non-argument in my eyes. In a similar vein, you can find comments for or against any piece of equipment if you look at internet forums long enough - there is really enough happening in the world to support any opinion if you take anecdotal evidence as representative, and there have been enough quality problems with Leicas reported to make anyone believe Leica is a junk company, as long as this is what he wants to believe, so take reported problems with any lens with a big grain of salt, as they really are little more than anectodal evidence.
The 21/4 is very good image-quality-wise and is a feature leader size-wise, as it is a very small lens; if you can spare the extra f-stop, this alone makes it more interesting than its Zeiss or Leica counterparts in my book, because it results in a very compact kit. Highly recommended in my book for everyone who doesn't absolutely need the extra stop.
Philipp
Last edited: