Hacker
黑客
retow said:
Seems that the 75 Heliar is cropping up again and again. May I ask what is the "signature" or uniqueness of this lens?
Hacker
黑客
cme4brain said:
I understand, and it's a little extreme as many of us do not need a focusing zone or DoF down to a mere fraction of a centimeter. Sharpness is just one variable, but there is a whole host of other qualities that are tripod independent, e.g. flare control, OOF, color, tonality, contrast, etc.
My question is very simple, are there any CV lenses that is considered a benchmark for its respective FL? For example, I can say: "I'm getting the Nokton but really wish to have the Noctilux." I'm not contesting about stuff that happens in the field. I'm asking about CV lenses that are considered the benchmarks in its FL.
Last edited:
djonesii
Well-known
I forget where I read it, but someone said that the CV lens line is like photographic crack....... one hit and you want more. ....... I have the 21/4, and as soon as I find a focal length I like with some FSU lenses, I will be getting the CV equivalent .... for my second hand Bessa-R. From all I have read and seen, the CV glass is in the quality debate with the Leica lenses, and in the debate is all I need for what I shoot. Now, if I did this for my day job, and needed every last drop of quality, then Leica may make some sense.
YMMV
Dave
YMMV
Dave
Uwe_Nds
Chief Assistant Driver
Hacker said:
The 28/1.9 is said to be the fastest RF wide angle lens available, but the 1.9 compared to Leica's 2.0 is probably only marketing.
Also, the 35/1.2 is said to be the fastest M-lens in that focal length.
All CV lens are most probably the benchmark regarding price/performance ratio of RF lenses.
If you are talking about optical benchmarks however, simply speaking: no, they are not.
Best regards,
Uwe
Didier
"Deed"
pkreyenhop said:
May I chime in with the remark, that most, if not all, Cosina Voigtlander lenses deliver much more resolution than the M8 sensor can capture. Seen from this point, there's absolutely no "obligation" to use M- or Z-Glass just because the M8 camera body was expensive.
I have CV and M lenses, like them all without exception (on a R-D1s not M8). I see no reason why I shouldn't use them on a M8 if ever i would have one.
Didier
johnalex141r
Member
cmogi10 said:
Hey, kind of interesting - I came to my M8 from using 99% of the time my Fujica gs645s (fixed lens camera). I purchased the Leica because:
- it was digital, not because it was a Leica, and
- because I like rangefinder cameras. IE, it was a digital version of my Fujica.
My first lens for it was a CV 25mm f2.5. Incredible learning experience, both the body and the lens, and of course the process.
I now have 4 CV lenses; maybe once I find my "groove" with this camera, one Leica lens of a "useful to me" length might be acquired. Then again, maybe not - the CV lenses seem to always give me that "wow" factor.
JohnS
Hacker
黑客
Uwe_Nds said:
Thanks. I'm strictly referring to what you call optical benchmarks. And yes, I'm looking from this angle without consideration to costs--money no object. I've been reading a lot on CV and from my friends' experiences (and my limited experience with the SL 125), CV lenses are often spoken with qualifying statements, example:
"Provides 99% of the performance but at 10% of the costs".
If this is the case, is not the Lecia being compared to still the benchmark, and not the CV lens?
kevin m
Veteran
Wow, this is just plain wrong. I love the look of Mandler glass (I had the pre-asph 90mm Summicron and the pre-asph 50mm Summilux) and no VC lens I've owned looks like them wide open. The Mandler lenses were chock full of flaws and abberations wide open. Beautiful flaws, flattering to human subjects, even, but still, technically flaws. The VC lenses are much better corrected.
The attached pic was shot with the VC 40mm SC Nokton at f1.7. Judge for yourself.
Attachments
kevin m
Veteran
Yes, Leica is the benchmark. My 35mm Aspherical 'Lux was better wide open than the 40mm SC Nokton. The 28mm Summicron is better wide open than the 28mm Ultron. The 21mm Aspherical Elmarit is better wide open than the CV 21.
But here's the rub. If you're shooting handheld on 400 speed film, you'd be hard pressed to ever see the difference. In fact, I'd dare you to see the difference in most cases. Put money on the line, compare negs and you'd lose your money.
If you can afford the best and don't mind paying for it, then buy Leica. Just be aware that you're getting a diminishing improvement in performance relative to price.
Pic: VC 21 @f4.0
Attachments
Ben Z
Veteran
pkreyenhop said:
In my case I own 4 Cosina lenses and the cost was a side benefit, although a welcome one. I have a 12mm, and there is nothing that wide in a Leica lens. I have a 15mm and the closest Leica has is 16mm and that comes on the much larger, heavier WATE along with 18 (which I don't want) and 21 (which I have, and which is like a 28mm on the M8, a focal length I rarely used with full-frame film). I have the Cosina 21mm f/4, because my Elmarit is twice its size so unless I really am going to need the extra stop, I don't care to haul it around. And on the M8 I use a 21mm rarely. Finally I have the 28mm f/1.9, because when I shot film I rarely used a 28 and didn't feel the need to tie up cash in a Leica Summicron. My mainstay on the M8 is a 28mm Elmarit, which I got for half its nominal price because there's a tiny, tiny mark on the front coating, but when I go specifically to shoot low-light I'll take the Ultron, along with the 50 Summilux and 90 Summicron. Otherwise I use smaller, lighter lenses.
jdos2
Well-known
I've the 40mm Nokton, 75mm, and 28mm Ultron, and 21mm from CV.
Only the 21mm focuses correctly.
The 40mm and 28mm both have tape on their rangefinder-connection flanges: thankfully they back focus and it's a "solution," though not a great one.
The 75mm front focuses and is impossible to fix myself.
I'm going to send the lenses off to someone that can fix em ("maybe" is the word, sometimes the locktite used, according to the well known Midwestern Leica repairman, is too much to overcome with tools) as I do like the looks of 'em.
Remember, nobody here can do CV warranty repairs. Everything sold in the USA is effectively grey market, and not all vendors of these lenses make good on their promises, are easy to deal with, refund shipping for multiple returns, &c.
Only the 21mm focuses correctly.
The 40mm and 28mm both have tape on their rangefinder-connection flanges: thankfully they back focus and it's a "solution," though not a great one.
The 75mm front focuses and is impossible to fix myself.
I'm going to send the lenses off to someone that can fix em ("maybe" is the word, sometimes the locktite used, according to the well known Midwestern Leica repairman, is too much to overcome with tools) as I do like the looks of 'em.
Remember, nobody here can do CV warranty repairs. Everything sold in the USA is effectively grey market, and not all vendors of these lenses make good on their promises, are easy to deal with, refund shipping for multiple returns, &c.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
If you only want to drive from point A to point B, does it really matter whether you have a bicycle, a Yugo or a Lamborghini?Hacker said:
The question you should be making to yourself is: if I don't know personally the differences between the items I want to buy, how much am I willing to spend?
Do you really need that pen that can be used in space, or can you make do with a No. 2 pencil to write that shopping list?
If you were a cartoonist, you could look into drawing pens...
My answer is genuine
tbarker13
shooter of stuff
Just because something costs more than everything else - that doesn't guarantee that is better.
Not everyone is on a quest to build a lens kit full of the very best lenses. Some people actually choose lenses based on the images they create.
I've gone through some 25-30 lenses in the past year, from old canon lenses to the newest leica glass.
In the end, I picked a kit that does what I want it to do. There is not a single leica asph lens in the kit. I sold all of them to go after the 1970s era glass. I like the way they draw, and could care less whether there are technically better lenses out there.
My kit does include a couple CV lenses (the obligatory 15, and the 35 nokton for lowlight)
Not everyone is on a quest to build a lens kit full of the very best lenses. Some people actually choose lenses based on the images they create.
I've gone through some 25-30 lenses in the past year, from old canon lenses to the newest leica glass.
In the end, I picked a kit that does what I want it to do. There is not a single leica asph lens in the kit. I sold all of them to go after the 1970s era glass. I like the way they draw, and could care less whether there are technically better lenses out there.
My kit does include a couple CV lenses (the obligatory 15, and the 35 nokton for lowlight)
Speenth
Emmaiter
pkreyenhop said:
I have another take on this: I think the M8 is wildly over-priced, but I don't care. I like it for the way it looks and feels, because its small and portable and because it takes pretty good pictures in a wide variety of circumstances within the limitations of its format.
I have no false expectations - it is NOT as good as its price. If it wasn't for the lenses the M8 would be nothing but a pretty piece of cottage craftsmanship. In other words, the camera may not be as good as the Cosina lens it wears.
In my view the CV12 and to a lesser extent the CV15 are damn good lenses - there is simply no need to pay an inflated price for the Leica alternative (unless you're a rich geek and you're going to study the MTF charts to work out the difference).
This doesn't apply in every case (which is why my 24mm and 50mm lenses are Leicas), but please, don't damn something just because it costs less.
kevin m
Veteran
Amen to that. The pre-asph 50 Summilux I said was "technically flawed" was still my favorite RF lens ever. It couldn't produce corner to corner, tack sharp images at f1.4, but it had a look that, to my eye, can't be duplicated with a whole bag of PS tricks.
And the CV lenses are 'better' than that lens.
And seriously, if a $250 lens is broken beyond repair, I can eat that and buy another. What I couldn't stand is sending in a $3k lens to have a loose barrel repaired and never having it fixed to my satisfaction. For a $250 35mm lens I have a sense of humor; for $3k, I don't.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Yep.tbarker13 said:
For example, here's this $999.00 sofa from Ikea:
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/S49840656
And this $199 sofa from Ikea:
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/20121218
Look the same? Difference is the "bed". If you only want to park your derrierere there, which would you choose? If it's imperative to park more than your derriere there, which would you not choose?
But if it's only for looks, you may just want to shave off another $90 and get this:
http://www.ikea.com/us/en/catalog/products/10118669
It's a personal choice, methinks.
But of course, customer feedback should always be taken into consideration. But when you're asking if a sofa is better if it's cheaper, you'll get lots of qualified ifs and buts.
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Do you know what an Auto de Fé is?kevin m said:
kevin m
Veteran
I had to google it to be sure.
Where do I report for my public flogging? :angel:
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
Repentance is all that's needed: I'll give you a superior, super-sharp CV 50mm f/2.5 in exchange for your inferior 50mm pre-asph Summilux. And I get to keep the change.kevin m said:
jdos2
Well-known
Speenth said:
Thank you: I think thats very well put (with no apologies to my M8!)