That CV 28mm f1.9 looks mighy nice

[back alley]

get the zm 25 and never look back.

joe

 

[willie_901]

I hope that was useful.

That was really, really, really, useful.

Thank you very much.

All I have to do is decide whether to get black or chrome for my chrome ZI camera.

I will be using this lens for street work so I wonder if the black version is significantly more stealthy.

willie

 

[Adam-T]

Yup - got an R1 here too 🙂 . I never shoot JPG with it because the smearing of fine detail is way too much even at ISO160 (lowest ISO) but in RAW with Capture One or RAWshooter essentials, the thing walks on water - it`s like shooting a D2X with a very expensive (if rather slow) lens fitted IN RAW ! . Lets face it, it`s not suprising really as they share the same basic sensor (some have even reported that the R1 CMOS is the D2X CMOS Masked off like the 2.6Mp F505V was a masked off DSC-S75 sensor!)

Jessops UK were blowing R1s out for £399 and that was a total bargain, stick in a 2Gb MS Pro High Speed and download Rawshooter (free) and you`re in bang for buck heaven. the R1 isn`t brilliant higher than ISO400 for noise but quite frankly it`s amazing that it works at all with live view, AF and metering all done using the main Sensor.....

One thing about the R1 is that it makes ANY Rangefinder seem very LOUD on the shutter in comparison, even a Leica sounds like a thunderclap going off next to the light tick of the R1 shutter. Couple this with the True waist level shooting (far better than those rear twisty or flip LCDs which get in the way) and the 24mm F2.8 wide end (sharp edge to edge wide open) and you`re looking at the ultimate Streetcam 🙂 .

No one takes any notice of you shooting with an RF for some reason, but they take even less notice of someone waistlevel shooting with a cam as tacky looking as the R1 😉

 

[Magnus]

One thing about the R1 which makes it stand out from any other digital camera is it's possibility to shoot from the waist.
Not for reason of being noticed, you can get much better image compositions. shooting from the waist. The image quality is excellent I find, none of this screamy ultra-velvia disney colour.
I bought mine for 629$ which included a seperate battery loader, a neopren cae and a 4GB memory stick ultra or whatever they are called all in the package. Excellent value for an excellent camera.

Bit off topic but I also bought the Fuji F30 as an always take with me sort of thing, everything the R1 doesn't do well like shooting 800 or higher, B&W imaging the F30 is absolutely top.

One thing I have learned to appreciate with digital cameras is the Histogram, it needed getting use to, but I use it in all situation, mostly with spot metering and Histogram I get the perfect image.

ahhh and I only shoot raw too. it comes with a high definition JPEG which are very usable, but when you do want the optimal image you just get the raw processed.

I have the 4gb memory stick in one slot and a 4gb CF card in the other which enbales one to to take quite a lot of pictures (raws and jpeg combined) and the battery seems to last forever.


question: What basic setting do you use?

me: saturation and contrast -1

 

[JeffM]

In no way do I want to hijack this thread in the name of the Sony R1, 😀 but seeing as how there seems to be a small group of rangefinder users with this camera, I just thought I’d affirm Adam’s shutter noise comment. The R1 is so unbelievably quite. The sound of the flash releasing is louder than the sound of the shutter releasing. I can’t recount the times people have asked whether or not I even took a photograph because the camera simply does not make anything beyond two slightly audible ticks: ‘open-close.’ The size of the camera is not very discrete unfortunately, but it’s no beast like a canon Mark II or even the Canon 5d. Like Adam and Magnus said, for people wanting to shoot from the hip digitally and never get noticed, this camera is pretty much THE digital choice. This seems like information worth spreading on RFF since shutter noise is always discussed, and the R1 is the quietest photo machine I’ve ever used.

One more thought too that came to me about the Biogon VS the Ultron. The Biogon has an extended close focus range, and though it is not rangefinder coupled I actually really liked this feature about the lens. Being someone who simply loves to shoot with the 15mm Heliar, I found that extra close up ability nice to work with, and it really shows off the Biogon’s ability to wipe-out distortion. It’s a small plus, but definitely a plus if you like the option to get close with wide angles. That said the Ultron still allows the max- close-up with rangefinder coupling, so one can’t really complain.

 

[Topdog1]

Concerning the Sony DSC-R1 digression

Concerning the Sony DSC-R1 digression

I have the related Sony DSC-H1, at only 5.1 MP. But it has a 12x zoom range, steady-shot capability at slow speeds, and with its lens adapter gives the equivalent of 750mm lens. Puchased for less than $500. I think this gives me better pictures in jpgs straight out of the camera than my Nikon D200. For the life of me, I'm not sure why I bought the D200 now. Ever dissatisfied, always looking for further horizons. Sometimes it's already at home. Attached is a photo taken through thick dirty office glass with this camera @ 750mm. The subject was about 10 feet away.

Regards,
Ira

 

[furcafe]

Per the other posts, I've found the Ultron to be a good performer, but a bit low in contrast for a modern lens, especially wide-open. The resolution is certainly there, but the contrast is lower than I generally prefer; almost like a lens from the '70s or '80s, like my 40/2 M-Rokkor. Still an awesome value for the money, though. Granted, my only points of comparison are a Leica 28/2 Summicron ASPH that I once borrowed & the Zeiss 28/2.8 Biogon for my Kyocera Contax G2, both of which are on the contrasty side.

Since I'm not a big wide-angle guy, I shoot mine (black finish) mainly on an R-D1 & occasionally w/a Hexar RF when shooting film. I have no problems w/the size & weight, though I wish the hood was bayonet mount, like the Leicas (or latest Cosina Voigtlanders).

😎 Anybody out there have any experiences with this lens? Any sample shots?

 

[Adam-T]

I`ve run the D200 in my Job for nearly a year (was one of the first with it) and it`s been pretty faultless - I NEVER shoot JPG however, only RAW with Capture one where it`s tack sharp and way beyond any Digicam . JPG engines in DSLRs (and the R-D1 etc) aren`t meant to be press`n`Print, they need post processing but even then you don`t gain the same detail level as you do from RAW with Nikon JPGs, the Fuji S3 has the best DSLR JPG engine (when compared to RAW) and even that needs post processing.

 

[Topdog1]

Adam-T,
Have you seen Ken Rockwell's analysis of D200 NEF files vs. Basic jpgs? He claims that there is no difference between the two, hence he recommends Basic JPG mode on the D200. The analysis is here:
http://www.kenrockwell.com/nikon/d200/quality-settings.htm

Regards,
Ira

 

[Trius]

Rockwell's site has a lot of advertising. Makes you wonder ...

 

[Adam-T]

Rockwell is on cloud nine most of the time, he even often writes rubbish just for a laugh (read his lens reviews, he claims the 18-200VR is the best lens ever) - I did the tests when I got the camera and haven`t used JPG since, even for leisure shooting..

If he had rangefinders, he`d come out with all sorts of hilarious stuff about glass, probably saying leica lenses weren`t worth the bother and that some Russian lens outperformed the lot of them ;-) ..

 

[jsuominen]

My Ultron 28/1.9 shots are here, if you are interested:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/tags/ultron28mm19/

Here is one sample, shot wide open with Leica M2 an CV 28/35 minifinder:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jsuominen/289598237/

I haven't found any complaint about Ultron, or maybe big size is sometimes a minor negative point. But my Nokton 50/1.5 is also about the same size. I enjoy shooting with it even more than Ultron.

 

[Lonely Driver]

I like it, don't mind the size, great value!

nice bokeh wide open

Todd

Torpedo Factory in Old Town Alexandria?

 

[Trius]

Adam: You said exactly what I meant. I think his site is useless. It's not about photography or gear, it's about Ken Rockwell.

 

[Adam-T]

you got it there 100% Trius !! ........ I REALLY hope he doesn`t start reviewing RF glass !! though I DO expect a report on the M8 and how it compares to a Fuji F30 and Loses just like the 5D was identical to a 6Mp Canon P&S Digicam 😉 .. his Ultron review would probably look very favourably on it until he reviewed the F3.5 version and spent a page telling everyone that the Skopar was the better lens even compared to a Leica `Cron whilst repeating himself four times in the text - LOL.

 

[kshapero]

Yup - got an R1 here too 🙂 . I never shoot JPG with it because the smearing of fine detail is way too much even at ISO160 (lowest ISO) but in RAW with Capture One or RAWshooter essentials, the thing walks on water - it`s like shooting a D2X with a very expensive (if rather slow) lens fitted IN RAW ! . Lets face it, it`s not suprising really as they share the same basic sensor (some have even reported that the R1 CMOS is the D2X CMOS Masked off like the 2.6Mp F505V was a masked off DSC-S75 sensor!)

😉

BTW, Rawshooter has just been acquired by Adobe. And so it goes....

 

[Adam-T]

Yah, but you can still download Essentials Free from Pixmantec`s site and it works great with the R1 and R-D1 🙂

 

[Todd.Hanz]

Torpedo Factory in Old Town Alexandria?

nope, Westhiemer Art Festival, Houston Tx. 😉

 

[pthurst]

The Zeiss Biogon f2.8 28 was an excellent lens, I sold it only because at one point I sold all my rangefinder gear to get a digital camera.

This next part is a digital digression:
That camera happened to be the “Sony DSC R1,” which is, in my humble opinion, the best digital camera on the market for your buck, and it sadly seems to be no longer manufactured. One can talk about noise, or Megapixels or sensor size, but it’s that subjective quality of the image processor that really counts, and the Sony really performs. The DSCR R1 gives the closest to film JPEGS straight out of the camera I’ve ever seen.

I’ve used the Canon 5d with expensive glass, and it takes great photos, but every image I ever shot needed to be tweaked in raw, the exposure, ESPEICALLY the color, even with the custom white balance: I couldn’t stand the flat color and white skin tones that came out of canon dslrs. Any boost in saturation always felt unnatural to me. But with the Sony I got what I really wanted out of a digital camera, the ability to shoot Jpegs, saturated, properly exposed, straight out of the camera and not have to tweak the sharpness, contrast etc of each image to infinity. I basically never use Raw anymore unless the shot is something I’m unsure of how to expose properly.

Anyway, I could go on forever about that camera, but I’ll cut to the chase, the lens on the Sony R1 is a beautiful fixed zoom Zeiss. It’s fast at f2.8 from 24-28mm, but from the 35mm-115mm zoom range, it was a slow f3.5-f4.8. The need for speed is what led me back to rangefinders.

End of Digression

So I had the 28mm Zeiss Biogon F2.8, which I sold, and then I bought the 28mm CV Ultron f1.9 with the expectation that I’d be loosing some quality, possibly sharpness, but
saving some money and gaining some speed. Holy **** was I wrong about quality loss.
Not only is the Ultron sharp wide open, but it really has a three dimensional draw that bests most of the lenses I’ve used, more so than even the Zeiss Biogon.

My reasoning is subjective of course, but I believe it has to do with the creamy quality of the lens, which is apparent in most any photo taken with it. I didn’t think I’d like it at first, but after using the lens a lot, I can say the effect is MUCH more subtle than it looks from photos on the net. The OOF regions of the film are very creamy, but the in focus regions snap to such a point that it adds just an extra pop. The Zeiss by contrast was sharper and more crisp across the entire film plain including OOF regions, at the cost of being, if only slightly, more contrasty of a lens. I’m someone who likes to shoot very saturated color negative film, so any help I can get reducing contrast is a plus.

The Ultron I found, is a lens that is easier to retain shadow detail with, which is probably why it’s being praised on digital bodies, and retaining shadow detail is ultimately a quality I look for in lenses to begin with.

So they are different lenses, contrastiness vs creaminess. I wasn’t crazy about the added F-stop clicks in the Zeiss, but it’s nothing that would prevent me from buying another Zeiss M lens. I also haven’t experienced any paint lose with the Ultron yet, and I have a black one.

The Zeiss Biogon, I definitely tested more rigorously for flare, without a hood, and I simply could NOT get that lens to flare in any situation, including shooting at the sun. I also don’t use a hood on the Ultron, and it is also incredibly flare resistant. The color rendition of the both lenses was exceptional, with something about the Zeiss maybe having a slight edge regarding accuracy and richness in the black, while the Ultron’s draw is perhaps a little flatter, (the perfect draw for saturated color film) but gives just beautiful color results.

So what else is there? Distortion is non-existent on both lenses. Both lenses perform wide open with sharpness. Should I add again that the Ultron performs wide open at f1.9 sharply?🙂 No complaints about size or handling on either lens. I don’t use hoods on my lenses if I can avoid it. The Ultron IS bigger, but on a ZI-M body it still doesn’t make an appearance in frameline area of the viewfinder. 😱 Amazing.

And lastly, for the price, the Ultron is a steal, especially in comparison to a certain 28mm Leica lens that has a similarly wide aperture. 😀

I hope that was useful.

I agree. A really useful review here. I have just bought this lens from Robert White in silver (black has been discontinued).

I borrowed a friends Leica 35mm f2.0 It simply transformed my R-D1s into a whole new camera like I'd never have expected (I have the 50mm Nokton so wasn't expecting a massive focal difference... I was wrong)

I am hoping the 28mm f1.9 will have a similar effect for me...

You can see the 35mm RF shots as part of this set

 

[jlancasterd]

The CV28/1.9 was the first lens I bought for my M8 - having blown all of my savings on the body I couldn't afford a Leica lens and bought the CV on the basis that I would save up for a Leica replacement...

12 months on I have 7 CV lenses and NO Leica lenses. The 28/1.9 was the one that persuaded me to stick with CV.

The CV 28/1.9 is an excellent lens, sharp but not over-contrasty. I take a lot of photographs where shadow detail is important and it handles that sort of work very well indeed. Mine is in black and the paint hasn't significantly worn in the 12 months I've been using it. The only downsides are:

1. It's quite heavy
2. It intrudes into the viewfinder image rather more than I would wish
3. The lens cap is forever falling off...

I also have the CV 28/3.5 and that is an equally effective lens. I tend to use it as the 'body cap' on the M8 and as a walk-around lens when I don't need the speed (or weight) of the 1.9.

Incidentally all of my wide-angle CV lenses are fitted with Milich coded adapters and B+W or Leica UV/IR filters. I'd recommend the Milich adapters to anyone using CV lenses on an M8.