Ultron 28/1.9 rendering qualities.

M

mawz

Established
Local time
3:57 PM
Joined
Jul 14, 2005
Messages
77
I'm just dipping my toe into RF shooting with a Bessa R and a 28/1.9 Ultron (Bought to be a long normal on a G1). Having just processed 2 rolls of Tri-X, I'm wondering if the lens is single-coated. I was pretty much expecting rendering similar to the 40/2 SLII I have in Nikon mount, just with an increased issue with flare (as I'd read up on the lens), but the 28/1.9 seems to have fairly low contrast overall, a look I generally associate with single-coated lenses like Super-Takumars or late 60's Nikon F glass.

I'm very happy with the lens overall, but it looks like I'm going to have to seriously tweak my expectations, I wasn't expecting as significant a difference from the rendering qualities of the Voigtlander SLII's as I got.
 
I have the Ultron 28mm and 35mm and they are both rather low contrast, but they are also very sharp at all apertures and don't suffer from significant vignetting. The 28mm does have more distortion than the 28mm Color-Skopar, however, which would probably match your 40mm more closely.
 
lawrence said:
I have the Ultron 28mm and 35mm and they are both rather low contrast, but they are also very sharp at all apertures and don't suffer from significant vignetting. The 28mm does have more distortion than the 28mm Color-Skopar, however, which would probably match your 40mm more closely.
Click to expand...

How is the 35 Ultron for flare? That's probably the only real weakness for me with the 28, as the rendering qualities, specifically the lower contrast, are a case of 'know what to expect' rather than a problem. Also is there a 50 which performs similarly?
 
I haven't had much of a problem with flare from the 35mm but I don't use the Voigtlander 'hood' -- I got a generic hood off eBay that's much better. You definitely get very low contrast with the 28mm when there are light sources within the frame but these effects can look quite nice if you aren't going for a 'technical' look. I guess the 50mm equivalent is the Nokton but I don't have one so can't comment. I do have two Voigt 50s however, the Color-Skopar and the Heliar Classic and currently prefer the Color-Skopar, which seems to be very good value.
 
mawz said:
How is the 35 Ultron for flare? That's probably the only real weakness for me with the 28, as the rendering qualities, specifically the lower contrast, are a case of 'know what to expect' rather than a problem. Also is there a 50 which performs similarly?
Click to expand...

I love my 28/1.9 Ultron to death and find the flare managable. It is a very sharp lens, Puts (!) quotes > 100 lp/mm at f4. Its color rendering is beautiful.

The best 50 to go with it in rendering, bokeh, and resolution is the 50/2 rigid (I) or DR Summicron. A perfect match.

Best,

Roland.
 
There must be some 28 1.9 lenses out there with manufacturing errors because I hear comments about low contrast but mine is nothing like low contrast. Compared with my Biogon 28 in identical conditions they are so close I can't see the difference on screen or in the histograms.

Sample variation?
 
ferider said:
I love my 28/1.9 Ultron to death and find the flare managable. It is a very sharp lens, Puts (!) quotes > 100 lp/mm at f4. Its color rendering is beautiful.

The best 50 to go with it in rendering, bokeh, and resolution is the 50/2 rigid (I) or DR Summicron. A perfect match.

Best,

Roland.
Click to expand...

I'm looking at my first roll of Ektar shot with the 28/1.9 and I definitely have to agree about the colour rendering. Simply gorgeous.
 
I don't find that lens low contrast at all

3264611524_ac96465ae7.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom