Ultron 28mm f1.9 verses f2

kram

kram

Well-known
Local time
3:01 PM
Joined
Apr 8, 2005
Messages
683
I have made my mind up and just purchased a second-hand Ultron f2. It's in great condition and I hopefully i will finish a film by the end of the weekend, and see the results soon.
However, some threads, and internet chat say that the f1.9 Ultron is better:confused: Has any one compared the two, what's the problem with the f2 over the f1.9 (if any). I have an old test report from the AP (UK mag) on the f1.9, but no caparison between the too. Your comments please.
 
Hi ferider, I plan to keep the f2 (if it's any good), and I don't plan to get the f1.9. I just wondered why some threads don't rate the f2?
 
Comments from Sean Reid review of fast 28mm:

28/1.9 if you prefer lower lens contrast
28/2 if you prefer higher lens contrast

28/1.9 should come off you list if you prefer a lens with good flare resistence
28/2 should come off your list if you prefer lens that do not focus shift


With regards to the Summicron 28/2 he did state the primary weekness was the price.

He also concludes his review with a statement that these are all good lenses with different strengths and weaknesses.

There are several pages of technical review comparing the three lenses on the Sean Reid review web site. I would recommend subscribing to his website for detail information regarding rangefinder lens. Information found here:
http://www.reidreviews.com/
 
I have both the f1.9 and the f2 version of the Ultron 28. I also used to have the 28f2 Summicron - did not think that one was worth the cost and converted it to something else.
The 28f2 is a/smaller than the f1.9 and b/better close-up performance than the 1.9 (and the Summicron 28f2.
The f1.9 is maybe marginally sharper at f2, compared to the 28f2 Ultron - but not significantly so. The 28f2 Ultron is very good with flare control, the 1.9 has a bit of "asph" flare to it, but again, nothing significant.
As for the focus shift with film and the 28f2 Ultron, never had a problem with it.
The Ultron 28f2 has slightly "weaker" corners at f2 and 2.8, compared to the Summicron 28, but better center sharpness. From f4 you can't really tell them apart.
All three lenses are very good, some subtle differences in tonal rendition (again, this is with film - and in my case, black/white film) and either one will do a very good job.
The choice is more related to size and price in my opinion. The Summicron 28 would end up costing what a new Nokton 28f2 and a used, mintish M6 TTL 0.58 would be - and there would still be money left over for a lot of film!!!!
 
Thanks for the posts guys. I would love the Summicron, but even second hand they are serious money. I have a Sonnar 50mm f1.5, and so far the focus shift has not bothered me. Hopefully it want bother me with the f2 either. The Ultron has better centre sharpness than the Summicron at wider apertures -interesting. Hopefully all will be well.
 
kram, on film the f2's focus shift is all but invisible. I hope you get a good sample; both Ultrons can be stunning performers.
 
I have only been shooting rangefinders for a couple of years. All the time I have been looking for a lens in the 24-to-28 range to give me a 35/40 on the digitals. There are some interesting options, but all are compromises in some respect. Too slow, too expensive, too big, not available when you would be buying. I was close to buying the Ultron 2, really wanted the Summicron, but I have now finally joined the Ultron 1.9 crowd. The lens is beautiful, I hope I can match it with my photography.
 
I have just bought a CV 28mm f2 and have to say that it looks pretty impressive in terms of its ability to turn in good images. The only comparison I did was before buying it, in the store when I compared it with a 35mm f2 summicron V4 to check how much extra image it gave me (not much but I still bought it anyway.) At f2 the Summicron may have been a tiny tiny bit sharper (at the image centre and at a distance of maybe 4 metres) but it was so close I found it hard to judge. I have to say I was impressed. I hope to test it further soon in real life.
 
I've tried several 28mm lenses, including both the Ultrons, Summicron, Elmarit V3, Elmarit ASPH and Biogon. In the end, I kept the Ultron 1.9 and the Summicron. The Summicron is simply the best wide open, and in particular it is unbeatable in night shots, as it does not exhibit the coma. Ultron 1.9 has the most pleasing rendition in B&W. However, in my opinion any one of these lenses could be considered excellent.
 
mfogiel said:
I've tried several 28mm lenses, including both the Ultrons, Summicron, Elmarit V3, Elmarit ASPH and Biogon. In the end, I kept the Ultron 1.9 and the Summicron. The Summicron is simply the best wide open, and in particular it is unbeatable in night shots, as it does not exhibit the coma. Ultron 1.9 has the most pleasing rendition in B&W. However, in my opinion any one of these lenses could be considered excellent.
Click to expand...
what about nikkor s mount lens? the nikkor W 2.8 f3.5 seems quite a value for money lens.

Just tat it might not work as well on a LTM mount camera..

By the way, if the camera doesnt support a 28mm frameline, do you guys uses an external VF for it?
 
Pikapig said:
By the way, if the camera doesnt support a 28mm frameline, do you guys uses an external VF for it?
Click to expand...
I do. In my case it is the 28mm viewfinder for CV 21/4 on M8. Also, now that I actually have a 28, I can use the same viewfinder on my Bessa R2A.
 
Can't comment on the 28mm. But with my 50mm on my Mamiya 7, some people used the normal viewfinder, but I did not get on with this, so used the appropriate finder. Note, the 50mm is ~25mm in 35mm terms and the camera has a frame for the 65mm lens (~32mm in 35mm terms). Comparing the 50mm finder with the view outside the 65mm frame-lines (i.e the maximum view you can see in the camera viewfinder, there is a difference.
 
Guys, can i hear from you guys if i input in the cv 28mm f3.5 as well as the canon 28mm f3.5

I was looking a the pics on flickr..thou the ultron 1.9 seems heavier, the control of distortion seems a little better compared to the f2...
 
agricola said:
This photo by TAH and his set on Flickr have just about got me hitting the button on an Ultron 1.9!
Click to expand...

I'd second that, great photography.

I'm warming to my CV 28 1.9, it's low contrast but that's pretty easy to alter in aperture, so you get the best of both worlds - B&W and punchy colour.

I'm on a 1.5 crop sensor though, so it's not as wide as the shots by TAH

I'm really missing FF!

cheers
paul
 
kram said:
...some threads, and internet chat say that the f1.9 Ultron is better:confused: Has any one compared the two, what's the problem with the f2 over the f1.9 (if any).
Click to expand...

This request from the OP has not yet been answered with examples: can anyone provide this comparison rather than showing favourites taken with one of these lenses only?

I have the f2 version and have had some great results with it & it's a good lens on the M8. I don't see a problem with it but I don't know how the f1.9 would have compared.

To those that can, please illustrate.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom