Stating the obvious... unless you used live view instead of the RF, sharpness results at wide apertures don’t mean a whole lot if a lens is giving you focus errors.
raid
Dad Photographer
For me, it is about the practicality (or not) of now getting an Ultron 35/2 when I have a Summicron 35/2 V1 and a Zeiss 35/2, plus a pre-asph Summilux 35/1.4 and Canon 35/2.
I am quite content with the 35mm lenses that I own.
I am quite content with the 35mm lenses that I own.
nickthetasmaniac
Veteran
Perhaps a teeny tiny bit paranoid?
nutmeg
Member
landscape focused on infinity and the nearest thing you can see is about 25 meters away.
RF focused or live focused??? What camera are you using???
I was (mostly) asking about the shots you took of the chair on your balcony at f2.
You really need to keep all variables to the minimum possible for comparison testing to mean anything worthwhile. Exact same framing being one of those variables.
nzeeman
Well-known
just realistic.... i dont want to go ot again sorry.. if anyone need to discuss please pm me instead...
and about photos-did you use distance scale on lens to focus or rf?
you should use distance to check sharpness, and also rf to check if distance and rf are well adjusted.
nutmeg
Member
I used an M9 with the rf only for this.
Actually I don’t have so much time and material for better tests, sorry guys.
Actually I don’t have so much time and material for better tests, sorry guys.
nzeeman
Well-known
and my theory is proven true-concerned owner suddenly dont have time to do real tests... forget about this guys - its obviously non existing issue...
nutmeg
Member
The lens is new, there is almost no review on the internet so I took from my time to post pictures on this forum. I could have done it on the Leica Forum where I am member too, but I thought the place was maybe not the most "partial".
I admit the pictures haven't been made as 100% seriously as some did but for me, they are solid enough for a light "overview".
It took quite some time to take the pictures, upload them and finally read all the comments..now I'm not sure to do it again.
BTW I'm the "Nutmeg" that used to be turntable afcionados on hi-fi forums and now sharpening geek on Kitchenknifeforums and usually give from my time for the community..
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMXAG0B5mr8
Not that I don't like the community here on rangefinderforum but it seems I can't do "better" tests now. So maybe I'll post one portrait wide open but no comparison anymore.
Sorry for the off-topic!
rscheffler
Well-known
Thanks for these, nutmeg.
A few comments: the photo of the buildings, they might be too close to simply set the lens at infinity, at least wide open. But the tops of trees off in the distance also show some softness at f/4 vs. f/8...
If focus is indeed perfect, then based on my years using the 35/1.7-M version on the M240, the 1.7 would be the sharper lens across the frame.
I appreciate the f/8 samples though, because it shows the lens does sharpen up well. Until now, the only 35/2 Ultron examples I've seen have been shot on Sony cameras and similar photos to yours of the buildings has always shown slightly smeared edges even at f/5.6-8. It's nice to see in your examples that edges are sharp already at f/4. From those photos on a Sony camera, there was field curvature and overall focus improved by focusing midway between the center and edges of the frame. That said, the central 'weakness' of the Ultron in your examples, even at f/4, is slightly disappointing. It would be appreciated, by me at least, if you could re-test with the new lens to see if there is any difference. I'd be happy even with one building shot at f/4.
Lastly, I think your Summicron is decentered - the right side is quite soft even at f/8, especially compared to the left side. It's also probably front-focusing at the infinity hard stop given that the near building is in focus but things farther away in the distance are out of focus.
OT: I'm also a bit of a kitchen knife geek... love Japanese carbon blades.
A few comments: the photo of the buildings, they might be too close to simply set the lens at infinity, at least wide open. But the tops of trees off in the distance also show some softness at f/4 vs. f/8...
If focus is indeed perfect, then based on my years using the 35/1.7-M version on the M240, the 1.7 would be the sharper lens across the frame.
I appreciate the f/8 samples though, because it shows the lens does sharpen up well. Until now, the only 35/2 Ultron examples I've seen have been shot on Sony cameras and similar photos to yours of the buildings has always shown slightly smeared edges even at f/5.6-8. It's nice to see in your examples that edges are sharp already at f/4. From those photos on a Sony camera, there was field curvature and overall focus improved by focusing midway between the center and edges of the frame. That said, the central 'weakness' of the Ultron in your examples, even at f/4, is slightly disappointing. It would be appreciated, by me at least, if you could re-test with the new lens to see if there is any difference. I'd be happy even with one building shot at f/4.
Lastly, I think your Summicron is decentered - the right side is quite soft even at f/8, especially compared to the left side. It's also probably front-focusing at the infinity hard stop given that the near building is in focus but things farther away in the distance are out of focus.
OT: I'm also a bit of a kitchen knife geek... love Japanese carbon blades.
We are a tough crowd at RFF
Don’t let that deter you though, nutmeg. The more information in the public domain the better.I think you experienced slight backfocus with your Ultron on your M9. This is a very common problem with a lot of lenses on digital Leica bodies. It might not be noticeable on film but digital makes these errors much easier to see. It could also be that your M9 is front focusing rather than the Ultron backfocusing. Or a combination of both. Your Summicron and Summilux may also be front focusing slightly and the M9 is covering up the error because it also front focuses. Lots of possibilities! That’s the reason why you’ll get better more meaningful test results by limiting the variables to the minimum. Take framing for example, if you focus on something at the center of the frame at F2, then tilt the camera a bit upwards or sideways, will what you focused on still be in focus? Depends on focus distance, field curvature of the lens etc. but possibly not. Or not in sharp focus. You can easily picture that by imagining the in focus area as a thick pane of glass (as thick as the DOF). Naturally if you tilt the glass, you change what’s in focus.
Anyway, I hope you have better luck with your second copy!
Errrrmmmm all mine are on film, including the shots at the start of this thread comparing the Summicron ASPH with the Ultron.
rscheffler
Well-known
Sorry, I meant digital images...
I appreciated your early samples too, Jon, for evaluating image rendering. However, being a strictly digital photographer and having only seen digital images with the new 35/2 on Sony cameras, I was uncertain how representative they were in respect to edge sharpness from Leica digital cameras.
I appreciated your early samples too, Jon, for evaluating image rendering. However, being a strictly digital photographer and having only seen digital images with the new 35/2 on Sony cameras, I was uncertain how representative they were in respect to edge sharpness from Leica digital cameras.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Well, it is obvious that this new lens is more an ergonomical than an optical improvement on the earlier f/1.7 35mm lenses from Voigtländer, both LTM and VM - exept for the stick. From those three lenses I prefer the LTM f/1.7 35mm. Really a joy to use.
Erik.
nutmeg
Member
guys, thanks for your very detailed replies.
The new copy should arrive today or tomorrow and I don‘t promise to manage 100% correct tests ( this time, I wish I bought the M240 instead of the M9!) but I‘ll try ;-)
The new copy should arrive today or tomorrow and I don‘t promise to manage 100% correct tests ( this time, I wish I bought the M240 instead of the M9!) but I‘ll try ;-)
Ultron 35mm f2 Aspherical vs Summicron 35mm f2 ASPH
Could not disagree more, Erik. I have never used the M-mount 35/1.7 so cannot comment about that lens, but the new Ultron is leaps and bounds better than the LTM Ultron 35/1.7 I owned many years ago.
Could not disagree more, Erik. I have never used the M-mount 35/1.7 so cannot comment about that lens, but the new Ultron is leaps and bounds better than the LTM Ultron 35/1.7 I owned many years ago.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Really? Hard to imagine, but I did not try the new lens myself.
Btw, the new lens is here in Amsterdam extremely expensive, over EUR 1.200,00 at Foto Den Boer. The VM f/1.7 (black or chrome) is only about EUR 800,00.
I'll check this again tomorrow.
I've checked this today, March 29 2019: There is an error, the price of the Utron at Foto Den Boer is EUR 745,00. They've put the wrong price on it - EUR 1.200,00 - in the display in the shop, no doubt by mistake.
Leica M2, LTM Voigtländer Ultron 35mm f/1.7 Aspherical at full aperture, Tmax400.
Erik.
I really love this rendering!
PCR
Established
rscheffler
Well-known
UK dealers could also be an option. Robert White has it listed for about 700 Euro with VAT (not sure how Brexit affects things currently, or not).
Back in 2015 at initial release, the EU was surprisingly the best price for the VM f/1.7... back then the VAT inclusive price was about 650 Euro.
Thanks. I'll be happy with a repeat of the buildings photo(s) to see what, if anything is different with your second copy.
Back in 2015 at initial release, the EU was surprisingly the best price for the VM f/1.7... back then the VAT inclusive price was about 650 Euro.
Thanks. I'll be happy with a repeat of the buildings photo(s) to see what, if anything is different with your second copy.
EVIL_Guy
Established
I had both f1.7 Ultron (M/LTM) and the new VM Ultron f1.7 was better on a digital sensor from the image quality perspective.
I really like my f1.7 Ultron but missing a focus tab/stick a lot.
So for me the new f2 Ultron might be a solution, but till I never found any direct comparisons of image qualities ...