"Voigtlander" 25/.95 Real or Not?

"Voigtlander" 25/.95 Real or Not?

  • Yes, a new innovative lens from Mr. K!

    Votes: 86 81.9%

  • NO WAY! A photoshop fake!

    Votes: 19 18.1%
  • Total voters
    105
  • Poll closed .
I find using the 55/1.2 Nikkor, 5cm f1.4 Nikkor, and 85/2 Nikkor wide-open with the EP2 is not a problem. The EVF is great. I'll try the Canon 50/0.95 on it, now that i have a C-Mount adapter for the camera and have the Canon breech-lock to C-Mount for the lens.

This lens will not be anymore difficult to focus wide-open than a fast 50 as the DOF is greater.
 
I think this is an indication of Oly/Panny coming up with new bodies with built-in EVF. Panny already has many, and maybe Cosina now knows Oly is also working on New PEN with EVF. With a good EVF, focusing manually is surprisingly easy, and now Cosina is in, I think Oly/Panny will design new bodies with more MF usability in mind.
 
Makten said:
No. The sensor is 1/4 of the size, so the "light gathering power" equivalent is 50/1.9.

25/0.95 = 26.3
50/1.9 = 26.3
Click to expand...

Whatever. F-Stop as used in the exposure is the same no matter what focal length is used. As long as the image circle covers the sensor and the scene is evenly lit, the exposure will be the same whether you use a 50/0.95 or a 25/0.95.

My handheld exposure meter is valid independant of focal length used, ASA, Shutter Speed, and F-Stop are independent of focal length.

For astrophotography, absolute size of the objective is more important for imaging stars. Recalled from many years ago using telescopes. Still valid today. But I doubt many will use the u4/3rds lens for this purpose. And if i did, i'll use the Canon 50/0.95.
 
Last edited:
I guess Mr. K. will make history again with new brilliant moves by Voigtländer, and I gladly expect this new road will give the company a solid way to continue being a design leader in present and future lenses and cameras. This is great news for all of us photographers!

Cheers,

Juan
 
Brian Sweeney said:
Whatever. F-Stop as used in the exposure is the same no matter what focal length is used. As long as the image circle covers the sensor and the scene is evenly lit, the exposure will be the same whether you use a 50/0.95 or a 25/0.95.

My handheld exposure meter is valid independant of focal length used, ASA, Shutter Speed, and F-Stop are independent of focal length.
Click to expand...
Of course, but you said "light gathering capabilities" were the same, which is not true. If you collect the amount X of photons for getting an apropriate exposure on MFT at f/0.95, you should have collected the amount 4X photons on FF at f/0.95 because the sensor is four times larger. I really hope everyone here understand this very simple logic. 🙂

Edit: Anyway, it's very nice to see that someone finally understands that the hole to fill in the MFT system is fast lenses! 50/1.9 equivalent isn't bad at all compared to anything previously announced.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
So Mr. K, after all, decided to "support" the digital camera business (i.e. to benefit from it). At least he entered a stylish side of the market, with a cool first item.

I would find it very very VERY surprising and downright silly if C/V would not come out very soon with a m4/3 body.

Now, how soon is very soon...don't know.
 
Mephiloco said:
I could care less if this lens is real or not, if it is, I can't see it selling well at all. Most people with Micro 4/3 don't want to manually focus a lens, and trying to manually focus this lens wide open would be a chore. It doesn't make sense to me to make an exclusively manual focus lens for a autofocus system when there's not a good manual focus method in place
Click to expand...

Have you used these cameras much? Everything you're saying there is wrong, I think. Focus on G1/GH1/G2 and E-P2 with evf is marvellously precise. Even with very, very fast mf lenses. I use them all the time on the E-P2, with greater focus accuracy than on my M8.

CV already makes manual focus lenses for Canon, Nikon, and other DSLRs and they apparently sell well. And m4/3 is a market crowded with hobbyists using old lenses.

The kind of arguments people are having here is why I don't post much anymore. I just don't understand people's need to denigrate what is obviously a clever and interesting bit of engineering with naysaying, misinformation, and casual accusations of fraud. Mr. K goes and gives people precisely what they asked for, and the result is a lot of sneering.
 
Pherdinand said:
So Mr. K, after all, decided to "support" the digital camera business (i.e. to benefit from it). At least he entered a stylish side of the market, with a cool first item.

I would find it very very VERY surprising and downright silly if C/V would not come out very soon with a m4/3 body.

Now, how soon is very soon...don't know.
Click to expand...

I agree, and I bet they're on it... And that's great because it's the best way to bite the digital cake: there they can get a bigger, faster market than with M bodies, and we'll keep enjoying their outstanding products for a very long time...

Cheers,

Juan
 
mabelsound said:
Have you used these cameras much? Everything you're saying there is wrong, I think. Focus on G1/GH1/G2 and E-P2 with evf is marvellously precise. Even with very, very fast mf lenses. I use them all the time on the E-P2, with greater focus accuracy than on my M8.

CV already makes manual focus lenses for Canon, Nikon, and other DSLRs and they apparently sell well. And m4/3 is a market crowded with hobbyists using old lenses.

The kind of arguments people are having here is why I don't post much anymore. I just don't understand people's need to denigrate what is obviously a clever and interesting bit of engineering....
Click to expand...

Agreed. It's obvious that this is an intriguing item, which even of itself makes the 4/3 format more interesting, and builds on its strengths. Equally, it's likely to stimulate the development of better cameras - superior EVF systems, or even an optical VF. Any of us could benefit from this move, even if we don't actually buy the lens.

Still, some people like to look gift horses in the mouth, and complain loudly and repetitively.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There is announcement on dpreview.com, so looks real.

This looks like the perfect lead-in for the launch of a micro 43rds RF. Once he has established a base for the lenses, then surely the camera could follow?

Ray
 
Makten said:
Obviously you didn't read the link. Light per area is irrelevant if area is excluded. ISO 100 isn't equal on every format. Larger area = more information = less grain or noise. So, ISO 100 on MFT is equal to ISO 400 on FF.

Again, the 25/0.95 on MFT has equal light gathering properties as a 50/1.9 on FF.
Click to expand...

No, it doesn't. Sorry 😛 Your theory would hold if all sensors were exactly the same in every way, just cut to different sizes. They're not.

Makten said:
Yes, but nothing even close to an equivalent image in terms of quality. Exposure is irrelevant.


And "f" is different, so "f/0.95" is also different. This is just as silly every time people without the slightest technical knowledge are trying to convince us that the laws of physics are wrong. 😀

Buy a point-and-shoot then for heavens sake.


Why are you talking about exposure? This is about light gathering, which gives image quality. Don't try to say that your EP-1 gives the same noise at ISO 400 as your 5D does.
Click to expand...

They're very comparable at ISO 400, once again in practice RATHER than theory.
 
This is an intriguing lens, but I have no idea how you'd properly focus at f/0.95 on a digital camera's live-view screen. With that in mind, here's a question: Are there there any plans for a digital, MANUAL FOCUS, point-and-shoot rangefinder which would have a small-sized sensor, similar to that of the 4/3s sensor? Manual focusing through a rangefinder would allow you to use very shallow depth-of-fields, and, since you're not using autofocus, the effective shutter lag would be miles better than any other digital P&S on the market. I'd certainly think about buying such a camera -- a sort of mini-M8.
 
Most m4/3 cameras have large EVF's now, and you can have the EVF automatically magnify an area of view 7x when the focus ring on the lens gets moved - so it zooms in an you can get accurate focus pretty well.
 
Keith said:
Call me old fashioned but I could see potential for this lens adapted to a half frame Pen FT film camera ... the image circle should be correct!
Click to expand...

The Pen lenses can be adapted to m4/3 with the addition of an adapter that adds to the flange length, but going from a shorter flange distance to a longer would require an adapter of negative length. 🙂

eavis said:
This is an intriguing lens, but I have no idea how you'd properly focus at f/0.95 on a digital camera's live-view screen.
Click to expand...

Same way the camera does autofocus...contrast detection, except one's eye is the detector. 🙂
 
fdigital said:
No, it doesn't. Sorry 😛 Your theory would hold if all sensors were exactly the same in every way, just cut to different sizes. They're not.
Click to expand...
Please explain how the sensor does affect the light gathering capability of the lens. This is going to be very interesting. 😀
 
Makten said:
It's only pointless if you don't care about image quality.


Yes indeed. I never said anything about the lens or MFT being worthless or so. I only said that mr Sweeney is wrong about the light gathering capabilities. 😛
Click to expand...

Again- Whatever. In terms of light gathered onto the sensor measured in photons per square millimeter within the formed image circle or other metric relevent to exposure, the 25/0.95 is the same as the 50/0.95. If the number of photons gathered per square millimeter were different, the exposure would be different. That is a metric more meaningful to the discussion on hand.

If you prefer, the SPEED of the 25/0.95 is the same as the 50/0.95.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom