Voigtlander 28 f2.0 VM lens

jvr said:
...Focus shift: I'll try it out. For the kind of photos I use my 28 for, this is usually not a problem. I tend to use it either wide-open or around f8-16 (hyperfocus).... Even in pictures at f4 or f5.6, I can't be sure of focus shift. I don'y have many at those apertures... So, at least for me, the question is not "Does it have focus shift?" but "Is the focus shift a problem?". With the 35/1.4, it was. With the 28/2, not yet...
Click to expand...
My CV 35/1.4 SC is spot on at f/1.4 so i tend to use it indoor because it is sharper than my favourite Summilux 35 pre-asph at full aperture. But from f/2.8 to f/5.6 it is difficult to focus accurately. In fact i wanted to know if the CV 28/2 has the same problem as i'm after a smaller 28/2 than the Summicron.
 
LCT said:
My CV 35/1.4 SC is spot on at f/1.4 so i tend to use it indoor because it is sharper than my favourite Summilux 35 pre-asph at full aperture. But from f/2.8 to f/5.6 it is difficult to focus accurately. In fact i wanted to know if the CV 28/2 has the same problem as i'm after a smaller 28/2 than the Summicron.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, my 35/1.5 was a bit off wide-open and in the wrong direction, that is, it added to the focus shift when closing down (and my sample had a lot of shift).

Ok, I'll do some tests and post results (probably tomorrow evening).

But beware that the Ultron is in fact a couple of mm longer than the Cron and maybe (I'm looking at them... :)) a mm wider. I tend to keep the round, threaded hood on the Ultron and the square hood on the Cron, so that makes the Cron look much bigger, when in fact they are practically the same size... :(

Rgd weight, the Ultron tips the scale (my kitchen scale, fairly accurate) at 236g, while the Summicron goes 20g further, to 256g.

So, in terms of size/weight, I would declare a draw.

In terms of wallet weight, on the other hand... :)
 
jvr said:
...beware that the Ultron is in fact a couple of mm longer than the Cron and maybe (I'm looking at them... :)) a mm wider. I tend to keep the round, threaded hood on the Ultron and the square hood on the Cron, so that makes the Cron look much bigger, when in fact they are practically the same size...
Click to expand...
Yes you're right of course but i don't use filters so for me a hood is mandatory to protect the front element and even with that of the Summilux 35/1.4 asph, the Summicron 28 is longer than the Ultron.
Found out those data some time ago:

Ultron 28/2:
Optical design: 8 groups 10 elements
Aperture blades: 10
Focus tab: Yes
Nearest distance: 0.7m
Filter ø: 46mm
Diameter x length: ø55 x 51.2mm
Weight: 244g

Summicron 28/2:
Optical design: 6 groups 9 elements
Aperture blades: 10
Focus tab: Yes
Nearest distance: 0.7m
Filter ø: 46mm
Diameter x length: ø53 x 40.8mm
Weight: 270g
 
Well, this thread turned out to be more dangerous than I'd thought, as I lept on a really good deal on a 28 cron that just showed up in the classifieds. I've often found myself wanting an extra stop--or two--over the ZM 28.

Looks like a coded ZM 28 will be hitting the classifieds soon.
 
jvr said:
I would definitely say that the CV f2 Ultron (at least a good copy), easily qualifies as a "poor man's" 28 cron asph. I can't say that about my copy of the 28/1.9 Ultron and I said even more than that about the 50/1.5 Nokton (I sold the cron). On the other hand, a lot of people (sean reid included) find it the other way round and prefer the old version. Since the "disagreement" is so strong, I would say that probably we have a case of both different taste AND different samples... :) BTW, I haven't sold the CV 28/1.9 either, I use it for B&W on the CLE and the M3 and really like it.
(
Click to expand...

Hi,

I don't necessarily prefer the 1.9, it's just that each version (1.9 and 2.0) have different strengths and weaknesses. Flare is much better controlled with the 2.0. My favorite fast 28 (cost excepted) is the Summicron ASPH.

Cheers,

Sean
 
I am looking to purchase a nice 28 for my RD-1... is the 1.9 version really that bad compared to the f/2 version? I'm looking at a nice 28/1.9, but if it's really "that" bad, i might save up for the f2 version (though it'll cost $200-300 more...). Is the f2 version really worth the added $$$? thanks!
 
The 1.9 certainly outperforms my skills:

68973552_p3AsL-O.jpg


419691152_fF5bm-O.jpg


195928145_fpnwG-XL-1.jpg


How many other lenses that have > 100 lp/mm across the field at f4 do you have ?

Roland.
 
Last edited:
I picked my f/1.9 up with some cosmetic wear for $199 and love it. My other 28 is a 4th-version Elmarit, so I tend only to use the Ultron in situations where I really need the extra stop, like shooting in dingy clubs and such, and in those conditions I love the way the Ultron performs. I've no desire to spend more money for anything reputedly better.
 
@ferider: nice shots! love the first one! :)

@ben z: Thanks! I hope to find one for around the same price as you got yours! :) I don't mind cosmetic wear, as long as it has perfect optics and functions perfectly!
 
I have the 28/3.5 Skopar as well as 28/1.9 Ultron. I can honestly say that I am happy with these lenses. Handling of the Skopar is wonderful as it's quite a small lens, whereas I cannot say the same about the Ultron. In terms of IQ, though, both do the job well enough.

All this talk about focus shifts and silly tests like cropping, etc, don't have any relevance to me at all in real-life shooting.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom