Voigtlander 50/2.5 Color Skopar

My what a turnaround! Six years ago when I bought mine used, these still sold very inexpensively on the used market. Sean Reid's positive review can't have hurt any, either... :)
 
I have a black version... I seldom use it since I have too many 50's in my collection... Heliar 50/3.5, Heliar 50/2, Nokton 50/1.5, Nokton 50/1.1... so I actually was going to sell my copy... but now I am considering keeping it... I tried selling it about 18 months ago and did not even get any inquiries... seems that has changed.

I must say that my 50/2.5 has never let me down... always delivering sparkling results...
 
I have have been keeping my eyes open for one. I use the 35/2.5 on my bessa r and love it. I'd buy the 50/2.5 new from photovillage (I think?) on ebay but they dont take paypal so I cannot use bing cashback.
 
the seller backed out of our deal which was for less than he had originally asked for and sold it to double negative.

nice guy...
 
I tweaked the photos I posted last night over at flickr, so I'm re-posting them here:

4773099923_ce23fd3dac_z.jpg


4773099967_8ec2c346a5_z.jpg
 
I'd like ask a question. I'm using the old collapsible summicron mostly and looking at my negatives and contact sheets I'm lacking a bit of contrast in shadows or on overcast days (well, on almost any shots that are not from sunny days using yellow filter on the lens). So, although I like the collapsible cron and the way it draws I began thinking about something perhaps a bit more modern and remembered this thread and very agreeably looking pictures here. So my question is - might this be a solution for me to get more contrasty pictures? Or shall I look somewhere else?
 
The Skopar should be more contrasty than your collapsible 'cron (it's contrastier than my Rigid 'cron), but it's moderately contrasty within the realm of modern lenses. If you want really punchy contrast from a lens, I'm told the Zeiss Planar, the Konica M-Hexanon or a modern Summicron are tops (I haven't tried any of those myself).

However, it seems to me that it's simpler to control contrast by varying film, exposure and development, rather than lenses, right?

Ari
 
andreios said:
I'd like ask a question. I'm using the old collapsible summicron mostly and looking at my negatives and contact sheets I'm lacking a bit of contrast in shadows or on overcast days (well, on almost any shots that are not from sunny days using yellow filter on the lens). So, although I like the collapsible cron and the way it draws I began thinking about something perhaps a bit more modern and remembered this thread and very agreeably looking pictures here. So my question is - might this be a solution for me to get more contrasty pictures? Or shall I look somewhere else?
Click to expand...

You could alter your developing process and/or materials to gain negatives with greater contrast using your existing col. Summicron.
 
I'm out shooting my 50/2.5 on a Nikon SP for the first time today. I'll be happy to post my thoughts after I get some results.
 
Can someone please share his/her experience with this lens in terms of pure sharpness, compared to other 50mm lenses, specially, but not exclusively, ltm choices?

Thanks!
 
I think that it can be extremely sharp or pleasingly unsharp depending on how wide open you go. IMO I've found the Elmar 3.5 sharp enough all the way to 3.5 :) whereas the the VC 2.5/50 isn't sharp opened all the way up. However stopped down to 4.0 to 5.6 the VC is sharp.

All with Leica IIIF and processed in Rodinal 1:25 for 6 minutes at 20 deg C

I think that this lens is more than sharp enough, and it has a pleasing signature with nice out of focus elements. In general all 50's are good lenses. I like that this lens focuses down to 75cm as opposed to 1 m as per the Elmar.

I also have an ongoing love affair with SLR 50's that focus down to 50 cm's or so.

I actually traded my Heliar 50/2 for the 50 / 2.5 specifically so that I could use a high quality modern lens on my IIIf. Great lens. Wonderful to use: feels beautiful. I should also note that all the 50's I've used are sharp enough. What's that old saying about the worst lens being better than the best photographer? So I include one of the apparently 'great' dog lenses to sample.

This isn't great but it still seems 'good enough' - if only let down as a composition.
 
Last edited:
ChrisN said:
Thanks, Stewart and Ralph, for the pics of the lens. I've ordered my lens in black (the AU importer's last black lens). And Stewart, that photo of the scene down the roadway and across the valley is very pleasing - and certainly sharp and detailed. Was the light that contrasty, or is that characteristic of the lens/film/processing? Regarding hoods - how does this lens handle flare? Is the optional squared-off hood an advantage? Thanks!
Click to expand...

rover said:
I have only shot the two rolls in mixed lighting, partly sunny day. I did not see any flare in my prints with the stock hood. I was wondering too when I saw Stewart's hood. I am hopeful though that the littie Skopar ring will be enough because the lens is so compact. I have not seen any mention of flare problems when I was researching the lens.
Click to expand...

Sorry chaps I missed this at the time, the shot of the road was just after a shower of rain so much of the high contrast is simply the reflection of a fairly bright sky

I got the big hood as I use the lens for colour print film normally and I tend to shoot close or into the sun a lot (on Corfu it gets v bright), the hood helps with the saturation flare is seldom a problem I find
 
It is sharp at all apertures, however at the small openings it is less sharp due to diffraction. It is less sharp than the 50mm Summicrons collapsible and first rigid, but it's higher contrast compensates this, creating a very nice rendering in B+W.

Erik.
 
I have a Vito II with the Color Skopar and it is one of my favorite lenses for color. With the old Kodachrome 25 the results were totally outstanding. I'm not sure if the current production is the same but if so, you can't go wrong. I've not found any problems with softness wide open when viewing slides so if the current crop has an issue the earlier versions may be better in that regard.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom