Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm f1.5

51728675527_5eb3119ea8_b.jpg
raid said:
Is then the bokeh the main difference between Heliar 50/2 and 50/1.5, other than the max apertute?
Click to expand...

The lenses are very different. The Heliar Classic 50mm f/2 is a fully corrected lens, even at full aperture everything within the dept of field is sharp. The Heliar Classic 50mm f/1.5 is not fully corrected, there are all kinds of lens faults left uncorrected. This is done because some people like these effects. It is as if you work with a very old lens. The lens shows at full aperture spherical and chromatic aberration, linear distortion and vignetting. The Heliar Classic 50mm f/2 is free from these.

Erik.

gelatin silver print (heliar classic 50mm f/2) leica mp

51718926424_ceb31c664f_b.jpg
 
Interesting facts, Erik. I may not need to get the Heliar 50/1.5 as I already have many lenses with issues. On the other hand, it is a new lens, which makes it attractive to buy.
 
raid said:
Interesting facts, Erik. I may not need to get the Heliar 50/1.5 as I already have many lenses with issues. On the other hand, it is a new lens, which makes it attractive to buy.
Click to expand...

It’s not a particularly compact 50, Raid, but the handling is really good and the build quality appears to be first rate. It may have created a new category of 50s: lenses with aesthetically meaningful flaws, and modern coatings.
 
Bingley said:
It’s not a particularly compact 50, Raid, but the handling is really good and the build quality appears to be first rate. It may have created a new category of 50s: lenses with aesthetically meaningful flaws, and modern coatings.
Click to expand...

Bingley, looking at the examples in this thread, I think that category/description is very accurate. Some of the images remind me of the Canon 50/1.5 LTM, but with modern coatings and without the Sonnar focus shift. I think you're familiar with that lens, any thoughts on how they compare? ;)
 
Another point - besides the coating - that has not yet been mentioned, is the distance adjustment stroke of this Heliar classic. It is very short. This can be seen in the narrow depth of field scale, among other things. A short distance adjustment stroke makes focusing more difficult. However, Cosina has done a lot to make setting the distance as comfortable as possible, see the beautiful and comfortable setting ring and I must say that I didn't miss a shot because of the focus.
Setting from infinity to 50cm is about 110 degrees. Does anyone have an idea why the adjustment stroke is so short and why the distance ring is so hard to read?

Erik.
 
Bingley said:
It’s not a particularly compact 50, Raid, but the handling is really good and the build quality appears to be first rate. It may have created a new category of 50s: lenses with aesthetically meaningful flaws, and modern coatings.
Click to expand...

This is what I meant to say. My vintage lenses obviously are not modern! :)
 
dourbalistar said:
Bingley, looking at the examples in this thread, I think that category/description is very accurate. Some of the images remind me of the Canon 50/1.5 LTM, but with modern coatings and without the Sonnar focus shift. I think you're familiar with that lens, any thoughts on how they compare? ;)
Click to expand...

Thanks. I have not shot the new Heliar Classic 50/1.5 enough to form an opinion of how it compares to the Canon 50/1.5. I have had my sample of the latter lens now for over ten years and have shot a lot with it. It’s a delightful lens, and makes a good all round shooter. My sample appears to be optimized for f4.0 (which is I believe pretty typical); I’ve used it a lot at that aperture and at f2.8. I don’t often shoot it wide open but the new Voigtlander lens may lead me to do more comparison shooting wide open. The Canon 50/1.5 has very smooth bokeh (as does, btw, the Canon 50/1.8). The Canon also excels with color film, producing a very luminous rendering at about f4.0.

Here’s a sample bw photo taken with the Canon 50/1.5 that illustrates what I’m talking about… shot with an M-E 240… my recollection is that I shot at f.2.0 or f2.8.

Temple Coffee by Steve Macfarlane, on Flickr
 
Erik van Straten said:
The lenses are very different. The Heliar Classic 50mm f/2 is a fully corrected lens, even at full aperture everything within the dept of field is sharp. The Heliar Classic 50mm f/1.5 is not fully corrected, there are all kinds of lens faults left uncorrected. This is done because some people like these effects. It is as if you work with a very old lens. The lens shows at full aperture spherical and chromatic aberration, linear distortion and vignetting. The Heliar Classic 50mm f/2 is free from these.

Erik.
All the "flaws" were designed into this lens, which makes it a great lens IMO....plus you do the lens a great service with your images.

"........The Heliar Classic is measured by a different yard stick as Heliar images are all about classic style.

The HELIAR classic 50mm f/1.5 VM is finished to show classical depiction at the wide open apertures by the aberrations that intentionally remained. This image effect is painterly or even “more fluffy” than images made by modern lenses. By leaving some factors of aberration, both coma and spherical, we create a different image flavor than contemporary images made in digital post-processing. Not every subject demands maximum sharpness and saturation, some require a more delicate touch. Our optical formula is like a hand reaching back in time. This look cannot be obtained with modern lenses that are over correct for various aberrations. In addition to the superior bokeh the remaining frame flare and single coated finish provide an extremely unique palette at wide open aperture settings. "
Click to expand...
Click to expand...
 
Voigtlander Heliar 50mm f1.5, Sony A7C (Kolari), Sony Mono Profile JPG. This Heliar is an instant Top 5 lens for me. I'm not saying these are good photos, but every photo just sings with it.

[url=https://www.flickr.com/gp/22673088@N03/J4AkK0]DSC00895 by Baz, on Flickr[/URL]

[url=https://www.flickr.com/gp/22673088@N03/i748su]DSC00894 by Baz, on Flickr[/URL]

[url=https://www.flickr.com/gp/22673088@N03/B3Zt48]DSC00903 by Baz, on Flickr[/URL]

[url=https://www.flickr.com/gp/22673088@N03/6Pqt11]DSC00906 by Baz, on Flickr[/URL]

[url=https://www.flickr.com/gp/22673088@N03/RP74me]DSC00907 by Baz, on Flickr[/URL]

[url=https://www.flickr.com/gp/22673088@N03/1x0JiX]DSC00908 by Baz, on Flickr[/URL]

[url=https://www.flickr.com/gp/22673088@N03/62vPTh]DSC00909 by Baz, on Flickr[/URL]

[url=https://www.flickr.com/gp/22673088@N03/Y99238]DSC00913 by Baz, on Flickr[/URL]

https://www.rangefinderforum.com/co...com/photos/22673088@N03/]Baz[/url], on FlickrDSC00917 by Baz, on Flickr
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom