Voigtlander Ultron 35mm F2 Aspherical Images

M4, 35 Ultron ASPH, 022 filter, TMY-2 @ ISO 250, HC-110B:


Socially Distanced Fat City Cafe, Multnomah Village
 
Compared to the 35mm f/2.8 c-biogon

Compared to the 35mm f/2.8 c-biogon

Does anyone have a view of this new Ultron compared to the smaller Zeiss 35mm -- the C-Biogon?

I once shot with a borrowed C-Biogon, and had an impression of astonishing performance and beautiful rendering. I'm in the market to buy a small and competent 35mm, and would like some opinions.

I did have the bigger 35mm Biogon for a while, and sold it after a while due to not liking it much.
 
anerjee said:
Does anyone have a view of this new Ultron compared to the smaller Zeiss 35mm -- the C-Biogon?

I once shot with a borrowed C-Biogon, and had an impression of astonishing performance and beautiful rendering. I'm in the market to buy a small and competent 35mm, and would like some opinions.

I did have the bigger 35mm Biogon for a while, and sold it after a while due to not liking it much.
Click to expand...
I have not tried the 2/35mm Ultron so I cannot compare, though the word here is that it's excellent.
I did have the C-Biogon... It's a marvelous little lens and gave great results on my M2 and M8. Where it falls down, in my experience, is with full-frame digital M cameras where it displays the Italian flag syndrome. For that reason I sold it on.
The 2.0/35mm Biogon ZM works much better on full-frame digital.
 
Leica M4, Voigtlander 35 2.0 Ultron ASPH, 022 filter, Kodak XX 5222, HC-110B



PacWest Center, Portland, Oregon
 
Leica M4, Voigtlander 35 2.0 Ultron ASPH, 022 filter, TMX, HC-110B:



Fort Yamhill Blockhouse 1856, Dayton, Oregon


Baptist Church 1886, Dayton, Oregon
 
50308643417_c1125c4e5e_c.jpg

Delta 400, f2

50308484981_2974eeabd7_c.jpg

Delta 3200
 
So, after looking at the photos in this thread and in the other thread devoted to the new CV Ultron Vintage 35mm f2.0 ASPH, and w/ a $100 price drop from the Head Bartender, I pulled the trigger and ordered the lens last week. It arrived this past Saturday (thanks to the HB for the expedited shipping). Here are some sample pix taken on an M-E Type 240, JPEGs straight out of the camera, no post-processing, starting with bw:

Shot at f2.0:



Sample photo: CV Ultron Vintage 35mm f2.0 by bingley0522, on Flickr

Shot at f2.0, focus on the back rim of the bowl:

Sample photo: CV Ultron Vintage 35mm f2.0 by bingley0522, on Flickr

Shot at f2.0, focus on the tree just to the right of center:

Sample photo: CV Ultron Vintage 35mm f2.0 by bingley0522, on Flickr
 
And some color images, all JPEGs straight out of the ME 240, with no post-processing.

Shot at f2.0:

Sample photo: CV Ultron Vintage 35mm f2.0 by bingley0522, on Flickr

Shot at f4.0:

Sample photo: CV Ultron Vintage 35mm f2.0 by bingley0522, on Flickr

Shot at f5.6:
Sample photo: CV Ultron Vintage 35mm f2.0 by bingley0522, on Flickr

There were some comments earlier in the thread about how this lens might perform on a digital Leica, including the M240. These photos show some samples. Not great in themselves, but I'm pretty pleased with these early results.
 
Leica M4, 35 Ultron ASPH, 022 filter, Reveni meter, TMX@ISO 50, HC-110B.


Food Truck Detail, Beaverton, Oregon
 
anerjee said:
Does anyone have a view of this new Ultron compared to the smaller Zeiss 35mm -- the C-Biogon?

I once shot with a borrowed C-Biogon, and had an impression of astonishing performance and beautiful rendering. I'm in the market to buy a small and competent 35mm, and would like some opinions.

I did have the bigger 35mm Biogon for a while, and sold it after a while due to not liking it much.
Click to expand...

I'm wondering the same - deciding between the Ultron f2 and the C-Biogon.
Anyone with experience of both lenses, especially on colour film?
I wonder if the Vignetting on the C-Biogon clears up sooner than the Ultron as you stop down, or is it that many of the examples posted of the Ultron are shot at f2 and it's exaggerated my impression of the vignetting?
The other comparison I'm interested in is distortion, which again is maybe exacerbated with the Ultron at f2?
 
I owned a 35 2.8 C-Biogon for about a year, It's a phenomenal lens with impressive sharpness, good color rendition and the famous Zeiss 3d pop. It also offers 1/3 stops and has a little focusing tab. It also takes an odd size filter and I didn't want to buy filters that would only fit one lens. I could have gone the step ring route but at the same time I had the Zeiss, I also owned a 35 Summicron ASPH. The C-Biogon was bundled with some other items as a trade in on a 28 Elmarit ASPH.
 
Thanks for the feedback @madNbad
Can you remember if the Ultron has more/less vignetting and barrel distortion at equivalent apertures?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom