Why WOULDN'T You Buy Voigtlander Lenses?

[tedwhite]

Raid is right. It's not titled properly. I currently have two CV lenses, the 35/2.5 and the 21/4. I have owned the 25/4. I find all three of these lenses produce superior images and for a hell of a lot less than Leica glass. I also own a Canon 50/1.8 and, if I didn't have a 50mm of this quality I'd be looking at the Heliar.

 

[M like Leica M6]

None of the answers in the poll works for me.

I have some Voigtlenses. The value for the price is good, but there are some things that I don't like:

- They all lose their black paint very quickly and show a lot of brass.

- Design, look and feel. The only Voigtländer lens that has the same mechanical feeling as a Leica lens is the 1.2/35: smoooth focussing, aperture clicks are just right.

 

[rxmd]

- They all lose their black paint very quickly and show a lot of brass.

With Leica people pay a lot of extra money to get just that when they choose an MP over an M6.

Philipp

 

[M like Leica M6]

With Leica people pay a lot of extra money to get just that when they choose an MP over an M6.

Philipp

EXACTLY.

And don't forget, many of them even pay more because it has NO rewind crank... whereas I would pay more if it had the words "not a rare collector's item, and the LHSA is not interested" engraved.



Recently, a Leica dealer tried to convince me that the black MP tusche is better than my M6's black chrome because it ages so beautifully... I still remember when Leitz showed off with black chrome cameras and lenses because they hardly show any wear at all...

Of course, an MP showing a lot of brass suits better if you have style... probably Leica is targeting new customers, wearing "bling-bling", a Tech-9, and the new limited Leica PI-MP

It's the same as with Windows Vista: everybody knows there is no advantage but only trouble and higher costs, but Microsoft insists it is sooo much better. I will sit it out...

 

[GrahamWelland]

None of the answers in the poll works for me.

I have some Voigtlenses. The value for the price is good, but there are some things that I don't like:

- They all lose their black paint very quickly and show a lot of brass.

- Design, look and feel. The only Voigtländer lens that has the same mechanical feeling as a Leica lens is the 1.2/35: smoooth focussing, aperture clicks are just right.

Agree about the build & feel of the 35/1.2 - if it said Leica on the front it would cost 5x and it's every bit as well made as any of my Leica glass.

As regards the paint, Leica lenses are also subject to wear and tear. I have a bunch of lenses that are showing minor brassing at the front of their focus rings. This is through general wear and tear, bumping in the bag, etc etc.

The very best made lenses I own come from ...... Zeiss.

When you spend the money it costs to get a new 6bit coded Noctilux or 28 or 35 Summicron, you EXPECT to get all magnesium/aluminum construction and lens hoods that don't fall to bits (now on Summicron hood #2 - no doubt #3 will be needed at some point). Similarly I don't expect to have to adjust the front element of a 28 Summicron to adjust out the 'rattle' either. The Noctilux is ok but I'm just pissed that a lens costing this much has such a low-rent lens hood compared to my 75 & 135 which have built in metal hoods.

The one thing missing from my Zeiss lenses - plastic.

 

[GrahamWelland]

Recently, a Leica dealer tried to convince me that the black MP tusche is better than my M6's black chrome because it ages so beautifully... I still remember when Leitz showed off with black chrome cameras and lenses because they hardly show any wear at all...

To be fair, black paint does wear more gracefully than black chrome. The brass shows through on an MP vs the black chrome gradually just looking duller and more shabby over time. I have a black M8 that is showing signs of this - it's a little hard to explain but 'grubby' or 'tired' seem to be what I'm thinking of.

Of course, ideally they'd never show any wear - ever. Oh well.

 

[Bnack]

I'm fairly new to the m-mount RF world and currently only own a 35 ZM. I love the lens and I like the idea that except for the sonnar, all the other ZMs have a very similar quality. But as I sit and think about what I can afford, I think it makes the most sense to spend the money on the ZMs only for the focals that I'll use most, 25, 35, 50 for me. I think I'll try to fill in the rest "specialty" lenses from the CV catalog. For me, the Leica glass is just cost prohibitive and really isn't on my radar.

 

[Joe Mondello]

Each time I see the title of this thread, I feel like saying: "I already have told you why.". It would be better titled " Why would you buy a CV Lens?".

Raid is right. It's not titled properly.

The title is the correct title. Wanna change it? then start your own poll!

Serously, though, when I started this thing I expected a handful of responses. I never expected this to become . . .

"THE THREAD THAT WOULD NOT DIE!!!"

Bwahahahahahaaaaaaaaaa!

But to answer your question as to "why WOULD you buy Voigtlander lenses?" the answer is simple -- they provide tremendous value and I like them.

 

[jsrockit]

Agree about the build & feel of the 35/1.2 - if it said Leica on the front it would cost 5x and it's every bit as well made as any of my Leica glass.

Ahead of his time?