Why WOULDN'T You Buy Voigtlander Lenses?

[Never Satisfied]

I have a collection of Leica / CV and Canon glass that I shoot with and when I look at my shots I struggle to pick which lens it was shot on, with the exception of my Canon 50mm f1.2.
I have a CV 35mm f2.5, 35mm f1.7 and a 75mm f2.5 and I prefer my CV 35mm f2.5 to my Summicron Gen 4 f2.0.
There is an obvious build quality difference, but that doesn't seen to ever impinge on image quality.
I would gladly swap either my 35mm or 50mm Summicron for a CV 35mm f1.2 Nokton; any takers??
Cheers Andrew.

 

[ZeissFan]

I think most people will agree that the lenses, not the cameras, are the true gems of the Cosina Voigtlander offerings. The lenses have gone a long way to rehabilitate the Cosina name among photographers.

I had the 35 Pancake and was always very pleased with it -- optically and mechanically.

 

[Joe Mondello]

Well, since I started this thread there has been a pretty steady 82% that have and like (or love) their CV lenses!

Sean Reid's reviews initially gave me the "permission" I guess I felt I needed to open my horizons beyond the few Leica lenses I'd ever used on the few Leicas I've had (many, many moons ago) as I came back to Leica with the M8. Thank you Sean.

I still have my eyes peeled for that new 28 Elmarit-M though -- almost had one last week. Not that I really need it, I just want it!

 

[dee]

A long time ago , I bought am OM1 , but was not happy with the pictorial quality kind of gritty too sharp ? .. I turned to the heavy outdated Minolta SRT and Rokkors , and there was the sense of the slides I wanted , a kind of softness , but still sharp , and still my prefered SLR lenses for my SRs and SR 7v [ mostly SRT fit or before ... ]
But my 50s Elmar on a IIIC or Zorki S creates , for me , that illusive reality that i look for .
Maybe it's this illusive quality which you are discussing ?
dee

 

[jdos2]

I have three of 'em now.
The 75, the 28 f/1.9 and the 21mm. I sent the 40mm back to get its focus "checked," as it had a pretty strong back focus.

And that leads me to...

Focus, and the M8.

How do I check it? My 40 backfocuses. So does the 28mm! The 75mm? it FRONT focuses (though only by a touch)! The 21mm? It's... about right. Is it the camera? Is it me? I'm learning how much to compensate with the focus ring, and which direction to turn...

Of course the rangefinder lines up at infinity for all lenses.

Oh, I'm hijacking the thread. Feh. Sorry. Wish I could adjust focus on the lenses myself. They have attractive drawing, all.

(Further hijack: switching LTM adapters makes the 28mm focus right- with the adapter from the 75mm)

 

[rich815]

Well, since I started this thread there has been a pretty steady 82% that have and like (or love) their CV lenses!

Well, no offense meant but your questions make for a fairly skewed poll. I have a couple of CV lenses and like them well enough. Much prefer the Leica lenses I have though (most bought used, most are older than 1980, so prices paid were about the cost of new VC lenses).

If you had added an option in the poll of "I like the VC lenses but sure wish I could get my hands on some Leica glass" and/or "I like my VC lenses but would trade them for Leica lenses in a minute if I could" it would have been a bit more interesting!

 

[GrahamWelland]

Well, no offense meant but your questions make for a fairly skewed poll. I have a couple of CV lenses and like them well enough. Much prefer the Leica lenses I have though (most bought used, most are older than 1980, so prices paid were about the cost of new VC lenses).

If you had added an option in the poll of "I like the VC lenses but sure wish I could get my hands on some Leica glass" and/or "I like my VC lenses but would trade them for Leica lenses in a minute if I could" it would have been a bit more interesting!

Absolutely!!!!!

 

[Bertram2]

"I like my VC lenses but would trade them for Leica lenses in a minute if I could" it would have been a bit more interesting!

I don't think there are not too many who would do so. After you have learned how good they really are what should make you spend five times more for a Leitz aequivalent ?

Bertram

 

[rxmd]

I don't think there are not too many who would do so. After you have learned how good they really are what should make you spend five times more for a Leitz aequivalent ?

I guess if it was an 1:1 trade I wouldn't say no. Getting a Leitz 21/2.8 and a Summicron 35 for my 21 and 35 Skopars would be a nice bargain. I'd get lenses that are maybe 20% better, and my lens collection's value would increase by a factor of 500%. Sounds like a very rational deal for me. So, you disgruntled Leica owners out there with an insatiable craving for used Voigtländer glass, here's your chance to support poor German students trapped in Uzbekistan

 

[Richard Black]

I have bought and hope to buy more! As one who has practiced the art of photography since the age of 11, nearly 50 years now, and have viewed lots of different photographs taken by others with a variety of cameras and lenses, I can't say I could pick out a photo taken with a specific lens and identify it as such. Others may have developed their eyes to select which was taken with which, but I haven't, and at my age, it probably won't happen. So, VC offer me an affordable selection of glass from extremely wide to moderately tele. I just wish I had acted when there was a selection of Minolta MD mount SLR lenses.
Although I love my ROKKOR glass too!

 

[Joe Mondello]

Well, no offense meant but your questions make for a fairly skewed poll. I have a couple of CV lenses and like them well enough. Much prefer the Leica lenses I have though (most bought used, most are older than 1980, so prices paid were about the cost of new VC lenses).

If you had added an option in the poll of "I like the VC lenses but sure wish I could get my hands on some Leica glass" and/or "I like my VC lenses but would trade them for Leica lenses in a minute if I could" it would have been a bit more interesting!

Your points are well taken . . . BUT . . . Tthe point of the poll was not to see whether people preferred their Leica glass to their CV glass, it was to find out what -- if anything -- was keeping people from giving the VC lenses a look. Turns out there are very few folks who won't give them a look.

As for the second point, while I'd enjoy surely owning a 75 lux, I don't need it and am actually very happy with my 75 Heliar.

 

[cmogi10]

Right now I have a 35 nokton, a 50 nokton, a 35 skopar pancake....
I also have a 50 summicron, 90 Elmarit, 135 Hektor, and a Canon 50.

The CV glass is so good that I haven't really decided it's worth chasing down really expensive leica glass for those focal lengths. My credit card hopes my opinion doesn't change much in the near future.

 

[gregg]

I had the 35/1.7 Ultron and was never quite satisfied with the "look". Others love it. Fussy, I know, but it never had the SNAP I expected. My previous experience with a 35mm Summicron ASPH left me longing for that "look". Other users' experience with the CV 35/1.2 and 35/2.5 pancake show a different side - nice SNAP (totally subjective, non-scientific observation.) No prejudice per se against CV, just selective in lens design and performance.

On the other hand, in that CV aversive state I bought the ZM 28/2.8 and now wish I would have given the CV 28/1.8 Ultron a shot. I'm very happy with the ZM lens but the CV is a stop+ faster, less $$$, and the images coming from it are quite nice...

 

[cmogi10]

the 28/1.8 is on my wish list...I have to stop thinking about gear...GAS!

 

[Doug]

The recent dearly-departed 28mm Ultron is an f/1.9, or at least that's the designation. Some say the meter doesn't react when moving between the f/2 position and wide open. Anyway, one can hope that the inevitable CV replacement for this lens is a more compact f/1.8... or at least a bayonet mount version of the old lens.

 

[ZivcoPhoto]

I bought the several VC lenses I own, 21mm Color Skopar and 15mm Heliar, to use on my screwmount Leica as I could not find vintage comparable lenses.

Their compact size compliments the camera well as does their very high quality images.

I prefer to use Leica glass on my M cameras as for now I can afford them (all but one purchased used)...and to me they are outstanding in all the attributes of lens imaging I am interested in, that being excellent micro-contrast throughout the entire image (makes the image really "pop"), excellent sharpness, although the 35mm ASPH Lux is borderline too sharp, and of course the excellent out of focus (including the 35mm ASPH Lux).

 

[thomasw_]

i own two VC lenses; the 35/1.2 and 15/4.5. Both have been fantastic in different ways. I use the 15 mostly on my IIIc to shoot landscapes and structures. The nokton is no compromise from a leica summilux 35 in terms of optics; I prefer its signature. It is large, but then again so what? Consider the noctilux's weight. For available light with a 35, the VC lens has the signature for me.

Now if we are talking 50 mm lenses, then Leica's Summilux 50/1,4 is my all-round lens. The VC nokton is fine, whereas the summilux is more sublime. And for the nighttime, with a 5cm FL, what is better than Leica's Noctilux?

 

[Bill58]

I bought the several VC lenses I own, 21mm Color Skopar and 15mm Heliar, to use on my screwmount Leica as I could not find vintage comparable lenses.


I bought a VC 21 only because I can't afford the Canon 19. All the rest of my lenses are Canons or Russkie 50s. I hope to soon buy a VC 15 (no comparable older lens). I just prefer the older look and build quality of the Canon lenses.

 

[tightsqueez]

One of the main reasons I only buy Leica and only buy NEW is because I would like to see the company around for awhile. I like their philosophy and the way photographers have been showing the world with their tools for so many years now. And if it costs me extra money, it becomes a priceless investment for the future.

CV lenses or Leica...it's who drives them that matters in terms of an image's quality.

 

[jaapv]

But the poor blokes are being paid in dollars....