Turtle
Veteran
I can only comment on the CV 21 and 25mm P lenses, but similar points hold true for the 35mm Pancake II:
There are epic variations in lens assembly. There are more decentered copies that perfect ones, by far. These differences can be obvious or almost invisible on film, but on a M digital (FF), they are unmissable. My 35mm Pancake is perfect on film. I cannot see ANY decentering, but I cannot miss it on the Monochrom (softer right side).
Neither perform as well in the outer margins as their Zeiss ZM or Leica equivalents. My 21mm f2.8 Zeiss is a cracker on the MM and trounces the CV 21mm P in the outer field and corners, but the CV has the charm of imperfection. BTW this 21P is perfectly centered (second copy) and so there is a natural and equal fall off in resolution towards the edges.
If you can find a 21mm or 25mm CV lens that can resolve as well across the frame as a ZM/Leica on a Leica FF digital M, you have done very well indeed. Then there are the colour shifts, which dont matter on the MM of course.
There are epic variations in lens assembly. There are more decentered copies that perfect ones, by far. These differences can be obvious or almost invisible on film, but on a M digital (FF), they are unmissable. My 35mm Pancake is perfect on film. I cannot see ANY decentering, but I cannot miss it on the Monochrom (softer right side).
Neither perform as well in the outer margins as their Zeiss ZM or Leica equivalents. My 21mm f2.8 Zeiss is a cracker on the MM and trounces the CV 21mm P in the outer field and corners, but the CV has the charm of imperfection. BTW this 21P is perfectly centered (second copy) and so there is a natural and equal fall off in resolution towards the edges.
If you can find a 21mm or 25mm CV lens that can resolve as well across the frame as a ZM/Leica on a Leica FF digital M, you have done very well indeed. Then there are the colour shifts, which dont matter on the MM of course.
agoglanian
Reconnected.
Yeah in all reality I am not TOO picky, and I don't pixel peep, but with those corners being so unmistakably soft, and the right side being slightly better than the left, I suppose I could just deal with it, but I admit I would like to try a real good copy. The Zeiss would be great, as my other lenses are Zeiss, but until I start shooting 21mm as more of a main lens I see no reason to invest in a better one.
BTW, I love your articles Tom! I came across your site a few months back and I really enjoyed what you had to say. I do hope it's something you continue to do.
BTW, I love your articles Tom! I came across your site a few months back and I really enjoyed what you had to say. I do hope it's something you continue to do.
Dez.
Member
The CV 21/4 has huge huge copy variations. There is is a real good shooter who posts in FM leica thread who tried 4 before he got a really great one. Even then he needed to stop down a lot, like f/11 before the corners came in. But he does some fantastic work with it.
My copy is only soso on M9 on the edges, I wish it was better, because the lens is so tiny.
The CV 21/1.8 is meant to be excellent, but it's a monster. Fantastic event tool, however.
I agree the upcoming CV 15 redesign looks very interesting.
My copy of the CV 21/4 was unusable on my M9. Not only were there huge color shifts at the edge of frame, but it was unacceptably soft outside the very center of frame, even stopped down, and to make matters worse I found the the colors to be muddy and lack any kind of "pop".
I do wanted to like that lens, but it turned out to be a huge waste of money and I got rid of mine as soon as I could.
Share: