Anyone happy with the CV 28 F2/M8?

[SteveRD1]

I sold my Leica 28 Elmarit ASPH to fund a 28 Cron but silly me...I saw this CV 28 F2 for a fraction of what a used cron would cost and had to try it out.

It arrived today but man, my first impression is disappointment. Soft corners, dull color, flat looking images, vignetting, and not very sharp IMO. My Elmarit killed this lens in every area.

I needed a faster 28 for some even shooting I have coming up and it does not appear that this one will fill the bill. I will do a bunch of shooting with it all week and see how it does in the real world, but I have my doubts after seeing the first shots I took with it.

Anyway, is anyone here happy with the CV 28 F2 on the M8? If so, do you have any pics to share?

Thanks!

[Avotius]

I think yours might have a problem, the general consensus on this lens is that it is up to par with the big boys on many levels. I had the opportunity to play with the older 1.9 28mm voigtlander once on a fellows m8 at a photo exhibition and that was already very nice so I think you might have a dud.

[BillBlackwell]

There is something wrong with your Ultron.

I tested the CV 28mm Ultron f/2 against the Leica 28mm Summicron f/2 and they were surprisingly close (I dare say dead-even wide open). The CV falls off (not just in the corners) when stopped down while the Summicron remains consistently sharp at all stops. Other than the slight differences in color rendition, the Ultron remains substantially contrasty and is still a serious contender at roughly 15% the price of a Summicron. If I didn't already have the Summicron, I would have been perfectly happy with the Ultron.

I would suggest returning your Ultron to the seller for a refund or replacement.

Slight vignetting wide open is normal - even the Summicron does that.

[SteveRD1]

Thanks guys..may have a dud. I will try another before throwing in the towel on it because if it is close, it is a huge savings over a cron (though I know the cron is the holy grail in a 28 F2 lens) and I could use all of the savings I can get. Thanks again...

[BillBlackwell]

If you're using the lens on an M8, do not return it until you've tried it with an IR/CUT filter.

The Ultron I tested was 6-bit coded (as a Summicron) and I used a UV/IR CUT filter. If you are not at least using an IR/CUT filter, I would suggest what you may be looking at is the cyan shift in the corners (not vignetting).

[BillBlackwell]

The more I think about it, the more I think this is your problem.

Try the IR/CUT filter - I am sure you will see a noted improvement. Once the mount is coded the firmware will adjust the color banding from center to corner.

Contact John Milich - JM [at] milich [dot] com for information on coding the mount (last I knew only $25 - shipping included).

[SteveRD1]

I do have an IR filter but when its on the corners are CYAN as its not coded. With it off, I just have the standard vignetting BUT here is what I think happened.

I have been shooting my Elmarit ASPH for 2 months, almost daily. I was so used to the files from that lens being sharp and snappy and when I saw the 1st around the house shots from the Ultron they seemed dull, flat and soft BUT only because I was used to the Elmarit ASPH.

I have taken many more shots..outside, inside, low light, bright light and this lens renders in a totally different way than the Elmarit. I suspect more like a cron.

So after I took more shots and processed a few RAWs it is growing on me, and I am enjoying this different look. For landscape I can see the Elmarit being much nicer, but for people I can see the Ultron coming out ahead.

Sorry for my early negative rant, but I think it was just my mind not being used to that different look after seeing Elmarit shots day in and day out!

I'll see about coding it through John. I also saw some kit at popflash to code. Any experience with that?

Anyway, I think the lens is fine and here is a quick JPEG mirror shot at F2...

http://stevehuffphotos.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p358317298.jpg

BTW, I did a quick test for focus shift (just a quick, sloppy one) and found none at all so far - Took some test shots at F2, 2.8, 4 and 5.6 - At 2.8 it is sharper than F2 for sure, and at F4 it seems about the same as 2.8.

Ill end up putting all of my samples and write up at my site in a couple of weeks or so. Anyway, thanks again for the responses.

Steve

[BillBlackwell]

Steve:

The coding kit at Popflash will do fine. The device perfectly lines up the six-bit "block" where the lens needs to the coded. Use a sharpie, or some other permanent black marker (only the black marks need to be used) - recode periodically as the ink wears off.

Personally, all of my lenses are permanently coded by either Leica or John Milich.

[BillBlackwell]

A listing of 6-bit codes can be found here:

http://digital-leica.com/lens_codes/

[Photon42]

Steve:

The coding kit at Popflash will do fine. The device perfectly lines up the six-bit "block" where the lens needs to the coded. Use a sharpie, or some other permanent black marker (only the black marks need to be used) - recode periodically as the ink wears off.

Personally, all of my lenses are permanently coded by either Leica or John Milich.

Yes the coding kit really works nice. As a side note, it's reported the CV 2.0/28 AFAIK does have a flange with a circular recess. So the ink may not wear off quickly.

Regards
Ivo

[SteveRD1]

I went out today and shot some subjects that I shot with my Elmarit, and no question. This Ultron is SOFT in the corners where my Elmarit was sharp as can be. Also, it is much softer in the center at all apertures than the Elmarit. I guess the question is, how sharp is the summicron?

Here is a quick compare, just web sized but you can see what I mean. The 1st shot was taken with the Elmarit a few weeks ago. The second with the Ultron. Look at the bottom and the corners as well as the tree on the side. It is pretty soft on the Ultron and both are at 2.8.

Is this normal behavior for the ultron or do I have a bad copy?

Elmarit ASPH at 2.8
http://stevehuffphotos.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p905235801.jpg

Ultron at 2.8
http://stevehuffphotos.zenfolio.com/img/v8/p827625111.jpg

Here is a quick shot where soft corners dont really matter, at F2

http://stevehuffphotos.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p726055812.jpg

If the soft corners and soft overall IQ at 100% is normal for this lens I may keep it for portrait/street and pick up another Elmarit for my landscape/building shots as it excelled at that. Or I can return the Ultron and go for the 28 Cron as I was originally going to do.

Not sure...

[BillBlackwell]

In my limited testing of the Ultron with the Summicron I can't say the differences were all that dramatic. Once again, the most obvious differences were in color saturation. However, the Summicron is certainly sharper than the Ultron stop-to-stop (they are only comparable wide open). Also, keep in mind you're comparing a high performance German sedan to a Toyota Corolla.

Reserve final judgment until you have tried the Ultron 6-bit coded (the kit isn't a bad idea particularly for this case) with a UV/IR filter. And I wouldn't completely rule out that you might have a bum copy of the Ultron.

The Ultron does indeed have the recessed mount, so the “sharpie” coding should last for some time.

[SteveRD1]

Just want to make sure this is normal as it may be with this lens. Wide open, the bottom half of the frame/corners is soft. By F8 they are much better but still not 100% crisp, but that is fine.

If this is normal behavior at F2 for this lens then I know my copy is fine, and that it is just how it is. If so, I will probably keep the lens as the price was good, and I am finding that I am liking this lens for people, and I can shoot my barns and landscapes at F8 if need be.

Anyway, here is a link to a full size shot at F2 with soft bottom corners:
http://www.pbase.com/stevehuff/image/111610004

Then one at F8:
http://www.pbase.com/stevehuff/image/111610001

Anyone that shoots this lens with an M8, let me know if this looks normal for this lens. It seems when wide open, it is soft at the bottom 1/4 of the frame but not really the top.

[Doug]

I noticed that your Ultron looks softer at bottom than top in that Hospital photo, but some more testing where the subject matter is about the same across the field would be more definitive. From that photo and from what you say, I'd suspect there's something wrong with that Ultron. Maybe send it to importer CameraQuest for a look-see.

I have had the Voigtlander Skopar 28 and now happily use the Summicron. Both of those are great lenses, but the Summicron has the speed and is widely considered the best 28 for the M8.

[BillBlackwell]

Your lens is fine.

Looking at the pics in post #11 the corners are out of focus because you're shooting at f/2 (the corners fall outside of the DOF plane for f/2). The bottom shot of the flowers reflects this as well. The objects that fall into the image plane for f/2 are in focus (even in the corners) - see the bottom left. Everything is in focus in the top shot of the hospital because everything falls within the DOF plane for f/8. If you shoot a flat surface, such as a target, you will find the entire image field will be in focus at f/2.

[SteveRD1]

You know, I thought that myself about an hour ago. I realized the shot of the antenna on the roof was at F2 and the bottom was OOF not soft. My mistake. Anyway, I shot the lens quite a bit today and got many keepers and I really do like the lens.

The hospital shots above..the top one was at 2.8 with the Elmarit and the bottom with the Ultron at 2.8 and that one does show some soft corners where the Elmarit shot does not.

Still, I am liking the smooth look of the files, and the lower contrast compared to the Elmarit for everyday real world shots. Ill post more later in the week, but after going through all of the shots I think I will be keeping the Ultron and for now will buy the coder kit.

Thanks!

Steve

[Uwe_Nds]

I went out today and shot some subjects that I shot with my Elmarit, and no question. This Ultron is SOFT in the corners where my Elmarit was sharp as can be. Also, it is much softer in the center at all apertures than the Elmarit. I guess the question is, how sharp is the summicron?

Here is a quick compare, just web sized but you can see what I mean. The 1st shot was taken with the Elmarit a few weeks ago. The second with the Ultron. Look at the bottom and the corners as well as the tree on the side. It is pretty soft on the Ultron and both are at 2.8.

Is this normal behavior for the ultron or do I have a bad copy?

Elmarit ASPH at 2.8
[deleted]

Ultron at 2.8
http://stevehuffphotos.zenfolio.com/img/v8/p827625111.jpg

Here is a quick shot where soft corners dont really matter, at F2

[deleted]

If the soft corners and soft overall IQ at 100% is normal for this lens I may keep it for portrait/street and pick up another Elmarit for my landscape/building shots as it excelled at that. Or I can return the Ultron and go for the 28 Cron as I was originally going to do.

Not sure...

The two copies I tried were like that, if not worse.
Sent them back and got the Elmarit instead.

Cheers,
Uwe

[HenningW]

I've now tried two copies of the CV 28/2. They were essentially equal, and both disappointing. They matched your description in most regards. They had better contrast than the older 28/1.9 but both noticeably fell off to the corners and showed unacceptable focus shift on stopping down. Flare was better controlled in the new lens but not up to Summicron standards. The focus shift of the 28/2 CV is not as bad as on on the CV 35/1.4, but it is certainly beyond acceptable dof.

The difference with respect to the Summicron 28 is very noticeable and makes the CV lens uninteresting for use on M8's. My results paralleled Sean Reid's quite closely.

CV has (had) an excellent 28mm lens, the 3.5 but the attempts to match the Summicron have fallen short.

Henning

[ferider]

While I like the Color Skopar, I am very happy with my 1.9, Henning. Just because there is a new 28/2, doesn't mean it has to be used. Both Puts and Reid had only good to say about the old Ultron, and I'm always surprised that not more people use it still. Here is a reminder about Puts 1.9 comments:

At full aperture the lens exhibits low to medium contrast and definition of very fine detail is soft but very even over the image field extending till the corners. The extreme corners are very soft. Even finer details are resolved in the center, but rapidly become softer when going to the zonal area. There is no astimatism and only a very small amount of curvature of field. There is some barrel distortion, but quite small. At 2.8 the overall contrast improves and at f/4 the optimum is reached. After f/8 contrast lowers again and from there we see a softening of image details with every additional stop. This is usual behaviour. At f/4 we note a resolution over the whole image area of above 100 lp/mm. As a design philosphy this lens is a bit tuned to high resolution versus high contrast. Mechanically this lens is excellent: no decentring at all, collimation at zero.
: :
The Leica Summicron 28 has the advantage of superior mechanical engineering and materials. It also sports a visibly better imagery at wider apertures. Wide open there is no contest: Leica is still the one to beat. ... Stopped down it is a draw. The Ultron 28 is one third of the price of the Leica and delivers excellent, and close to outstanding imagery. .... To get some perspective: an older 28mm lens from Leica is blown to pieces by the Ultron.
: :
While the Summicron is still the one to beat, the Ultron delivers quality, that was unbelievable some years ago. Leica designers are challenged!!
: :
Where lenses today differ is in the mechanics, and the engineering quality and the performance at the wide apertures. But lenses are at such a high level that the user and the choice of film and the handling of the imaging chain become more impartant than ever. The most important factor now is the user expertise and expectancy. The Ultron is an amazingly good lens, that will satisfy the demands and expectations of many a photographer.

This is quite a good review for a 3rd party lens from somebody like Puts. And it matches my experience.

Cheers,

Roland.

[SteveRD1]

BTW, I have done a ton of testing and have found ZERO focus shift with this 28 and my M8. I am a bit disappointed in the softness as I do not consider this a sharp lens by any means, but so far I actually like it in real world shooting.

I have shot at every aperture looking for the focus shift and have not seen it at all.

F2
http://stevehuffphotos.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p117918443.jpg

F8
http://stevehuffphotos.zenfolio.com/img/v7/p341535107.jpg

F5.6
http://stevehuffphotos.zenfolio.com/img/v8/p182615742.jpg

[HenningW]

While I like the Color Skopar, I am very happy with my 1.9, Henning. Just because there is a new 28/2, doesn't mean it has to be used. Both Puts and Reid had only good to say about the old Ultron, and I'm always surprised that not more people use it still.

I'm sorry Roland; I guess it didn't come out properly in my comments but I found the older f/1.9 lens to be better and more useable on the M8 than the new f/2. The older lens had better resolution across the field and less focus shift. That definitely works better for me in spite of the lower contrast, which as Sean has pointed out, can be an advantage.

Henning

[RLG]

It is the only lens so far that I have been using on the M8. The lens is coded and used with a Leica IRcut filter. Generally I'm pleased with the results.
I think this shot was made at f 8.

[SteveRD1]

At F8 this lens is stellar - just as good as any Leica I have used. BUT since I have never tried a 28 Cron, I have one arriving tomorrow and I am doing a head to head against the Ultron in real world shooting, at all apertures. I will post the results at my site in a week or two. I want to see just how close they are for my style of shooting and if I can save a few bucks, that would be great.

But yea, from F4-F8, my copy of the Ultron is actually pretty amazing for the $$. I have found ZERO focus shift after 200 shots so far. I still see soft corners, but again, its a $500 lens not a $4000 lens. I do notice the pics with the CV are much duller than with my Leica lenses. They need much more work.

[jvr]

I'm sorry Roland; I guess it didn't come out properly in my comments but I found the older f/1.9 lens to be better and more useable on the M8 than the new f/2. The older lens had better resolution across the field and less focus shift. That definitely works better for me in spite of the lower contrast, which as Sean has pointed out, can be an advantage.

Henning

Haven't been posting for a while: just taking photos. :D

But since I own and have used both "fast" 28 CV (the f1.9 and the new f2) and the 28/2 Summicron ASPH, maybe I ought to share my experience.

I've used all the lenses in 4 bodies: a Epson R-D1s, a Leica M8, a Leica M3 and a Minolta CLE. In every occasion, all the lenses are easily recognizeable by looking at the pictures, especially when flare may be a problem and/or wide-open. Anyway, all the lenses are relatively low-contrast (I mean, lower than a Skopar type lens or a Elmar, but higher than, say, a Jupiter-9 or old Canon). For me, that's a bonus on digital and a non-issue in film (I scan and print digitally and painfully learned that high-contrast slides or B&W negs look great but scan bad, even with my Coolscan 4000ED...).

Please keep in mind that, IMHO, film and digital cameras are different beasts and even in digital, the Epson and the M8 are very different (that's why I still keep the Epson).

First of all, the Summicron ASPH is the "best" lens of them all, at least on pure technical grounds. It'd better be, looking at the price. I consider it a fantastic lens and worth of the price, if you can afford it. Most pictures are keepers, rgd technique. My Summicron is the "de facto" lens on my M8 (where it alternates with the UC-Hexanon, another fantastic lens). Most of the times, I simply take the 28 Cron, the 21/2.8 Zeiss and the CV 50/1.5 Ultron and I would be incredibly happy shooting all my life with these lenses.

On film, the Summicron also excels. Unfortunately, on _my_ Epson (and I stress "my"), the Summicron does not focus perfectly (which is a mistery, since my Epson focuses perfectly my CV 35/1.2 Ultron wide-open, as accurate as my M8 does...). When used stopped down, that is not an issue and even wide-open, local contrast is so good that even slightly misfocused pictures are perfectly ok to A4 size.

But the Cron is very expensive, really.

So expensive that my first 28 "fast" lens was a CV 28/1.9, that I used for long in my Epson and on the M8 for a while. I have a love/hate relationship with this lens. My best pictures with it are incredibly good (this lens has a way of drawing in B&W that still fascinates me, even after all these years) but my worse pictures can really irritate me. My major gripe a very annoying veiling flare that can sometimes appear. It's much better with a deeper hood (good for the Epson, bit of vignetting on the Leica, unusable on film) but even then sometimes I get a "weird" shot that really infuriates me. That also happens in film but digital is worse (could it be that the CCD is more reflective and "interacts" more with almost flat rear element? Who knows?). On a lower level of complain, color balance is not as accurate (warm and different from other CV lens I own) and the lens is "bigger" than the Summicron. Apart from that, the 28/1.9 Ultron is a very good lens. It resolves almost as well as the Summicron, although the lower global contrast makes the photos less "poppy". Nothing a good contrast bump can't equalize. Pity about the flare and the color balance. Also, especially on the Epson, corners are worse than the Summicron, with a "strange" drawing pattern that makes things look like they are "moving". probably, that has to do with the light strinking on a more accute angle. It's even more noticing on OOF things, so bokeh in the corners can be "weird". On film, I don't feel that so much and the special sensor on the M8 goes a long way to eradicate that problem (together with fall-off).

The new CV is, again, different. In most ways, is closer to the Summicron than to the old Ultron: improved veiling flare control, color rendition (slighlty cooler than the Summicron but more accurate - as in "more like all my other lenses" - than the old Ultron), size, contrast. My sample resolves less than both the Summicron and the old Ultron but the difference is of no consequence in real printing. Corners are always worse than the Summicron and it's not only "resolution". My sample shows the same kind of "movement drawing" in the corners that the old version shows (btw, we can easily see this kind of drawing on the corners of the photos posted in this thread!) and contrast is lower (the Summicron is just perfect for the M8 sensor, IMHO). Again, most of the times those differences are of no consequence. But there is the odd shot where it shows up and can be annoying. I really can't detect any focus shift that worries me on the new Ultron. In that regard, is much better than the CV 35/1.4 (I bought one and sent it back after 2 days).

Why did I buy the new Ultron? First, because I really like to experiment around... :) Second, because I had the idea I could use it and sell my Summicron and keep the difference... :) But truth is, everytime I open up a few files from the Summicron, I have the feeling I'll regret the decision later. And so, since I bought it, the new Ultrom has stayed on my Epson and doing a very good job there. While, at the same time, my old Ultron now sits on my CLE and sometimes even graces my M3 (both bodies usually loaded with the month's fashion of B&W film).

So, until now, I kept all three lenses... :)

Summary...

The old Ultron is a very different lens from both the Summicron ASPH and the new Ultron and it provides a look that's not very different from my older lenses (Leica, Canon). So different, that I bought a Summicron... On the other hand, I am sure that, if I had the new Ultron, I would never have bought the Summicron, as the overall performance of the Ultron 28/2 is more than enough for me (I can't say the same about the old one, espcially because of color rendering and, most of all, flare). But, again, the old Ultron has a way of drawing in B&W that can be breathtaking (maybe high resolution, together with low overall contrast, gives lots of shades of gray? A bit like my old Leica lenses?). The Summicron seems to get the best of both and add a few things on top (perfect focus, perfect global contrast, mechanical handling, color rendition, etc).

If I was in the market for a low-cost Summicron, the new Ultron is a no-brain buy. And, I guess, the reason why I'm keeping it is because I know, one day, I'll get reasonable and sell the Cron to someone even pickier than myself... :)

Someday, when I have the time, I'll try to take out all three lenses and try them, side-by-side, on the real world. Most diferences show-up in controlled testing but their impact in "real" photography is all it matters in the end, at least IMHO.

BTW, sometimes I feel we are spoiled by quality in this digital and 100% magnification on 19in screens era : I scanned all my slides, B&W and color negs (20k+) and I could not believe the amount of misfocused, camera-shaken, grainy and low-resolution-lensed photos I took in the past... :) But fact is, most of them would withstand a projection on a big screen, let alone a print to 30x40cm (the biggest print I've ever made from 35mm). On the other hand, it was remarkable to see how good my leica lenses from the 50s were.

BR,
Joao

[RLG]

Thanks jvr for all this information. Having read reflections of different users of the Ultron 28 2.0 I started doubting if I have made a good choice. At a moment I even considered of selling it and buying an Elmarit instead. Anyway, the wallet is empty after buying the M8, so I'll keep on using the Ultron 28 2.0 on the M8 (I purchased the lens for use on my Bessa R2M but had never used it with the Bessa).

Best

[ferider]

I have tried a variety of CV lenses, multiple copies sometimes (including the 28/1.9). One thing is sure for me: If you have a good copy, keep it.

Reg. the 28/1.9 flare, it is true, it flares easier than my other 28mm lenses. I've not experienced "veiling flare" though (as I understand it), only contrast sudden degradation and ghosts when getting close to very bright light.

One of the major reasons why I like it is it's color rendition. It does something that I only know from other CV S.C. lenses, and from lenses from the 60s, like the Nikkor 50/1.4. I guess this is another version of what jky wrote about B+W rendering.

Roland.

[Tom Niblick]

So, tell us again exactly why you sold your 28 Elmarit ASPH. After all was this not THE lens designed to go with the M8? Was it too contrasty? Too edgy? Did you really need F2?

I'm not giving you grief. I'm just curious.

Tom

[Tom Niblick]

Never mind. I read your blog. Who can argue with a 28 cron?

While CV lenses are good, the 28 and 35 crons are legendary.

Now you'll have to sell lots of advertising to pay for it.

[rwchisholm]

My first CV 28 f2 was a dog -- terribly soft. Sent it back to Cameraquest for a replacement -- Love the replacement - sharp, nice, good colors. Rob

[SteveRD1]

Hey guys,

I sold my Elmarit as i wanted a faster 28. I have an event coming up on Sunday and I could use F2! I ended up buying and keeping the 28 Summicron. Got it for $2400 plus shipping used, mint in box. Also put up my write ups and comparisons of both just a few minutes ago.

Thanks!

[sreidvt]

At F8 this lens is stellar - just as good as any Leica I have used. BUT since I have never tried a 28 Cron, I have one arriving tomorrow and I am doing a head to head against the Ultron in real world shooting, at all apertures. I will post the results at my site in a week or two. I want to see just how close they are for my style of shooting and if I can save a few bucks, that would be great.

But yea, from F4-F8, my copy of the Ultron is actually pretty amazing for the $$. I have found ZERO focus shift after 200 shots so far. I still see soft corners, but again, its a $500 lens not a $4000 lens. I do notice the pics with the CV are much duller than with my Leica lenses. They need much more work.

What methodology are you using to test for focus shift and what increments are you using for focus bracketing series sets to establish base resolution wide open?

[sreidvt]

... Flare was better controlled in the new lens but not up to Summicron standards. The focus shift of the 28/2 CV is not as bad as on on the CV 35/1.4, but it is certainly beyond acceptable dof.

The difference with respect to the Summicron 28 is very noticeable and makes the CV lens uninteresting for use on M8's. My results paralleled Sean Reid's quite closely.

CV has (had) an excellent 28mm lens, the 3.5 but the attempts to match the Summicron have fallen short.

Henning

Hi Henning,

I just saw this post for the first time. It's interesting to note that your focus shift results are among those that corollate with what I saw in my testing.

Ironically, Stephen Gandy had cited you (to me) as one of the people who tested and found no focus shift with the 28/2.0. I think there must have been a misunderstanding somewhere.

Best,

Sean