Go Back   Rangefinderforum.com > Cameras / Gear / Photography > Leicas and other Leica Mount Cameras > Voigtlander Bessa Leica Mount Cameras

Voigtlander Bessa Leica Mount Cameras Made in Japan by Cosina in partnership with Voigtlander, the many modern Voigtlander Leica Screw Mount and Leica M mount bodies offer inexpensive and often unique options into entering the world of Leica rangefinder photography.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes

Steve Huff Review Voigtlander 35/1.7 vs ZM 35/1.4
Old 09-23-2015   #1
CameraQuest
Head Bartender
 
CameraQuest is offline
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: over the hills from Malibu
Posts: 5,280
Steve Huff Review Voigtlander 35/1.7 vs ZM 35/1.4

see http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2015/0...t-lens-review/

Test done on Sony A7rII



Chrome and Black versions of the Voigtlander 35/1.7 M



the current production Voigtlander Leica Mount 35mm lenses,
35/2.5 P Color Skopar, 35/1.7 Ultron in black and chrome, 35/1.2 Nokton Version II



black Voigtlander 35/1.7 M Ultron mounted on Leica M-P



New optical formula, highly corrected very sharp fast 35mm lens designed for digital sensors

Great sharpness with minimum color shift

Styled like the 50/1.5 Nokton M Aspheric in classic chrome or black aluminum lens barrel

f/1.7 to f/16 in clicked half stops

9 elements in 7 groups, one aspherical

close focus .7meters with rangefinder coupling, scale focusing to .5 meter

46mm filter size

Dedicated LH-9 B Black or LH-9 C Silver Vented Lens Hood optional

Weight Chrome 11.6 oz, Black 8.4 oz

Size 50.6mm x 53mm

63 degree field of view on full frame 35mm

10 aperture blades for pleasing bokeh

Will fit ANY Leica M mount camera, as well as all Sony NEX, M43, Fuji X and digital mirrorless cameras via adapters
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-23-2015   #2
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
 
bobby_novatron's Avatar
 
bobby_novatron is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: the Great White North (Canada)
Age: 47
Posts: 1,224
Cool -- thanks for sharing this.
__________________
my Flickr:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bobby_novatron
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #3
viboons
Registered User
 
viboons is online now
Join Date: Nov 2010
Posts: 46
Thank, it was an informative and good review.

I'm also considering purchase this lens and searching the comparison between the 35mm f2 ZM and the 35mm new Ultron on M. They are both similar in price and size and only half stop aperture different.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #4
Dante_Stella
Rex canum cattorumque
 
Dante_Stella's Avatar
 
Dante_Stella is offline
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 1,504
Actually, not that helpful. Using a Sony A7-series camera - which is all but guaranteed to give poor corners with any wide - tends to obscure a pretty important performance metric (if he ran the "against all other tests" with corner detail, I'd wager that the Sony/Zeiss lens would crush the others on this camera).

I'm sure this is a great lens. But I question the premise of "value shopping" among expensive lenses on a system that can't take advantage of them.

Also, what's with the shiny chrome finish? Lots of "revival" RF lenses use a sandblasted, somewhat cool-tone chrome that is at least an ok match for various chrome and chrome-like camera bodies (in fact, a lot of the details look so close that I'd almost wager that one metalworking or finishing shop served Ricoh, Pentax, Konica, Rollei, Avenon, etc.). Putting a highly polished lens on a matte chrome body just looks weird (unless it's an adapted Opton Sonnar - but that only works because the Sonnar is so small and has so much detailing that you don't immediately notice it's shiny).

Dante
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #5
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante_Stella View Post
Also, what's with the shiny chrome finish?


Dante
I've been using the 50mm f/1.5 in shiny chrome for about two years. Sandblasted chrome is very sensible for scratches. Not a single scratch on my shiny Nokton so far.

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #6
Vobluda
Registered User
 
Vobluda is offline
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Prague, Czech Republic
Age: 41
Posts: 825
Wow, SH "review" as reference on the RFF. I wouldn't think that I will live up to see it!
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #7
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 3,423
The lens is showing pretty severe field curvature. Look at the shot of his friend in the gym. The writing on the wall is legible on the left side, but blurs out in the middle.

No mention of this in his review.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #8
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,193
There are many excellent options for 35mm RF lenses these days. This by itself is great. I believe that Stephen and Steve both will agree with me that some factors for choosing a 35mm lens are personal preferences. How many photographers (anywhere) really "need" a perfect 35mm lens in their photography, compared to a 35mm lens that is "95% perfect"?


The modern CV lenses obviously are first class lenses. They are excellent deals with respect to the cost, as compared with Leica lenses. Zeiss ZM lenses are also great lenses at fair prices, as compared with Leica lenses.

The live view FF cameras also allow us to use excellent SLR 35mm lenses now. While such lenses are larger in size than most comparable RF 35mm lenses, they are "free" (in my closet).

It is great that we have so many options available to us. The rest is about using the lenses to obtain great looking images.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #9
horosu
Registered User
 
horosu is offline
Join Date: Jul 2006
Age: 43
Posts: 414
Steve Huff is enthusiastic about every new lens he tests. It' s always better than the last one :-)

I would wait for Sean Reid's opinion, but so far I'm not impressed
__________________
Leica M240, MP, 35 Summilux, Summicron 50

My 500px
My Flickr
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #10
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
 
bobby_novatron's Avatar
 
bobby_novatron is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: the Great White North (Canada)
Age: 47
Posts: 1,224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
The lens is showing pretty severe field curvature. Look at the shot of his friend in the gym. The writing on the wall is legible on the left side, but blurs out in the middle.

No mention of this in his review.
It would be interesting to see a comparo between this lens as shot on the Sony -- then used on an M9 or M240.

Something tells me that the Voigtlander as well as the Zeiss Distagon would perform even better on a native RF body.

The A7rII is a great camera, but it seems to stuggle with lenses that aren't E-mount.
__________________
my Flickr:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bobby_novatron
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #11
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by Huss View Post
The lens is showing pretty severe field curvature. Look at the shot of his friend in the gym. The writing on the wall is legible on the left side, but blurs out in the middle.

No mention of this in his review.
You are not looking at "the field" (focus plane).

Also agree with everybody else, why not test on an M ? Guessing, SH gets more readers that way.

Stephen, I have the hardest time pushing the button on this one - because it would make my 35/1.4 SC obsolete.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #12
Monochrom
Registered User
 
Monochrom's Avatar
 
Monochrom is offline
Join Date: May 2012
Posts: 1,025
ZM 35 1.4 is huge
__________________
M9 Vc 28/3.5 Ltm 5/3.5
Leica IIIF Black Paint
Fuji Gf670
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #13
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferider View Post

Stephen, I have the hardest time pushing the button on this one - because it would make my 35/1.4 SC obsolete.
It will free you from quite a lot of barrel-distortion.

Erik.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #14
raid
Dad Photographer
 
raid's Avatar
 
raid is offline
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Florida
Posts: 27,193
I am satisfied (now) with the 35/2.
__________________
- Raid

________________
Top 12 Images;

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffg...n.php?cid=7007

http://raid.smugmug.com/
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #15
bobby_novatron
Photon Collector
 
bobby_novatron's Avatar
 
bobby_novatron is offline
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: the Great White North (Canada)
Age: 47
Posts: 1,224
Quote:
Originally Posted by Monochrom View Post
ZM 35 1.4 is huge
Not as big as the Distagon in E-mount. It looks twice as big as the ZM-mount version.
__________________
my Flickr:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/bobby_novatron
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #16
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,316
Leica MP, Ultron-M 35mm f/1.7, Tmax400.

Erik.

  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #17
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,800
Quote:
Originally Posted by Dante_Stella View Post
Actually, not that helpful. Using a Sony A7-series camera - which is all but guaranteed to give poor corners with any wide - tends to obscure a pretty important performance metric (if he ran the "against all other tests" with corner detail, I'd wager that the Sony/Zeiss lens would crush the others on this camera).

I'm sure this is a great lens. But I question the premise of "value shopping" among expensive lenses — on a system that can't take advantage of them.

Dante
Huff testing on the A7 is exactly to the point of many many buyers.

Why is the CV 15v3 a success? Because it shoots well on the Sonys. This has increased sales of that lens by 10x or more.

Obviously we all know how the Sony sensor, with it's thick cover, hates most RF 35s and loves none. The Native 35/2.8 is very good (if you get a good one), but awful to manual focus.

Many Sony users dream of a good RF 35 for their camera.

What about M240 or M9? 1) test shots are out and it's real good. 2) How many good 35s are there for M9? I can't even count. The lens is squarely aimed at Sony users who love M glass.

In fact this looks to be the best yet RF 35 for the A7 series.

Not that you can tell from the "review". I like Steve, and I have seen him really do a good review of lenses, but not for some time. He once did a CV 28/2 versus 28 Cron review that was excellent. This one shows his recent trend where practically everything you see is wide open with a central subject. His one wider test shot is way too close to see the real sony issues, and a single aperture only. Why he won't compare 35/2.8 to the ultron at multiple apertures, with long shots included, I don't know, because it's not that hard and it would be very helpful for many users.

But Steve does what he likes and people like it . I have learned lots of stuff reading various pieces he's done over the years. I have two great camera bags thanks to him. Also he has done a service to Voigtander and our bartender in this review, which has a huge exposure. He is quite honest about the way he tests, as well, not claiming to be lloyd or Sean or even Ming
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #18
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,316
Leica MP, Ultron-M 35mm f/1.7, Tmax400.

Erik.

  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #19
ferider
Registered User
 
ferider's Avatar
 
ferider is offline
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 11,094
Quote:
Originally Posted by uhoh7 View Post
The lens is squarely aimed at Sony users who love M glass.
You said this before and I wasn't sure. I thought about it, have been browsing ebay, and now I agree. If you want a "clean" (high resolution, no distortion, etc.), f2 or faster RF 35mm, in the < 2000$ ballpark, you basically have 3 choices: (1) Summicron ASPH, (2) ZM Biogon, and (3) this one. For my M, I probably would pick a Biogon. (3) is the only one that doesn't smear corners on the A7.

Roland.
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #20
Saul
fighting inertia
 
Saul's Avatar
 
Saul is offline
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Baltimore MD
Posts: 326
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vobluda View Post
Wow, SH "review" as reference on the RFF. I wouldn't think that I will live up to see it!
Look at the first line under the third photo in the review
  Reply With Quote

Old 09-24-2015   #21
uhoh7
Registered User
 
uhoh7 is offline
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 2,800
Quote:
Originally Posted by ferider View Post
You said this before and I wasn't sure. I thought about it, have been browsing ebay, and now I agree. If you want a "clean" (high resolution, no distortion, etc.), f2 or faster RF 35mm, in the < 2000$ ballpark, you basically have 3 choices: (1) Summicron ASPH, (2) ZM Biogon, and (3) this one. For my M, I probably would pick a Biogon. (3) is the only one that doesn't smear corners on the A7.

Roland.
I did get a Biogon, after alot of reading, for my M9. On the A7.mod it's actually usable, but still not as good as M9.

Someday I might get a asph. or who knows? Maybe an Ultron, which I bet would just smoke on a Kolari A7.

The trump of the asph is the form factor.
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2015   #23
trip-xa
Registered User
 
trip-xa is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 94
I am wondering why in the head bartender's OP and on the CQ website the Voigtlander 35mm family photo omits the Nokton 35mm f1.4. I get that it's not in this discussion and doesn't rival the lenses dicussed here, but it is still available and offers value for a film M shooter looking for a 35mm lens.
__________________
- Dan

Leica M2, Olympus OM-1n (black), Yashica Mat (Lumaxar), marathon runner

http://www.flickr.com/photos/danfogel
  Reply With Quote

Old 10-20-2015   #24
Erik van Straten
Registered User
 
Erik van Straten's Avatar
 
Erik van Straten is offline
Join Date: May 2008
Posts: 5,316
It is a great lens for film.

Leica M2, Nokton-M 35mm f/1.7, Tmax400.

Erik.

  Reply With Quote

Old 02-05-2017   #25
Huss
Registered User
 
Huss is offline
Join Date: Sep 2014
Location: Venice, CA
Posts: 3,423
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erik van Straten View Post
It is a great lens for film.

Leica M2, Nokton-M 35mm f/1.7, Tmax400.

Erik.
Excellent photo. I should see if I have any TMAX in my freezer.
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 20:14.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.