Thoughts on Voigtlander Lens Quality

[JHenry]

I know there is lots of continued debate and discussions about the build quality of different M-mount lenses. Many different camps on this issue, and probably more opinions than people who actually use the lenses.

I thought long and hard before my recent lens purchases, and did lots of online research. Sure, if you have the money, Leica might be the way to go--great build quality, excellent optics, and the glass probably won't depreciate in value over time. But, not everybody has that kind of money, or some think that the 90% solution at 10-20% the cost is good value.

I was also a bit concerned about the build quality of Zeiss and Voigtlander lenses. I have two ZM lenses (35mm C-Biogon and 50mm Planar) and the VC 35mm f1.2 Nokton; the build quality of those is good, but nothing to write home about. Endless threads on the Zeiss lens wobble, or the less-than-stellar quality control of Voigtlander lenses. I had all these in my mind when I was in Japan last week and wanted to pick up a few lenses to finish rounding out my kit and in preparation for a few serious trips this year. I bought the Voigtlander 15mm f4.5 and the new 75mm f1.8.

I have to say, for anybody who is thinking about buying Voigtlander lenses, that the build quality of these lenses is INCREDIBLE, especially the 75mm. Sure, the build quality isn't as important as the optical quality, but it matters (and, from what I've seen so far, the optical quality is also great).

These lenses exude quality in your hand. The finish is great, the aperture rings moves cleanly from one stop to the next, the focus ring glides smoothly along the entire range. The 75mm, in hand, feels as good as any Leica glass I've ever held. In the Osaka store where I purchased the lenses they had large selection of Lecia glass, and I even got to hold a 24mm Summilux--the VC 75mm felt as solid as the Summilux.

Not trying to start a waging battle here about Voigtlander vs. Leica vs. Zeiss glass. Just wanted to put my two cents out there for others who are considering future purchases. Maybe it was an issue in the past, but it seems that Voigtlander/Cosina is improving their build quality and quality control, and the results I've seen are outstanding. I should note that the build quality of the 15mm and 75mm far exceed that of my 35mm Nokton, and feel significantly better than my 90mm Summicron APO.

I also purchased the 15-35mm zoom viewfinder...amazing. The only bad thing about it is that it is so bright and clear that it makes looking through the M9 or M7 viewfinder like looking through a black hole.

Hope the new 35mm Nokton vII has the same quality--might cause me to upgrade.

All the best,

Jeff

[gavinlg]

Yeah I agree, the modern voigtlanders are seriously nicely built. Same with the Zeiss ZE lenses for canon though - no lesser build than a leica.

[SolaresLarrave]

Count my vote in. I also am impressed with their products. I have just the Nokton 35mm f1.4, and can report my satisfaction.

[presspass]

The build quality seemed erratic on the older CV lenses, but I've never had a problem with any I've had - 15 ltm, 20 ltm 4.0, 35 ltm 1.7. I'm looking forward to a 75 1.8 and a new 35 1.2 in the near future. If they're up to the ZM lenses I have, I'll be more than satisfied.

[MC JC86]

The reliability of their fit and finish seems to have increased, if based only on my own experiences. I had an R and 15mm a few years ago. The R was a very early one and had metering and frameline issues.. Nothing huge, I just couldn't rely on the meter and and bottom and top frame lines where not parallel to the ground. The 15mm was optically very good but the built in petal shaped hood seemed poorly machined or finished.

Just recently I have received the 90mm F/3.5 Lanthar, and I was astounded by how much better it was that previous products I had owned. Afterwards I bought a Bessa R2S and 21mm F/4 S.C. with VF (from Cameraquest)... all are excellent, things seem to gotten a lot better. The Bessa still doesn't handle like my Nikon RFs but fit and finish has definitely improved. Wouldn't hesitate to buy anything with the Voigtlander name on it.

[drew.saunders]

I've had a 15/4.5 LTM for several years. When threaded to an adaptor for M-mount, it doesn't quite center properly on the camera, which doesn't affect image quality, but indicates a problem with the lens or CV adaptor.

I picked up a 50/1.5 and 50/75 M adaptor in late 2007 and it's been solid ever since. I just got a 21/4 and 75/1.8, and I agree, they're very well made. I'm scanning the negatives from my test of the 21 and 75 right now, and am impressed with the results. My Leica lenses are likely better, but the CV ones are really very nice. I have a 24/2.8 ASPH and it's huge, so I might get a CV 25/4 just for the compactness. I'll keep the Leica 24, there's no way I could afford to buy another one to replace it, even used.

[sper]

I'm pretty impressed with the build quality. The 28 f2 is as solid as any Leica lens Ive used, and the Voigtlander 40mm f2 Ultron for Canon has the same build as Zeiss lenses with the added feature of the rubber grip, which I like.

I think the older LTM lenses are spotty. My 50mm Nokton 1.5 is super solid, but my 21mm F4 is just ok, Ive seen copies where the handle falls off.

In short, I recommend Voigtlander to anyone with few reservations. My one caveat is that lately it seems like CV is making more special effect lenses than I'd like, like the 35mm 1.4 or the 50mm 1.1. I like their straight forward designs like the 21 and the 28 Ultron, and the 40 for SLRs is straight up world class. It's better than the 50mm Zeiss in my opinion.

[jonmanjiro]

I've been saying the same thing for a few years now. IMO the major leap upward in build quality occured when Cosina started production of the VM mount lineup of lenses.

But even the LTM range of lenses are great IMO. Sure they may lack that tight, solid feel in some spots (aperture ring action feels a little sloppy etc.), but they're solid where it counts.

[Keith]

The two CV lenses I currently own (15mm Heliar and 35mm f1.2 Nokton) are incredibly well made IMO. If I have a minor criticism of the 35mm 1.2 Nokton it would be that it's easy to bump the aperture ring from your chosen setting ... it moves a little too freely which may just be my example!

[JHenry]

Keith: My copy of the Nokton is the same way. But, even with my short time with the 75mm 1.8 Heliar Classic, I don't think the aperture ring could be so easily bumped out of position.

sper: Agree that the recent lens announcements from Voigtlander have been more of a specialty variety (50mm f1.1, new 35mm f1.2, etc). But, there appears to be a market for those new offerings. Honestly, if Cosina came out with a 24mm f1.4, I'd be the first in line. I keep hoping someone will announce the ability for me to mount a wide angle black hole on the front my my camera--something that just sucks in all available light, letting none escape...and doesn't cost USD 6,000. If Cosina did a very fast wide angle lens with the quality I've seen from my new 75mm or 15mm, I'd readily drop USD 2,000 for it.

[Haigh]

I have a CV 28mm 1.9 and it is one solid piece of lens and tack sharp. I am about to get the 25mm f/4 color skopar for its lightness and it is so compact, weight being an issue for me. I have several Leica lenses.

[Krosya]

How well are the CV lenses built? It's hard to tell without actually having to open one and looking for yourself. I have done this with a few and all I can say is - not bad, but could be better. In some cases it's the design, in others - materials used, or even both. Yes, they did seem to improve finish. Yet some "DIY" improvments help in some cases. Some benefit from lubrication. Some with securing the screws here and there. All this can affect the final output - image and longevity. I think Cosina makes some superb glass and when lens is put together well - it can easily rival some of the best names on the market. I own many CV lenses - both M and LTM mount. And nearly all had to have a little work just to secure or adjust minor things. When it's done (and it's not hard to do in most cases) they become a much better lenses. So, while they are not as well made as let's say - M-Hexanons - which are superb out of the box, CV lenses are surely very good and thats the reason I have many. Could they be better built? SURE. Would they cost the same than? Not so sure. As it is they are increasing in price with each new version. All this being said - I'd have no problem recommending most of the CV lenses to a serious amature photographer. But I dont know if they would survive a real Pro use. But I still love them regardless.

[wjlapier]

My first CV lens was a 21 for Nikon mount. It felt cheap and loose. I sold it immediately and bought the Zeiss Biogon 21 ( 50's version ). I eventually sold the Biogon. Recently I bought the LTM version of the CV 21/4. I'm very impressed with it's build. Tiny. Focus is smooth and the aperture ring clicks nicely. And what a sharp lens.

[Haigh]

I am about to get the 25mm f/4 colour Scopar and am confident it will have the samr rock solid build as my 28mmm f/199 lens.

[Haigh]

Whoops: that should read f/1.9 of course. Apologies

[rbsinto]

I have no experience with Leica gear, and my rangefinder lenses are either Nikons or CVs in s-mount, but I think my experience is still applicable.
I had a CV 35 2.5 which I was very satisfied with in all respects and only sold because I got a good deal on a Nikkor 35 1.8.
I also have the CV 21 and 25 lenses and find them to be high quality, well built lenses that give me good well-exposed images. The 21 does produce some vignetting, but it is no worse than what I get with any of my other extremely wide lenses.
If Cosina had produced rangefinder lenses for Nikon that matched or exceeeded the comparable Nikkors in specs ( 28 3.5, 35 1.8, 85 f2, 105 2.5) based on my experience with the CV lenses I've owned, I would have purchased them rather than the Nikkors without hesitation.

[denizg7]

Originally Posted by JHenry

These lenses exude quality in your hand.

So I first picked up this 35mm 1.4 nokton from adorama, and 3 times in a row they sold me open box used items as new.Finally returned it.

Bought the one in stock from BH photo and it wasn't sealed but it was new.

Unfortunately there was some grease left on the outer glass on the front of the lens and on the back.

I tried,

Rubbing microfiber cloth with alcohol which made large sticky dust like particles that couldn't be blowed off (If I used a gentle lens brush it would simply reapply the particles into smudges)

Used a q tip with alcohol and did the same effect plus adding about 18 scratches on my new lens.

Finally bought lenspen and it distributed all the grease to the lens evenly and now it looks cloudy.

So I went by a lens service place in NY and they said they might have to do a full repair.

Oh and also the focusing ring is extremely stiff, this is at all my least problem

and I am all out of money.

cheers

[baycrest]

Originally Posted by denizg7

So I first picked up this 35mm 1.4 nokton from adorama, and 3 times in a row they sold me open box used items as new.Finally returned it.

Bought the one in stock from BH photo and it wasn't sealed but it was new.

Unfortunately there was some grease left on the outer glass on the front of the lens and on the back.

I tried,

Rubbing microfiber cloth with alcohol which made large sticky dust like particles that couldn't be blowed off (If I used a gentle lens brush it would simply reapply the particles into smudges)

Used a q tip with alcohol and did the same effect plus adding about 18 scratches on my new lens.

Finally bought lenspen and it distributed all the grease to the lens evenly and now it looks cloudy.

So I went by a lens service place in NY and they said they might have to do a full repair.

Oh and also the focusing ring is extremely stiff, this is at all my least problem

and I am all out of money.

cheers

Sorry to here about your bad experience.

I've got the CV 21, 35 f2.5, 35 f1.2 v1, & CV 40. I'm happy with them all. (the CV40, similar to the CV 35 Nokton, can produce some pretty jarring bokeh.

The only CV lens I didn't like was the 35 Nokton. When it first came out, I went to my CV shop here in HK, where I buy all most of my stuff and tried at least 4 copies. All of them exhibited a significant amount of focus shift.

Try the CV 35 f2.5, its a real winner IMO and also good value.

[rxmd]

I have five CV lenses as of now (21/f4, 28/f3.5, 35/f2.5, 40/f1.4, 50/f3.5) and am extremely happy with all of them.

[amin_sabet]

I've owned CV 35/1.4, 50/1.5, ZM 50/2, ZF 35/2, and ZF 50/2. All had wonderful build quality, and all were robust for as long as I owned them.

I don't have much experience with modern Leica lenses, and I don't doubt that lenses that cost 5-10X more than these lenses may have even nicer build quality, but the CV and ZM lenses didn't leave me wanting more in that department.

I also think that the CV lenses get a totally bogus rap in the bokeh department purely because they don't bear the Leica name. What qualifies as "character" on a pre-asph Leica is called "harsh" when the label says "Voigtlander".

[Jockos]

I had the 75/2.5, which was rock solid - no complaints at all.
The 35/2.5 classic, which had kind of a sloppy build/poor tolerances.
The Nokton 50/1.1, which broke down after a week. Stephen fixed it up, but then it didn't focus properly. Got a second one which was ok until I sold it a few months later.
The 21/4 M mount, to much grease on the focus and very poor black finishing.
I also had a 40/1.4 for one month, this one felt pretty solid to.

As for image quality, almost all of their fast glass exhibits focus shift, which for me is a major problem, other than that they were all good enough for their purpose.

The CV lenses do not come close in build quality to the Leica lenses (vintage) that I have used, which were much much tighter in tolerances and had a more solid feel. And from working at Canon, I feel that the CV are sloppier built than the high end Canons, which are not much more expensive in some cases.

I tried a ZM at Fotomässan, but that was to short to give a verdict for the quality.

[peter_n]

My very first "Leica" lens was a CV; the original 35/2.5 pancake - what a great lens that was! I understand the current M mount version is just as good. I did buy the LTM 15/4.5 but then replaced it with the M mount 15 when it was released and I agree about the build quality, there is a marked difference between the M mount and LTM versions. I never had a problem with the four CV lenses I owned though and I agree they are great value.

[David Murphy]

All fine lenses, particularly for what they cost.

[helenhill]

Never had a Problem with any Voigtlander lens...
In terms of Build, Ergonomics, Quality
(be it the 50 1.5 Nokton, 35 Ultron, 40 Nokton or the 35 1.4 Nokton)
Or for that matter any of my Leica lenses or Zeiss

My Zeiss c Sonnar had focus shift issues but this was ironed out after a Trip to Zeiss in Germany

[alfredian]

I have only good things to say about Cosina's V/Z lenses. SnapShot Skopar 25/4s are stunning, optically. I even LIKE the click-set "zone focus" feature. The older screwmount 35/2.5 C-Skopars are also great otically - and handier than the 35/1.7 Ultrons.

The S-mount series has a couple of stunners - the 50/1.5 Nokton is (I think) mechanically nicer than the LTM version, and the 85/3.5 ApoLanthar is a real tack-driver.

I tend to have multiple copies of each, and all are uniformly, well, uniform. My only CZ item is a 50/2 Planar, which deserves its "scary sharp" reputation.

Other than some early-bought Summicrons (50s and Canadian 90s) and some (recent) older Nikkor glass, the bulk of my stuff, until recently, was mostly Cosina. I had an R3M and sold it to an RFFer, my R4M is a keeper (odd, but my fave lens on it is a fifty - CV 2.5 Skopar or V3 'cron. I am gentle with my gear, so "durability" is not an issue - I even focus gently!