The Voigtlander Ultron 28mm f2.0...

[Tom A]

Originally Posted by oscroft

Thanks - that's really the kind of thing I was hoping to hear. I'll probably give some serious consideration to a 28/2 in the New Year, but if there had been a chance it would make the f/3.5 redundant I doubt I'd be able to do it.

Alan, take it from me. No lens is ever reduntant - they just become "alternatives" and can occasionally be used to hold down papers on the desk! This might explain my "lens" drawers - chockful of older (and newer) lenses. I make it a routine to cycle through all of them over time - sometimes just to confirm why I liked or disliked them!

[oscroft]

Alan, take it from me. No lens is ever reduntant - they just become "alternatives" and can occasionally be used to hold down papers on the desk! This might explain my "lens" drawers - chockful of older (and newer) lenses. I make it a routine to cycle through all of them over time - sometimes just to confirm why I liked or disliked them!

Hehe, yes, good point. For months I've been thinking I should get rid of a couple of my OM zooms (they all overlap, and I haven't used any for ages anyway), then last weekend I thought I'd take them out to shoot and decide which ones to keep - and you've probably guessed, I'm keeping all of them

[amin_sabet]

Has anyone compared the CV 28/2 with the ZM 28/2.8? I am trying to decide between these two lenses and would be interested to know how they compare in edge performance when stopped down to f/4 and beyond, as well as how out of focus rendering compares at f/2.8. Also, is there much barrel distortion to speak of with either lens?

[edrahil]

Hi,

Reviews are great and many positives points for new Ultron. But the old version made also a good job...
So, I wonder what is the best value between a second hand Ultron 28/1.9 and the new one ?
Size and native M mount seem better in new, but cheaper is the old...
Aspherical or not, could it help my decision ?
Thanks

[gullevek]

I have not yet used it on my Bessa, and I actually explicit bought it for my Epson, to have wide lens that still works with the internal finder.

I am very happy with the results. For reference you can check out my set at flickr: http://flickr.com/photos/gullevek/se...7610378689854/

I can really recommend this lens.

[Ljós]

Giving this a bump... Thanks a bunch to P. Lynn Miller for the pictures and writeup of his experiences, to all chiming in, especially Tom A.!

I have found this thread extremely helpful, and it really makes me want to save up for the Ultron. (And selling my Serenar 28 3.5, which is so cute and small and exceedingly well made... but focuses down to only 1m, and has a very long focusing throw... and I would really like the speed of the Ultron for my shooting habits)

With more than a year passed since the original post, I was wondering how the accumulated experience with this lens turns out now? Is it still a favorite go-to lens? Any gotchas discovered in use?

Thanks in advance,
Hannes

[Makten]

Originally Posted by Ljós

Any gotchas discovered in use?

It shifts focus when stopped down. Not a problem at far distances, but if you stop it down for a closeup, it will be all out of focus. Dead sharp at f/2 though.
I'd not buy this lens as an "all purpose" lens, but for using it wide open.

[ashrafazlan]

Originally Posted by Makten

It shifts focus when stopped down. Not a problem at far distances, but if you stop it down for a closeup, it will be all out of focus. Dead sharp at f/2 though.
I'd not buy this lens as an "all purpose" lens, but for using it wide open.

I definitely agree. At f/2 the lens is surprisingly sharp, almost as good as my Zeiss ZF 35/2 wide open, a lens well known for it's crazy sharpness and contrast.

[Ljós]

Tjänare :-) Makten,

do you notice the focus shift on a digital rangefinder or with Film?
There is a very good thread on this here at RFF, and the gist of it was that the Ultron (not being aspherical) does indeed have focus shift, which can also be seen (if you look for it) on film, but really is more of a problem with a digital sensor.

Thanks in advance,
Hannes

[Makten]

Originally Posted by Ljós

Tjänare :-) Makten,

Hallå där!

do you notice the focus shift on a digital rangefinder or with Film?

In my case I use it on an M8.

There is a very good thread on this here at RFF, and the gist of it was that the Ultron (not being aspherical) does indeed have focus shift, which can also be seen (if you look for it) on film, but really is more of a problem with a digital sensor.

I think the problem is just the same on film, but that it is less likely to be observed due to several factors: The time from pic being taken to being developed, less likelihood of pixel peeping, and perhaps the thickness of the film and its lower resolution hiding the shift.

It took me quite some time to find out about the shift, but now when I know about it, I'd say it's a bit of a problem. But for wide open use, it's a great lens that draws in a nice way.

[bidnez]

This is a mystery to me. (så er jeg jo norsk også ) I experienced the focus shift problem with a sample of the 1,9/28 on my M8. Sold to a friend who shoots film only - perfect. So; I´ve become a bit reluctant in my dealings with fast lenses for the M8. Even if my single coated 1,4/35 Nokton behaves very well.

[Makten]

Originally Posted by bidnez

This is a mystery to me. (så er jeg jo norsk også ) I experienced the focus shift problem with a sample of the 1,9/28 on my M8. Sold to a friend who shoots film only - perfect. So; I´ve become a bit reluctant in my dealings with fast lenses for the M8. Even if my single coated 1,4/35 Nokton behaves very well.

Yes, the shift issues on digital seems to...vary! My 35/1.4 Nokton is the worst focus shifting lens I've ever used. I'm actually selling it right now because of that.

I'm also thinking about replacing the Ultron with either a Zeiss 28/2.8 or Leica 28/2.8. The M8 sucks pretty bad at low light anyway, so I think I'd prefer a slower lens that is really sharp and has no focus issues.

I've been very happy with the Ultron though; mostly because I've had to use it wide open in the swedish darkness at this time of year. Here's some stuff with it on my M8:

http://smg.photobucket.com/albums/v6...n/Ultron_28_2/

Many of the shots are wide open.

[Ljós]

Makten, gillar dina bilder starkt! (Och inte bara därför att jag känner "hemlängtan" till Sverige ;-))

Thanks for the recently posted experiences! So it looks like I should be doing ok, since all I will be using is film...
For all interested, here is a link to RFF-mfogiel's flickr-album demonstrating the Ultron's focus shift on film
http://www.flickr.com/photos/5917703...7619239722523/
Mfogiel's take is that shift is covered by increased DOF (on film), with f4 being the f-stop where the most noticeable discrepancy between plane of sharpness and the point originally focused tends to occur.

[cnphoto]

I have experienced the focus shift too on film at middle apertures, and have found it a little annoying but probably not as bad as on a digital RF. I'm thinking of buying a 4 stop ND filter for use in brighter conditions (I have a circ polariser I've been using and opening up a stop/stop and a half to good success), because it really is sharp at F2.0/F2.8. I think the shift mostly occurs around F4-F8ish, and have had it worse around F5.6.

[naql]

Thanks for posting pictures and your experiences with this lens. I was thinking about getting one of these eventually for my R4M. I really want the 28/3.5 but can't seem to find one anywhere.

[palec]

Originally Posted by naql

Thanks for posting pictures and your experiences with this lens. I was thinking about getting one of these eventually for my R4M. I really want the 28/3.5 but can't seem to find one anywhere.

AFAIK Spyderman has one and considers selling it, send him a PM.

[DNG]

Originally Posted by Tom A

Last Saturday's Concours de Elegance in Gastown as usual provides a great test setting for a lens. This is with the ZI body and the Ultron 28f2.0. Film was Acros 100, developed in Beutler (home made) dilution 1part A/1 part B and 10 parts of water for 7 min (10sec agit/60 sec).
Classic Chrysler Airflow from 1935.

Love this image....Hay, do you add a little vanilla tinting...on my laptop, this has a very pleasing eggshell creamy tint...Can't wait to get mine!

[baycrest]

Originally Posted by ashrafazlan

I definitely agree. At f/2 the lens is surprisingly sharp, almost as good as my Zeiss ZF 35/2 wide open, a lens well known for it's crazy sharpness and contrast.

From my own experience, I didn't find the Zeiss 35 f2 to be as sharp as the CV 35 f1.2 or the 35 Lux. That said The ZM does hold up well in the corners with consistent sharpness across the frame.

Back to the Zeiss ZM 28 f2.8, its a very sharp lens, sharper than the ZM 35, if I can make that "comparison".

[Turtle]

ashrafaslan was referrring to the ZF 35 which is supposed to be like a razor on centre wide open. My ZM f2 biogon is also not at its best wide open but still 'good'. Its razor sharp by f4 and very good at F2.8. In the corners it is remarkable.

I agree on the 28 biogon. MUCH sharper than some would give it credit for (having looked at MTFs). There may be field curvature incolved, but I have found it very sharp and on centre that begins wide open. By F4 or so I see nothing between them though the 35 is a touch better in the extreme corners IMO. This is paltry tho.

[fotomeow]

thanks for getting this thread re/starter PLM: appreciate the B&Ws, and the color shots as well by our man in sweden with the RD-1s. I, too, have had my mind set on the CV 28/2, if not just for use with the RD-1s for the lens' speed alone. Ive had the Biogon 28/2.8 for some years and have liked it very much, but its a bit slow for a "normal" lens on the Epson which makes it a 42mm. I like the Biogons color rendition more than with B&W on film.

That said, I would really like to see a side-by-side comparison of the CV 28/2 and the Biogon 28/2.8.......recent posts seem to be hinting at the same. Maybe see them side X side in B&W, color; on film vs digital...........
Interesting points being made about the focus shift issues, and shift on film vs digital with these lenses.......Its reassuring to hear, I just thought my eyes were playing tricks on me, or I was simply losing my mind. Now, though, I hope not to blame every mis-focus on the equipment alone.

There was also some talk about the CV35/1.4. I bought it simply out of theory: small. light, fast, quality CV make, SC for B&W, and affordable.......and b/c I didnt have a sample to try out first. I actually quite like the lens, especially what it does with B&W in low light...though I have noticed some focus shift wide open at minimum distance focus in moderate light. I've especially been impressed with its rendition on the Epson, even though it turns it into a 52mm, the B&W Epson images are actually quite nice: an interesting mix of nostalgic rendition and s/w creamy bokeh.....

But back to the theme at hand: the CV 28/2 which I dont have.....versus the Biogon 28/2.8 which I do have: username Avotius posted his experience of the Biogon (Link), and we see a lot of praise for this lens in the posts. I must say, the color images he presented generally puts the Biogon in "a good light", and some of the images are pretty stunning (see the initial shot of the trees). Anyone have both lenses which they can post some comparisons????

[Makten]

Originally Posted by fotomeow

Anyone have both lenses which they can post some comparisons????

I might have both if I get the Biogon before managing to sell the Ultron. I'll post my experiences anyway, sooner or later. The Biogon is ordered but it seems to take a long time to get it.

[Nigel Meaby]

I have a CV 28 ultron. I've done some shots with it at .7m at F2 on m8.2 and the focus is spot on. Maybe I got lucky.

[Ljós]

I have a CV 28 ultron. I've done some shots with it at .7m at F2 on m8.2 and the focus is spot on. Maybe I got lucky.

Nigel, the CV 28 f2's capability of being spot on at f2 and close in is pretty much uncontested. The focus shift-issue only starts rearing its head once you stop down. On film (RFF members have put up galleries that illustrate the point) the "wandering" of the plane of focus further back from the plane you actually meant to focus on is caught by the increased depth of field that comes with stopping down. But, on digital sensors, it looks like the focus shift can be problematic in specific situations. Depending on how you shoot/what your needs are, you might never see a problem. But, if you start looking for it with your M8, it is very likely it could be demonstrated.
If you liked your pictures so far - keep it that way :-)

[gilpen123]

I love this lens been a mainstay in my RD1 too. This was shot with a CLE tri-x

[gilpen123]

Some more with the CLE