Site Sponsors
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: Voigtlander Help Please

  1. #1
    richie15
    Guest

    Voigtlander Help Please

    I have a GF1 and my lens line up is the Pana 7-14 (Landscape), 20 (Low Light and walkaround) and 14-45 (walkaround and landscape) all which are keepers. I also have the Voigtlander 75mm which I love (portrait and long length).

    A few months ago I owned a 35mm Ultron 1.7 and found this a but soft at f4 and below and having search the internet I concluded that if I am comparing lenses of 35mm and below with Panasonic lenses then the Panasonic lenses would probably be better so I will keep my Panasonic line up. Interestingly the 7-14 is the one I am struggling to come to grips with.

    I like my 75mm so much I have been exploring the idea of either a 40mm (1.4), 50mm (1.5) or the 50mm (1.1). The BOKEH on the 50mm 1.1 is stunning but it is a really expensive portrait lens and I wonder if owners use their lens for anything else?

    To sum up I wonder how much difference there is between the 50mm 1.1 and 1.5 or am I better off given my lens line up with the 40mm. Of course the alternative is the 45mm Pana/Leica????

    Any suggestions or help welcome.

  2. #2
    Subscriber Member Jonathon Delacour's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    454
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    7

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    Quote Originally Posted by richie15 View Post
    I have a GF1 and my lens line up is the Pana 7-14 (Landscape), 20 (Low Light and walkaround) and 14-45 (walkaround and landscape) all which are keepers. I also have the Voigtlander 75mm which I love (portrait and long length).

    A few months ago I owned a 35mm Ultron 1.7 and found this a but soft at f4 and below and having search the internet I concluded that if I am comparing lenses of 35mm and below with Panasonic lenses then the Panasonic lenses would probably be better so I will keep my Panasonic line up. Interestingly the 7-14 is the one I am struggling to come to grips with.

    I like my 75mm so much I have been exploring the idea of either a 40mm (1.4), 50mm (1.5) or the 50mm (1.1). The BOKEH on the 50mm 1.1 is stunning but it is a really expensive portrait lens and I wonder if owners use their lens for anything else?

    To sum up I wonder how much difference there is between the 50mm 1.1 and 1.5 or am I better off given my lens line up with the 40mm. Of course the alternative is the 45mm Pana/Leica????

    Any suggestions or help welcome.
    The rule that "at 35mm and below, Panasonic native lenses are better than legacy lenses" only applies to Leica M and screw mount lenses, because of their short register. SLR lenses with focal lengths 35mm and under -- I have experience with Pen F, Minolta MC/MD, Hexanon AR, and Contax/Yashica lenses -- can provide superb results on m4/3 cameras. Even if you have to buy another adapter or two, you'll save money if you're willing to consider alternatives to the Leica mount.

    If the relatively small size of Leica M and screw lenses is important, then you might want to investigate Pen F lenses. I sold my Voigtlander Nokton 40/1.4 not long after I bought a Pen F 40/1.4. This may not apply to your usage but I also regard the 0.7 meter minimum focusing distance of the M-mount lenses as a significant disadvantage.
    Last edited by Jonathon Delacour; 9th April 2010 at 04:22.

  3. #3
    richie15
    Guest

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonathon Delacour View Post
    The rule that "at 35mm and below, Panasonic native lenses are better than legacy lenses" only applies to Leica M and screw mount lenses, because of their short register. SLR lenses with focal lengths 35mm and under -- I have experience with Pen F, Minolta MC/MD, Hexanon AR, Contax G, and Contax/Yashica lenses -- can provide superb results on m4/3 cameras. Even if you have to buy another adapter or two, you'll save money if you're willing to consider alternatives to the Leica mount.

    If the relatively small size of Leica M and screw lenses is important, then you might want to investigate Pen F lenses. I sold my Voigtlander Nokton 40/1.4 not long after I bought a Pen F 40/1.4. This may not apply to your usage but I also regard the 0.7 meter minimum focusing distance of the M-mount lenses as a significant disadvantage.
    Thanks for your reply, I think I may be a bit Voigtlander blinkered at the minute. Given your experiences could you recommend any alternatives. Not that worried about the minimum focus distance as I was thinking of getting a Canon FD 50mm f3.5 macro to cover that.

  4. #4
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,336
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    Have a look at OM Zuiko lenses. I use a 50mm f/2.0 Macro for portraits, and it's incredibly sharp, even wide open. If you can live with a slower lens, the 50mm f/3.5 Macro is equally sharp, much cheaper and much smaller. I actually consider buying that in addition for the smaller size.

    Other OM Zuiko lenses that I use are the 35mm f/2.0, 100mm f/2.8 (a darling of a lens, but best used at f/4.0 or 5.6) and the 200mm f/5.0. The really good ones (besides the 50 macros) are the 90mm f/2.0 macro and 100mm f/2.0, but they are horribly expensive. The wides are nice too, but since they aren't wide on m43, a Panasonic or Digital Zuiko will mostly fo a better job for an equal amount of money.

  5. #5
    Senior Member simonclivehughes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    North Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    1,168
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    Richie,

    I have and use the CV 50 f1.5, the 75 f2.5 and the 90 f3.5 on my G-series bodies and love them all. The 50 f1.5, draws beautifully and has lovely bokeh. Personally, I tend to use the 75 more for portraits than the 50, but that's more the working distance than anything.

    I haven't tried the 50 f1.1 but I did have both the 35 1.7 and the 1.2 and the difference in size and weight is considerable, something that you might want to take into consideration.

    Hope that helps,

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    (...) The really good ones (besides the 50 macros) are the 90mm f/2.0 macro and 100mm f/2.0, but they are horribly expensive.
    Ah..oh. I have a 90/2 for sale and it isn't horrible expensive at all. It is some money involved but you get more than you pay for!

    The OM50/2 is really excellent and while optically different to the ZD 50/2 it produces similar results, just so much better for manual focusing and critical checking of focus and DOF. But, as you say, with the adapter it becomes a bit large.

    Cheers,

    /Jonas

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    Quote Originally Posted by simonclivehughes View Post
    Richie,

    I have and use the CV 50 f1.5, the 75 f2.5 and the 90 f3.5 on my G-series bodies and love them all. The 50 f1.5, draws beautifully and has lovely bokeh. Personally, I tend to use the 75 more for portraits than the 50, but that's more the working distance than anything.

    I haven't tried the 50 f1.1 but I did have both the 35 1.7 and the 1.2 and the difference in size and weight is considerable, something that you might want to take into consideration.

    Hope that helps,
    I second most of all this. I sold my CV50/1.5 a day when I was more confused than usual. That was a bad move. I also love the CV75/2.5 which is a lens hard to beat in that FL. The 35mm lenses... well, I sold both, it is a facal length not really to my taste. But that is personal.

    I haven't tried the 50/1.1 as it is about a lot of money and I have other lenses in that FL which are fun and good enough.

    Generally I like lenses that are versatile. The 50/1.5 is "sharper" than the 40/1.4. There isn't a lot difference between them when it comes to the bokeh; they can both be a bit edgy sometimes but mostly works fine. Maybe a little advantage to the 50mm.

    I would check out images taken with the 50/1.5.

    my cents,

    /Jonas

  8. #8
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,598
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    The "perfect" ones, as Jonathon mentioned, are the pen F lenses.

    I would definitely stay away from buying Leica M-mount lenses for the m/43rds.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    (...)
    I would definitely stay away from buying Leica M-mount lenses for the m/43rds.
    ...because?

  10. #10
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,598
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    Better c-mount lenses are available.

  11. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Gothenburg, Sweden
    Posts
    1,309
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    Mmm. There may be. But it is not a given. Do you have some suggestions for the OP? I would like to learn about a 50mm c-mount lens being better, or at least a real good value, compared to the CV50/1.5.

  12. #12
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Michiel Schierbeek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Amsterdam/Normandy
    Posts
    4,055
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    762

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    Quote Originally Posted by Jonas View Post
    Mmm. There may be. But it is not a given. Do you have some suggestions for the OP? I would like to learn about a 50mm c-mount lens being better, or at least a real good value, compared to the CV50/1.5.
    Or the Canon fd 50/1.4 Cheap and a terrific lens. I do have the VC Nokton 50/1.5 too. Nice, may be a bit sharper, but more expensive and I prefer the bokeh of the Canon fd, which is just a tad faster.

    Michiel

  13. #13
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    San Diego, CA
    Posts
    776
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    My Canon FL 55/1.2 makes for a superb portrait lens.
    -Dragos
    Panasonic GH1/G1, Canon FTb(n)/F-1, Mamiya C330F/RB67 Pro SD, Chamonix 45N-2, Nikon F5 + Assorted Lenses

  14. #14
    dazedproductions
    Guest

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    I was all for getting a voigtlander as they are nicely priced and some of my first cameras were voigtlander rangefinders. The 40mm has somewhat busy bokeh though and the 50mm is quite large. I ended up going with the zeiss 50 f1.5 instead which is nice and compact and has nice bokeh IMO (but its somewhat more expensive). Size was important to me (I already have nikon f1.4 35/50mm lenses but they are larger than I wanted)

  15. #15
    richie15
    Guest

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    Quote Originally Posted by Michiel Schierbeek View Post
    Or the Canon fd 50/1.4 Cheap and a terrific lens. I do have the VC Nokton 50/1.5 too. Nice, may be a bit sharper, but more expensive and I prefer the bokeh of the Canon fd, which is just a tad faster.

    Michiel
    I am going to explore this option as I have heard this as well. Yesterday I picked up the Canon 50mm f3.5 macro and will start with this and if I am impressed will try and track down a Canon 50mm f1.4, either way the cost of both of these lenses is going to be less than a CV 50mm 1.5 and def less than a 1.1.

  16. #16
    rachp
    Guest

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    I have a gh-1 now and had an ep-1 before. I have several voigtlanders - 50/1.1 and in nikon mount sl lenses I have 90/3.5, 180/4 and 75/2.5. I love all of my voigtlanders on the gh-1 but I don't think I would want to use the 50/1.1 on a smaller 4/3 body. I don't mind the size of the nikon mount sl lenses - they are very light and a good fit. I also love that I can use the sl lenses. on my nikon body.

    I am a big fan of voigtlander - they are a great value. If you can get around the mfd on the 50/1.1 then go for it!! It is a real WOW lens! Just look for a used one in the low $800s.

    I also have slII voigtlanders in Nikon mount - 20/3.5 and 40/2.
    Last edited by rachp; 10th April 2010 at 17:27.

  17. #17
    jedperkins
    Guest

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    I have the Voigtlander 40mm f/2.0 SLII in the Pentax K mount. It is a pancake, so it is not too long even with the PK to mft adapter. I like it very much, the pictures are sharp even wide open.

  18. #18
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    60
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander Help Please

    Quote Originally Posted by richie15 View Post
    I have a GF1 and my lens line up is the Pana 7-14 (Landscape), 20 (Low Light and walkaround) and 14-45 (walkaround and landscape) all which are keepers. I also have the Voigtlander 75mm which I love (portrait and long length).

    A few months ago I owned a 35mm Ultron 1.7 and found this a but soft at f4 and below and having search the internet I concluded that if I am comparing lenses of 35mm and below with Panasonic lenses then the Panasonic lenses would probably be better so I will keep my Panasonic line up. Interestingly the 7-14 is the one I am struggling to come to grips with.

    I like my 75mm so much I have been exploring the idea of either a 40mm (1.4), 50mm (1.5) or the 50mm (1.1). The BOKEH on the 50mm 1.1 is stunning but it is a really expensive portrait lens and I wonder if owners use their lens for anything else?

    To sum up I wonder how much difference there is between the 50mm 1.1 and 1.5 or am I better off given my lens line up with the 40mm. Of course the alternative is the 45mm Pana/Leica????

    Any suggestions or help welcome.
    The faster, the better. Having said that, i use the 85mm f1.2 and the 85mm f1.8 on a canon 5d and I sold the f1.2 lens because it ws just too heavy and the final results was not a world of difference in oof areas.

    on the m43 however, the difference between 1.1 lens and 1.5 lens is not too many grams, both are still quite light and the price difference is in hundreds and not thousands.

    i would go for the 1.1 lens.

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •