Site Sponsors
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 50 of 53

Thread: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    477
    Post Thanks / Like

    Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    If true, yet another lens for the m4/3 lens stable. And it sure would be an interesting lens to play with.

    saw it rumored over on 43rumors.

    Doug

  2. #2
    Senior Member ggibson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    SF Bay Area
    Posts
    743
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    How come Olympus can't make one of these with AF?

  3. #3
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,332
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by ggibson View Post
    How come Olympus can't make one of these with AF?
    Size, weight, price... look at the Canon 50/1.2

  4. #4
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,332
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Looks good:



    Must be the perfect low light lens for m4/3.
    Things I sell: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/epixx?language=en
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  5. #5
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    Looks good:

    Must be the perfect low light lens for m4/3.
    I'm impressed too - it's not too big either . . . now all they need is to put focus peaking on the OM-D . . .and I'm in trouble!

    Just this guy you know

  6. #6
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Here is the 43rumors page:

    43 Rumors | Blog | HOT! Voigtl舅der announces the new (amazing!) 17.5mm f/0.95 lens!

    Absolutely amazing!

    I will buy it!

    This goes far beyond the high end movie lenses! Price is very reasonable!

  7. #7
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    jonoslack's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    East Anglia & Cornwall (UK)
    Posts
    11,778
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Here is the 43rumors page:

    43 Rumors | Blog | HOT! Voigtl舅der announces the new (amazing!) 17.5mm f/0.95 lens!

    Absolutely amazing!

    I will buy it!

    This goes far beyond the high end movie lenses! Price is very reasonable!
    You can put it on your OM-D1

    Just this guy you know

  8. #8
    Senior Member Lars's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Sunnyvale, California
    Posts
    1,811
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    19

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    That's kinda unique. Interesting.
    Monochrome: http://mochro.com

  9. #9
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,332
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by jonoslack View Post
    I'm impressed too - it's not too big either . . . now all they need is to put focus peaking on the OM-D . . .and I'm in trouble!
    Things I sell: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/epixx?language=en
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  10. #10
    Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    111
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    To add a bit of proportionality, isn't the depth of field equivalent to a 35mm f1.8 lens on a full frame camera? . . . It's true, you can shoot with a faster shutter speed than you could with a 35mm f1.8 lens on a full frame camera, and it's also true that there's no other way to get this relatively shallow depth of field on a 4/3 camera with the same field of view of a traditional 35mm lens, but it's not all that unique, is it? . . . Now on the other hand, I would like one.

  11. #11
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,332
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    This lens is also perfectly positioned between the Zuiko 12/2.0 and Leica 25/1.4. My problem with the Voigtlander 25/0.95 was always that I would have to choose between that and the Leica, so I've ended up with none of them so far.

    Problem solved. Now I can buy both. I just need to stumble upon a big pile of money first
    Last edited by Jorgen Udvang; 7th February 2012 at 00:01.

  12. #12
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    60
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    I had written to Cosina or submitted some Poll I cant remember but the 17.5mm is the most sought after lens, after the 25mm focal length, to me that is. But the price announced does seem rather high and more than the 25mm which I use extensively. Samples here.

    Flickr: Please wait...

    There is something REALLY SPECIAL about shooting fast wide angle lenses with shallow DOF. It achieves a rendering that is so unique, a wider coverage to include the environment, yet has a bokeh effect to separate the background without Blowing the background to oblivion. Meaning you can get contextual portrait photos and balance the Bokeh. In the right hands this wide standard can appear almost like a short tele, yet you can make portraits/candids from just few feet away.

    There are so many master photographers who shoot exclusively with this focal length and it is especially true with the Leica M range.

    So this "35mm" with about f1.8 in DOF sits nicely between a Summilux and a Summicron. Since it has a fatter bokeh than the Summicron, its going to be able to produce some nice Candid/Reportage style pics. I use the Fuji x100 exclusively for this 35mm look. Samples here...

    Flickr: Please wait...

    Now with this lens, then I may not need the x100 anymore? But the x100 is still such a fun toy...sigh. Man toys are expensive.

    This lens and the 25mm Nokton will really fit the OM-D well. With a grip attached, its gonna be very business like and deliver world class results under all kinds of lighting situations, even with almost NO LIGHT. This sort of lens should be used wide open, more often than not, if you gonna stop it down, then the pancake 17mm f2.8 from Oly would suffice.

    For a short TELE for the OM-D, there are PLENTY of options, manual focus, AF, legacy lenses. I think a 38mm f0.95 lens would be really nice. Thats a niche not yet filled, the closest being the Voigt 35mm f1.2 for the Leica M. Of course the SLR magic 50mm 0.95 is another fab choice. I have several 50+mm f1.2 to use now so its not going to be a rush for me at the TELE end.

    The problem with m43 is that its inherent DOF. We can really do with these super fast lenses to overcome this limitation. For my style of candid/reportage portraiture, its a no-brainer. Now to go find more money for the OM-D and this lens...hehe.

  13. #13
    Senior Member Brian Mosley's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    2,394
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    17

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Well, obviously there's a demand for this 35mm perspective - I can't believe that Olympus haven't spotted that demand yet. I'd kill for a weather-sealed 17mm f1.4 prime lens for the OM-D.

    I'm afraid this lens is a non-starter for me, at least until someone brings focus peaking to m4/3rds.

    Cheers

    Brian

  14. #14
    Senior Member Y.B.Hudson III's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    314
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Yehh... I go for signature over speed.

  15. #15
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    The "SLR magic" lenses seem to have plenty of character.

  16. #16
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,122
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    No one has yet mentioned the one obvious and possibly fatal flaw of this lens.

    Focal lengths below 50mm are notoriously poor on m43rds cameras unless they have inbuilt perspective/distortion correction in firmware.

    This will be a wholly manual lens and I can't see how a m43rds body will see it as anything other than a short focal length piece of glass and as such fail to correct the smeary edges that result.

    I have never managed to get a decent 'wide open' image from any of my Leica or Voigtlander glass below 50mm and my 15mm Heliar which is close enough to the 17.5mm to be representative is basically unusable below f8.

    So, by all means slaver over the fast aperture of this lens but I remain to be convinced until I see samples.

    LouisB

  17. #17
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    No one has yet mentioned the one obvious and possibly fatal flaw of this lens.

    Focal lengths below 50mm are notoriously poor on m43rds cameras unless they have inbuilt perspective/distortion correction in firmware.

    This will be a wholly manual lens and I can't see how a m43rds body will see it as anything other than a short focal length piece of glass and as such fail to correct the smeary edges that result.

    I have never managed to get a decent 'wide open' image from any of my Leica or Voigtlander glass below 50mm and my 15mm Heliar which is close enough to the 17.5mm to be representative is basically unusable below f8.

    So, by all means slaver over the fast aperture of this lens but I remain to be convinced until I see samples.

    LouisB
    A bit presumptuous, Louis.

    There are no inherent "fatal flaws" if the lens is made well.

    What is so fatal about the CV 25/0.95?

    You should perhaps try a 16/2 Arri Distagon or a Kinoptik 9.8 f/1.8- all usable wide open.

  18. #18
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    No one has yet mentioned the one obvious and possibly fatal flaw of this lens.

    Focal lengths below 50mm are notoriously poor on m43rds cameras unless they have inbuilt perspective/distortion correction in firmware.

    This will be a wholly manual lens and I can't see how a m43rds body will see it as anything other than a short focal length piece of glass and as such fail to correct the smeary edges that result.

    I have never managed to get a decent 'wide open' image from any of my Leica or Voigtlander glass below 50mm and my 15mm Heliar which is close enough to the 17.5mm to be representative is basically unusable below f8.

    So, by all means slaver over the fast aperture of this lens but I remain to be convinced until I see samples.

    LouisB
    Those lenses we're not designed for mFT or digital sensors, bl. They require special sensor technology to work well.

    This lens is designed for mFT digital cameras. It will work well.

  19. #19
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,122
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    Those lenses we're not designed for mFT or digital sensors, bl. They require special sensor technology to work well.

    This lens is designed for mFT digital cameras. It will work well.
    I stand corrected but I also hope the lens is corrected - not sure how they do this as I thought there was a basic issue with any focal length below 50mm and that is why there is heavy firmware processing, e.g. a 20/1.7 would look awful were it not for the in-camera correction.

    But I await to be amazed!

    Or indeed inspired if Leica follow suit and give us a proper PanaLeica 17.5 Summicron to complete the stable.

    Louis

  20. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    477
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Not to mention drooling in advance is half the fun .

    Before reality sets in, one can at least imagine that it performs well. And one can hope that Cosina's reasonably deserved reputation for putting out quality glass will continue here.

    Doug

  21. #21
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    I stand corrected but I also hope the lens is corrected - not sure how they do this as I thought there was a basic issue with any focal length below 50mm and that is why there is heavy firmware processing, e.g. a 20/1.7 would look awful were it not for the in-camera correction.
    The issue is making lens designs that most closely matches the recording medium's needs. Film isn't sensitive to the angle that light hits it but digital sensors are. So lenses designed for a digital capture medium use designs that make the ray trace to the sensor as close to orthogonal as possible where optical designs for film never had to care about it.

    Long lenses with narrow FoV on small format cameras are like this pretty much by default, but short lenses with wide FoV lenses are not. If you look at an Olympus Zuiko Digital wide lenses, all the way down to 7mm focal length, you'll see a very high degree of correction without any additional software because those lenses pre-dated lens the lens correction metadata introduced with Micro-FourThirds.

    The Micro-FourThirds standard was designed to produce compact cameras and lenses. The innovation was to consider lens correction processing as a standard part of the lens formula. This enables very compact, fast, short focal length lenses like the Lumix G 20/1.7 and 14/2.8 to be produced at modest prices ... the lenses are designed with the processing parameter to correct chromatic aberration and rectilinear distortion built into their firmware.

    Cosina/Voigtl舅der chooses to build their lenses without requiring software correction for the sensor and format, so their lens options in this range designed for mFT are not small but produce highly corrected results.

  22. #22
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    477
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    Cosina/Voigtl舅der chooses to build their lenses without requiring software correction for the sensor and format, so their lens options in this range designed for mFT are not small but produce highly corrected results.
    Isn't that still relative (the size that is)? I am just trying to imagine a 35mm f0.95 APS-C or full frame lens and its size. So perhaps not as small as processing correction could make it, but this lens does not seem a monster lens to me either.

    Doug

  23. #23
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by greypilgrim View Post
    Isn't that still relative (the size that is)? I am just trying to imagine a 35mm f0.95 APS-C or full frame lens and its size. So perhaps not as small as processing correction could make it, but this lens does not seem a monster lens to me either.
    It's just about the same size as the Voigtl舅der Nokton 35mm f/1.2, which to me is a pretty large and heavy lens for a Leica M (about 80x63mm, a little over a pound). On a typical much-lighter mFT camera (Panasonic GX1, Olympus Pen E-PL2, etc), it's a pretty big thing.

    Of course, it's all relative. You want to play with ultra high speed lenses, be ready to deal with some bulk ... :-)

  24. #24
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    477
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    It's just about the same size as the Voigtl舅der Nokton 35mm f/1.2, which to me is a pretty large and heavy lens for a Leica M (about 80x63mm, a little over a pound). On a typical much-lighter mFT camera (Panasonic GX1, Olympus Pen E-PL2, etc), it's a pretty big thing.

    Of course, it's all relative. You want to play with ultra high speed lenses, be ready to deal with some bulk ... :-)
    Good point. I guess I am betraying my Nikon roots there... I hadn't considered the equivalent in the Leica realm. I was just imagining a 35mm f0.95 Nikkor :-o...

    Doug

  25. #25
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    804
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    If low light shooting and thin DOF was my main thing I'd rather buy a larger sensor camera with moderately fast primes than mft coupled with a quite pricey and bulky mf only mft sensor dedicated lens.

  26. #26
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by retow View Post
    If low light shooting and thin DOF was my main thing I'd rather buy a larger sensor camera with moderately fast primes than mft coupled with a quite pricey and bulky mf only mft sensor dedicated lens.
    "Low light shooting and thin DoF" is actually not the point at all.

    The advantage of the smaller sensor with a fast lens is to achieve more depth of field while also being able to work in very poor light, in this case, with a wide field of view.

    If you want shallow DoF, you need a larger format or a longer lens.

  27. #27
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    804
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    "Low light shooting and thin DoF" is actually not the point at all.

    The advantage of the smaller sensor with a fast lens is to achieve more depth of field while also being able to work in very poor light, in this case, with a wide field of view.

    If you want shallow DoF, you need a larger format or a longer lens.
    That's what I was saying, just with different words. People buy these fast lenses either to shoot in low light or for DOF control, or for both reasons. I have not seen discussions yet of somebody choosing the mft format to be able to have more depth of field when shooting with fast lenses. One can have both with larger sensors, better low light capability thanks to better high iso performance and better DOF control by simply stopping down a fast lens if more dof is desired. So I don't see your "..advantage of the smaller sensor with a fast lens is to achieve more depth of field while also being able to work in very poor light...." as the deeper dof is by design rather than by choice of the shooter. Aps-c sensors offer 1-3 stop advantages and the ability to better control dof.

  28. #28
    Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Miami
    Posts
    164
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    A bit presumptuous, Louis.

    There are no inherent "fatal flaws" if the lens is made well.

    What is so fatal about the CV 25/0.95?

    You should perhaps try a 16/2 Arri Distagon or a Kinoptik 9.8 f/1.8- all usable wide open.
    Yes, or Arriflex:
    Distagon 24/2; or
    Kinoptik 18/1.8; or
    Cooke Speed Panchro 18/2 or 25/2.
    All great lenses, and as a matter of fact I'd pick any of them over CV25, lets say 9 out of 10 times. (and as an extra feature they work flawlessly on NEX5n as well)

  29. #29
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Godfrey's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Near San Jose, California
    Posts
    7,927
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by retow View Post
    .. I have not seen discussions yet of somebody choosing the mft format to be able to have more depth of field when shooting with fast lenses. One can have both with larger sensors ... by stopping down the lens ..
    ...
    Aps-c sensors offer 1-3 stop advantages and the ability to better control dof.
    Sorry, but you cannot achieve the same light gathering potential at the same ISO setting with a larger format by stopping down the lens. APS-C sensors do not automatically have 1-3 stop sensitivity advances over FourThirds sensors. I know this from actually using both. Some APS-C sensors do have improved sensitivity over some FourThirds format sensors, like the K5 over the E-5, but the differential is about 1 stop (that is, I see the same amount of noise with a K5 shooting at ISO 6400 that I do with the E-5 shooting at ISO 3200).

    I choose to work with FourThirds format because the small format allows more DoF at larger apertures, netting better low light performance for my work. And there are faster lenses available ... where are the f/0.95 lenses for a K5? Perhaps I am the exception as I actually think through the implications of large apertures and know how much DoF I need for various shooting situations, which is usually more than the hair thickness razor that is available at f/0.95 with a 35mm format camera. At least at f/1.2 it's a thick hair... ;-)

    Your phrasing dismisses this lens as irrelevant. I and all the other folks who prefer Micro-FourThirds see it as very relevant and useful.
    Godfrey - GDGPhoto Flickr Stream
    Likes 2 Member(s) liked this post

  30. #30
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,332
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by Godfrey View Post
    Sorry, but you cannot achieve the same light gathering potential at the same ISO setting with a larger format by stopping down the lens. APS-C sensors do not automatically have 1-3 stop sensitivity advances over FourThirds sensors. I know this from actually using both. Some APS-C sensors do have improved sensitivity over some FourThirds format sensors, like the K5 over the E-5, but the differential is about 1 stop (that is, I see the same amount of noise with a K5 shooting at ISO 6400 that I do with the E-5 shooting at ISO 3200).

    I choose to work with FourThirds format because the small format allows more DoF at larger apertures, netting better low light performance for my work. And there are faster lenses available ... where are the f/0.95 lenses for a K5? Perhaps I am the exception as I actually think through the implications of large apertures and know how much DoF I need for various shooting situations, which is usually more than the hair thickness razor that is available at f/0.95 with a 35mm format camera. At least at f/1.2 it's a thick hair... ;-)

    Your phrasing dismisses this lens as irrelevant. I and all the other folks who prefer Micro-FourThirds see it as very relevant and useful.
    Very well written, Godfrey

  31. #31
    Super Duper
    Senior Member
    Vivek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Location
    Netherlands
    Posts
    13,594
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    21

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  32. #32
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    477
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    Vivek,
    Nice find and thanks for sharing. It certainly does look like a good combo.

    Could make for a really nice low light shooter .

    My GAS is certainly ratcheting up, and here I had it tamped down so well . My small camera fund is whimpering.

    Doug

  33. #33
    Subscriber Member Jorgen Udvang's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Pratamnak
    Posts
    9,332
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    2157

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by Vivek View Post
    That looks like a fantastic walk-around combo. I can hardly wait
    Things I sell: https://www.shutterstock.com/g/epixx?language=en
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  34. #34
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Sydney, Australia
    Posts
    347
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    I have never managed to get a decent 'wide open' image from any of my Leica or Voigtlander glass below 50mm and my 15mm Heliar which is close enough to the 17.5mm to be representative is basically unusable below f8.

    So, by all means slaver over the fast aperture of this lens but I remain to be convinced until I see samples.

    LouisB
    I think this is true of any fast lens and the wider you go the harder it is to get a good outcome.

    I have the Voigtlander 25mm f/0.95 and it is a wonderful lens and delivers and exceptional image from f/2 and even quite a fine one from f/1.4. There would be few lenses of the same price that give that performance.

    Even f/0.95 is sort of usable under the right circumstances provided you are aware of the limitations and work with it.

    But what does f/0.95 really give me? Well one of the first shoots I did with my Olympus E-P3 was with the 25mm f/0.95 and it was in the wee dark hours of a cold winter morning and I could actually see an image on the camera's display and I could focus (although strictly speaking, I would normally set the focus by scale under those conditions).


    Foggy Morning Railway by peterb666, on Flickr

    The shot is not at f/0.95 - I think it is around f/5.6 for depth of field - but the lens was a joy to use under the conditions and I cannot think of another lens that would have been as much fun to use.

    I really don't need a 17.5mm lens so won't be getting it. I have the Olympus 12mm f/2 which I use a lot and the Panasonic 20mm f/1.7 which I rarely use.
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  35. #35
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    221
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by retow View Post
    ... and better DOF control by simply stopping down a fast lens if more dof is desired. So I don't see your "..advantage of the smaller sensor with a fast lens is to achieve more depth of field while also being able to work in very poor light...." as the deeper dof is by design rather than by choice of the shooter. Aps-c sensors offer 1-3 stop advantages and the ability to better control dof.
    'Better' dof control is a personal thing. Sometimes 'better' is a 360 Symmar on 8x10, sometimes a tiny censored P&S. Neither is 'better'.

    Deeper dof is part of the camera specifications, and choice of that camera by the buyer who often is the user. Often the greater dof is a boon. Sometimes one wishes slightly less without going home and getting the other camera, and then the availability of an f/0.95 lens helps.

    I have yet to see aps-c sensors ever having a 3 stop advantage in any way.

    Henning

  36. #36
    Senior Member Tesselator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Japan
    Posts
    695
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Interesting thread all around. Thanks!

    From all the thoughts, opinions, and side chatter the only thing that strikes me as contrary to my own knowledge and thoughts are the bits about CA correction.

    I don't see it as it's been discussed so far. There is no such thing as a lens that's been designed for digital or not. There's some lens element coating technology that has been used for use with digital sensors because sensors have a different amount and kind of reflectivity but nothing more than that.

    A lens (any lens) is either well corrected or it's not. On film a poor lens in that regard causes just as many problems as it does on digital. The main difference is that some of the colored fringes don't show up as much when printed as they do on screen but that's true with digital images as well. Same same.

    The bits about in-camera correction are only a way of selling poorly designed lenses for more. It might save the user some time in editing if they care about such things but the user doesn't seem to benefit otherwise. I mean the lens in question gets sold for more than it would otherwise - meaning the user pays for it in the end.

    So IMO a good lens design is a good lens design - period. It has nothing to do with digital or not. And there are plenty of WA/UWA lenses designed prior to the advent of digital which are superb and therefor support this thinking. And in-camera correction is only a hidden tax - whether or not you want to pay that tax or spend your time at the computer is for each individual to decide. Im my case I'd rather have the good design rather than paying higher prices for the poor design because the in-camera correction is not always the best quality and robs me of the ability both to get the most out of it and to see exactly what a lens can and can't do.

    I guess I should also add that I for sure don't need focus peaking on a 17mm lens. I shoot 17mm and 18mm a lot on the GH1 and the MF assist is already perfect for that. Now down around 8mm or less then I could see wanting it - maybe. Also maybe for really slow lenses where it's hard to tell exactly where the focal plane is (cuz it's so thick) but for a 17/f0.95... Nope not needed (for me). Certainly peaking is not a critical factor in selecting this lens as or not.
    Last edited by Tesselator; 11th February 2012 at 19:06.

  37. #37
    Senior Member Tesselator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Japan
    Posts
    695
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by Jorgen Udvang View Post
    That looks like a fantastic walk-around combo. I can hardly wait
    Mmmm, that does look nice!




  38. #38
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    221
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by Tesselator View Post
    I don't see it as it's been discussed so far. There is no such thing as a lens that's been designed for digital or not. There's some lens element coating technology that has been used for use with digital sensors because sensors have a different amount and kind of reflectivity but nothing more than that.

    A lens (any lens) is either well corrected or it's not. On film a poor lens in that regard causes just as many problems as it does on digital. The main difference is that some of the colored fringes don't show up as much when printed as they do on screen but that's true with digital images as well. Same same.

    The bits about in-camera correction are only a way of selling poorly designed lenses for more. It might save the user some time in editing if they care about such things but the user doesn't seem to benefit otherwise. I mean the lens in question gets sold for more than it would otherwise - meaning the user pays for it in the end.

    So IMO a good lens design is a good lens design - period. It has nothing to do with digital or not. And there are plenty of WA/UWA lenses designed prior to the advent of digital which are superb and therefor support this thinking. And in-camera correction is only a hidden tax - whether or not you want to pay that tax or spend your time at the computer is for each individual to decide. Im my case I'd rather have the good design rather than paying higher prices for the poor design because the in-camera correction is not always the best quality and robs me of the ability both to get the most out of it and to see exactly what a lens can and can't do.
    A lens is well designed if it produces the desired quality in the system it is designed for.

    The 7-14 Panasonic zoom and 20/1.7 are not good film camera lenses, but that is irrelevant because they are not designed for nor are ever likely to be used on a film camera. On the digital cameras they were designed for they produce exceptional results while maintaining a small size and reasonable costs for their performance. The parameters that can't be corrected in software right now, such as astigmatism and coma have been corrected for extremely well, but distortion and CA have been left to 'float', because those things can be corrected.

    The number of wide and super wide lenses designed before digital that have decent performance is extremely small, and cost a lot of money. The 38 Biogon in the Hassy SWC, and the other pre-digital Biogons for that matter are eclipsed by the performance of the 7-14. I have some of those Biogons, as well as the 7-14, and the value in the 7-14 is outstanding.

    I also have 4 Leica 21mm lenses, including the 21 Summilux, and on the m43 sensor these lenses are useless. They are good lenses, but they were not designed to be part of this system, and that is telling.

    The user doesn't 'pay' for this correction in processing time as it's done by the camera automatically. The user benefits in all sorts of ways.

    Remember, there never were any absolutes in lens design. A 'good' lens was always part of a system. Apo repro lenses were often useless for general photography, as they were commonly designed for 1:1 reproductions, and only behaved wonderfully at their three specified wavelengths. A more generally useful lens might not have or need the superb resolution or distortion correction that those lenses had at 1:1 at the three primary colours, but would run rings around them performance wise for general photography. And what about 'floating elements'? The first creeping intrusion of providing lenses with corrections that they weren't capable of on their own in fixed configurations?

    Lenses are never to be regarded 'in a vacuum', as objects in themselves unless they are to live out their lives on a shelf. Lenses are designed to serve a purpose, and that includes the whole system. If a lens doesn't serve that system properly and to your satisfaction, get another lens. But don't blame designers or manufacturers for giving us the best effective lens for this system. Right now that includes the possibility of software correction.

    Mr. Kobayashi is not interested in this right now, so he is not doing it and the lenses he has designed to date do not have the contacts and firmware to interact with the camera in this way. He has however designed the lenses for the m43 sensor, which requires a degree of telecentricity which Leica and other rangefinder lenses lack for the most part. Therefore I fully expect higher performance in the corners from the 17/0.95 than from my 21 Summilux on the m43 cameras.

    His lenses are excellent value, partly due to not constraining the size a lot. Leica will tell you that part of the cost of producing lenses for the (full frame) M9 and film Leicas comes from making sure the lenses are not too large. Remember, scaling the 25/0.95 up to full frame would result in a lens ~6" long, weighing 6 to 8 times as much and with a filter size of 105mm. Then we would have a 50mm/0.95 Nokton.

    He has more in store for us, so let your imaginations run wild.

    Henning
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  39. #39
    Senior Member Tesselator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Japan
    Posts
    695
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    I disagree or find irrelevant almost everything you just said but that's cool. We just have totally different opinions and ways of assessing things.

    I'm sure however, that the CV 17/0.95 will rock and it's very good news about there being more lenses to come of course!








    .
    Last edited by Tesselator; 12th February 2012 at 01:19.

  40. #40
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,122
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by henningw View Post
    The 38 Biogon in the Hassy SWC, and the other pre-digital Biogons for that matter are eclipsed by the performance of the 7-14. I have some of those Biogons, as well as the 7-14, and the value in the 7-14 is outstanding.
    Henning, I hate to disagree but my experience with the 7-14 and the Hass SWC is not the same as yours. No way is the 7-14 even close. The 7-14 is a great lens and delivers on the promise of small portable good quality optics for m43rds but the SWC is a whole different order of quality above it, imho. However, I have rarely got a sharp image at the edges at 7mm even stopped down and comparing notes with at least one other owner we both agreed it was hard to do.

    In some ways the comparison is irrelevent because I carry the 7-14 a lot more than the SWC and of course it the camera you have with you which gets the shot.

    Quote Originally Posted by PeterB666 View Post
    The shot is not at f/0.95 - I think it is around f/5.6 for depth of field - but the lens was a joy to use under the conditions and I cannot think of another lens that would have been as much fun to use.
    Peter, the only reason why I held off on the Voigtlander was the rumours of the impending Leica DG Summilux 1.4. That has a wonderful colour draw in low light and would equal the CV, imho. Life is now full of choices: manual high quality glass or auto high quality glass.

    LouisB

  41. #41
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    221
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Louis,

    My experience comes from many years as an architectural photographer, and for fast 8x10's and 11x14's the SWC was the go to camera for 30 years. If there was a bit more time, I'd use a Cambo Wide with roll film back with 47SA and 65 Grandagon, and later the 47XL-SA and 35 Apo Grandagon for any MF stuff. All four of these, and especially the latter two have more coverage for their angles of view and needed centre filters, but the last two especially eclipsed the 38 Biogon in almost every respect. I've also had 75 and 43 Biogons, and the latter was very good, but I find the better current designs generally 'better' than the old Biogons. 'Better' is of course a very subjective term.

    Upon reflection, it was also silly of me to compare an MF lens designed for film with a m43 lens designed for a specific digital sensor. Apples and potatoes.

    Doesn't mean I don't feel a great deal of fondness for the SWC, which I still have and occasionally use in conjunction with a Mamiya 6 set.

    Henning

  42. #42
    Senior Member Tesselator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Japan
    Posts
    695
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Lenses are designed for size of (sensor/film etc. having to do with image circle size) the medium and flange focal distance (FFD). Besides the coatings I mentioned lens systems are not designed for a particular kind of medium like film or CMOS sensors, NMOS sensors, CCD Sensors, and et cetera.

  43. #43
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    221
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    At present digital sensors generally require the light rays to strike the surface and enter the photosites close to perpendicular. Systems which are designed as digital systems, such as m43 and regular 43, have lenses whose exit light bundles never stray far from perpendicular. These may be termed 'digital lenses'. They would work well on film as well, but tend to be larger and heavier than needed for the format if they didn't have this restriction. As noted before, the Nokton 25/0.95 is huge in comparison to the format, and that is because it is designed for good digital performance. Scaled up to full frame 35mm, it would be twice as long, twice the diameter and 6 to 8 times the weight to have the same performance characteristics. It would make the SLR Magic 50/0.95 look small.

    As film is not that fussy about angle of incidence, designs such as (old style) Biogons and Super Angulons, which are close to symmetric in design, can be made high performance with exit ray bundles that strike the film at very steep angles, far off perpendicular. These lenses either do not work or don't work very well on most digital sensors.

    That's why most Leica mount wide angles do so poorly on the m43 cameras, because the photo sites on m43 cameras are expecting light rays from lenses designed for the system that are close to perpendicular to the sensor surface.

    The Leica M8 and M9 have microlenses above the photo sites that can accept incident light over a greater angular distance and can therefore cope with many lenses designed for film. There are limits, though and lenses such as the 21 Super Angulons and the Hologon can't be accommodated as the image rays in the corners are just too far off perpendicular.

    Another problem, well demonstrated with the Leicas and their requirement to accept steep incidence angles, is the IR problem. IR filtration which is necessary for most digital sensors is best handled by interference filters, which work by having reflective surfaces 1/4 wavelength of the offending radiation apart. As the rays reflect back from the second surface to the first and recombine with the incident radiation, the reflected rays are now 1/2 wavelengths 'off' and effectively cancel each other out. This works fine for rays that are close to perpendicular, but if the incident rays are at 45 degrees for example, the distance from the first layer to the second is much longer and longer wavelengths are cancelled. If white light comes in, the long red wavelengths are partly cancelled and the image is cyan.

    In systems designed from the start for digital, like the m43, image rays from the lenses are not allowed to arrive far off the perpendicular, so this effect is never produced. Film lenses, where the designers never worried about angle of incidence, just don't work as well in this case.

    With long focal length lenses, these issues don't arise generally, so most excellent film telephotos are still excellent digital lenses.

    Henning
    Likes 1 Member(s) liked this post

  44. #44
    Senior Member biglouis's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    2,122
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by henningw View Post
    Louis,

    My experience comes from many years as an architectural photographer, and for fast 8x10's and 11x14's the SWC was the go to camera for 30 years. If there was a bit more time, I'd use a Cambo Wide with roll film back with 47SA and 65 Grandagon, and later the 47XL-SA and 35 Apo Grandagon for any MF stuff. All four of these, and especially the latter two have more coverage for their angles of view and needed centre filters, but the last two especially eclipsed the 38 Biogon in almost every respect. I've also had 75 and 43 Biogons, and the latter was very good, but I find the better current designs generally 'better' than the old Biogons. 'Better' is of course a very subjective term.

    Upon reflection, it was also silly of me to compare an MF lens designed for film with a m43 lens designed for a specific digital sensor. Apples and potatoes.

    Doesn't mean I don't feel a great deal of fondness for the SWC, which I still have and occasionally use in conjunction with a Mamiya 6 set.

    Henning
    Henning, interesting to hear of your experiences. Those must all have been very interesting cameras to work with.

    Louis

  45. #45
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    Hawaii
    Posts
    944
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    16

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    I learn so much from ALL of you.......thank you.

    R

  46. #46
    Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    West Chester, PA
    Posts
    199
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    Henning, I hate to disagree but my experience with the 7-14 and the Hass SWC is not the same as yours. No way is the 7-14 even close. The 7-14 is a great lens and delivers on the promise of small portable good quality optics for m43rds but the SWC is a whole different order of quality above it, imho. However, I have rarely got a sharp image at the edges at 7mm even stopped down and comparing notes with at least one other owner we both agreed it was hard to do.
    Hmm, my 7-14 stopped down is very sharp to the corners. Particularly when stopped down to f/9 or f/11. Maybe I got a ringer...

    On another subject, I had the Voigtlander 25mm f0.95. Ended up selling it as I did not like the results versus the Panasonic 25mm. At f/0.95 the lens produced images that had a sort of glow that was like it had significant flare. This was noted at Luminous Landscape in their review. Stopping down tended to get rid of it, but I guess I like autofocus and when I want manual focus, the Panasonic works just fine. Everybody is different. Not interested in the 17mm from Voigtlander.

    Cliff

  47. #47
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    221
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by biglouis View Post
    Henning, interesting to hear of your experiences. Those must all have been very interesting cameras to work with.

    Louis
    Yes, lots of fun with toys!

    Sinar-p 4x5 and 8x10, Roundshot, Horizon and just about every shift lens made, along with many hundreds of other lenses. Now many are gone or relegated to the bottom shelf, but the Rounshot still gets some use.

    Now I mostly use teeny sensors up to 35mm ff. And for the most part, I'm quite happy about that, as long as I can still occasionally shoot some film.

    It'd be interesting to hear what other's experiences have been. Should start a thread on it.

    Henning

  48. #48
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Vancouver, BC
    Posts
    221
    Post Thanks / Like
    Images
    1

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by CPWarner View Post
    Hmm, my 7-14 stopped down is very sharp to the corners. Particularly when stopped down to f/9 or f/11. Maybe I got a ringer...

    On another subject, I had the Voigtlander 25mm f0.95. Ended up selling it as I did not like the results versus the Panasonic 25mm. At f/0.95 the lens produced images that had a sort of glow that was like it had significant flare. This was noted at Luminous Landscape in their review. Stopping down tended to get rid of it, but I guess I like autofocus and when I want manual focus, the Panasonic works just fine. Everybody is different. Not interested in the 17mm from Voigtlander.

    Cliff
    My 7-14 also gives me excellent results.

    I have the 25/0.95, and am quite happy with it. I bought it very lightly used, so didn't feel like I was taking much of a chance. I've used various Noctilux lenses over the years, from the 50/1.2 on. I still have and regularly use a ver.2 50/1 and have shot a bit with the f/0.95.

    The Nokton is a lens I treat like I would the Noctilux f/1 on the Leica, and put up with/use the aberrations that it produces. They are not the same as those of the Noctilux, but after shooting with the 50/1 the foibles of the Nokton are not hard to get used to. It has harsher bokeh and is, of course, not nearly as flare resistant as the Noctilux which is probably the most flare resistant of any lens I've ever used.

    In any case, on the GH2 and G3 the manual focussing operation feels quite easy and comfortable, and the results please me. I have the 20/1.7 and will not get the 25/1.4, as the 25 Nokton provides on the one had the slightly different f.o.v. and on the other a completely different character as well. The 17.5 will probably do the same but I'll wait a bit.

    Henning
    Last edited by henningw; 14th February 2012 at 15:18.

  49. #49
    Senior Member RichA's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    544
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    Quote Originally Posted by CPWarner View Post
    Hmm, my 7-14 stopped down is very sharp to the corners. Particularly when stopped down to f/9 or f/11. Maybe I got a ringer...

    On another subject, I had the Voigtlander 25mm f0.95. Ended up selling it as I did not like the results versus the Panasonic 25mm. At f/0.95 the lens produced images that had a sort of glow that was like it had significant flare. This was noted at Luminous Landscape in their review. Stopping down tended to get rid of it, but I guess I like autofocus and when I want manual focus, the Panasonic works just fine. Everybody is different. Not interested in the 17mm from Voigtlander.

    Cliff
    Both Olympus 4/3rds 7-14mm and Panasonic's m4/3rd version are very good lenses, but at f11, it's a guarantee they would be suffering from a little diffraction-caused blurring because of the 4/3rds sensor size. As far as the ultra-fast 25mm lenses go, I've yet to find one that was really good, except for Schneider's 25mm f0.95 "TV" lens, made for CCTV work. The speed gain over f1.4 is marginal and probably not worth it, unless the shallowest DOF is an absolute must.

  50. #50
    Senior Member Tesselator's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Japan
    Posts
    695
    Post Thanks / Like

    Re: Voigtlander 17.5mm f0.95

    I tested the Zeiss 45/2.8 and diffraction limitations didn't show up till f/16 and then it was VERY slight. It was noticeable at f/22 tho.



    or see it here: Zeiss Tessar 45mm f/2.8 Image Samples Focus point was the highest point on the door seam (crack).


    So I'm guessing that no lens will show DL at f/11 and that pretty much all lenses will follow the Tessar here: f/16 = an almost unnoticeable amount of DL but that's where it starts and increases from there.

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
  •