I'm considering upgrading my Ultron 35/1.7 + close focus adapter for the new Nokton. Mainly to go native and get rid of the adapter.
Is it worth it? What will I gain other than faster aperture?
I think the major thing you will get is a lens designed for the Sony sensor. That should mean less astigmatism/field curvature especially in the outer part of the frame.
Steve Spencer wrote:
I think the major thing you will get is a lens designed for the Sony sensor. That should mean less astigmatism/field curvature especially in the outer part of the frame.
I've compared the CV 35/1.2 III (M-mount) on the Sony A7R IV and Leica M10 yesterday and it performed well even on the Sony. Way better than the Zeiss 35/1.4 ZM, CV 35/1.7 or CV 35/2 Ultron lenses do on Sony's thicker sensor stack.
So for those who are looking for a fast 35mm M-mount lens that works well on both systems, the new CV 35/1.2 III VM is the best choice I've seen so far. It still performs better on the Leica though. The induced field curvature is still noticeable in the OOF rendering at mid-distance but it's not very prominent. At f/4-5.6, it's sharp from center to edges similarly on both systems.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I've compared the CV 35/1.2 III (M-mount) on the Sony A7R IV and Leica M10 yesterday and it performed well even on the Sony. Way better than the Zeiss 35/1.4 ZM, CV 35/1.7 or CV 35/2 Ultron lenses do on Sony's thicker sensor stack.
So for those who are looking for a fast 35mm M-mount lens that works well on both systems, the new CV 35/1.2 III VM is the best choice I've seen so far. It still performs better on the Leica though. The induced field curvature is still noticeable in the OOF rendering at mid-distance but it's not very prominent. At f/4-5.6, it's sharp from center to edges similarly on both systems.
So I suspect it makes more sense to get the 35/1.2 SE and sell the Ultron for someone just using Sony? Just trying to understand if I'll get a dramatically better image by doing so.
matt-to wrote:
So I suspect it makes more sense to get the 35/1.2 SE and sell the Ultron for someone just using Sony? Just trying to understand if I'll get a dramatically better image by doing so.
If you are only using it on the Sony, get the 35/1.2 SE.
If you are using it with both Sony and Leica, get the 35/1.2 III VM. (Unless you are willing to buy two lenses)
The Voigtlander 35/1.7 Ultron is a great lens. Sharp from wide open at center/mid and optimal across the field at f/4 on the Leica. It does not work great on the Sony unless you add a front lens (5m PCX) to it. I would pick the CV 35/1.2 III if you intend to adapt it on the Sony without any PCX glass.
I've tested many copies against each other and the 35/1.7 is sharper than the newer CV 35/2 Ultron at center @f/1.7 and f/2 but it's bigger and heavier.
If you intend to use it on the Leica, it's one of the best 35mm lenses I've tested.
However, the new Voigtlander 35/1.2 III came along and stirred things up a bit. it's just as long as the CV 35/1.7 Ultron but it's a full stop faster. At infinity, it's sharper than the Ultron f/1.7 until about f/2.8 at center and at f/4 it's just as good off-axis. So, although it's a bit heavier (90 grams more) it blocks the rangefinder framelines just as much as the CV 35/1.7 Ultron while being faster and sharper at similar apertures.
Rendering-wise the CV 35/1.2 III Nokton is capable of smoother transition zone and less cat-eye shaped specular highlights towards the edges at similar apertures but the CV 35/1.7 Ultron has gorgeous rendering as well. (Smoother rendering than CV 35/2 Ultron or CV 35/2.5 Color Skopar)
Yes, it's discontinued which means it will only be available on the used market soon. Not sure what will happen to the pricing.
Here's how the lenses commented here look side by side:
From LEFT TO RIGHT: CV 35/2.5, CV 35/2, CV 35/1.7, CV 35/1.2
Fred Miranda wrote:
The Voigtlander 35/1.7 Ultron is a great lens. Sharp from wide open at center/mid and optimal across the field at f/4 on the Leica. It does not work great on the Sony unless you add a front lens (5m PCX) to it. I would pick the CV 35/1.2 III if you intend to adapt it on the Sony without any PCX glass.
I've tested many copies against each other and the 35/1.7 is sharper than the newer CV 35/2 Ultron at center @f/1.7 and f/2 but it's bigger and heavier.
If you intend to use it on the Leica, it's one of the best 35mm lenses I've tested.
However, the new Voigtlander 35/1.2 III came along and stirred things up a bit. it's just as long as the CV 35/1.7 Ultron but it's a full stop faster. At infinity, it's sharper than the Ultron f/1.7 until about f/2.8 at center and at f/4 it's just as good off-axis. So, although it's a bit heavier (90 grams more) it blocks the rangefinder framelines just as much as the CV 35/1.7 Ultron while being faster and sharper at similar apertures.
Rendering-wise the CV 35/1.2 III Nokton is capable of smoother transition zone and less cat-eye shaped specular highlights towards the edges at similar apertures but the CV 35/1.7 Ultron has gorgeous rendering as well. (Smoother rendering than CV 35/2 Ultron or CV 35/2.5 Color Skopar)
Yes, it's discontinued which means it will only be available on the used market soon. Not sure what will happen to the pricing.
Here's how the lenses commented here look side by side:
From LEFT TO RIGHT: CV 35/2.5, CV 35/2, CV 35/1.7, CV 35/1.2
Nice... This in SE version will most likely be my next buy now after I've bought the 50mm f/1.2 SE. But I'm kinda debating between 21mm f/3.5 Color-Skopar & this 35mm f/1.2 Nokton OR just the 21mm f/1.4 Nokton.
Fred, since you own both the Sony and the Leica M10, it would be great, if you didn´t that before, to compare them not from a supertechnical standpoint but from your user experience.
I have recently reviewed the new Leica M10 R for the spanish newspaper I work for as a freelance (www.elmundo.es) and was surprised by the IQ, the colors and the contrast straight out of camera (the lens I was using was the 50mm summicron f2), although I found the MF system is really challenging. Pricing is the obvious problem, and this entry barrier generates an interesting debate on the value-price equation and the weight of the emotional factor in photography.
fededuran wrote:
Fred, since you own both the Sony and the Leica M10, it would be great, if you didn´t that before, to compare them not from a supertechnical standpoint but from your user experience.
I have recently reviewed the new Leica M10 R for the spanish newspaper I work for as a freelance (www.elmundo.es) and was surprised by the IQ, the colors and the contrast straight out of camera (the lens I was using was the 50mm summicron f2), although I found the MF system is really challenging. Pricing is the obvious problem, and this entry barrier generates an interesting debate on the value-price equation and the weight of the emotional factor in photography....Show more →
I second that! That would be a good read. I am also about to buy a used M10 from the secondhand market.
The last time I had rangefinder experience was many years ago with a Voigtlander Bessa R3A film camera plus the Voigtlander 40mm f/1.4. That was fun.
After that I was a few time in the Leica HQ in Solms and when they moved back to their birthplace in Wetzlar I visited their newest HQ in the Leitz Park (at that time the R&D building with Huawei wasn't built) and tried their entire product portfolio.
For years I haven't touch a rangefinder again.
The Sony cameras make it easy to take photos, their RAW files allow you a lot of head space to post-process them as you wish till you hit the barrier after a broad vastness, wide DR, IBIS, the AF (eye AF, animal AF detection, tracking etc.) but somehow with all that technology it literally takes away the experience of taking photos as Leica and the Leica camera owners propagate (Das Wesentliche). I can't believe that that I am saying/writing this but somehow there is some truth in it. If you say this to my past me I would label you as a crazy person.
Raptor17 wrote:
The Sony cameras make it easy to take photos, their RAW files allow you a lot of head space to post-process them as you wish till you hit the barrier after a broad vastness, wide DR, IBIS, the AF (eye AF, animal AF detection, tracking etc.) but somehow with all that technology it literally takes away the experience of taking photos as Leica and the Leica camera owners propagate (Das Wesentliche). I can't believe that that I am saying/writing this but somehow there is some truth in it. If you say this to my past me I would label you as a crazy person. ...Show more →
I've been shooting with mostly manual glass on mirrorless for 5 years now (first Fuji then Sony). I've tested friend's leica, but modern EVF with "what you see is what you get" is what I prefer. And these modern native Voigtländer lenses for sony are a truly heaven-sent for people like me, as I get all the EXIF data and best performing IBIS. And still I get to do all the "artistic" work myself with magnificient manual operating glass, while camera only does the "boring" stuff. Best of both worlds. Just wish my A7III had better EVF (which might be the only reason I'm following the news of A7C with interest) and a bit better focus peaking.
