nehemiahphoto wrote:
Are you still liking the m9? I sent of my camera to NKIR to get modded with a thin sensor. I think I’ll try this new CV 28/2 once so get it back.
Yes, I love the M9's tonality and colors. It's getting its sensor replaced at the moment. :-)
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Are you still liking the m9? I sent of my camera to NKIR to get modded with a thin sensor. I think I’ll try this new CV 28/2 once so get it back.
I hope you’ll report back on your experience. I’m thinking of having the NKIR conversion done on an A7R3.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, I love the M9's tonality and colors. It's getting its sensor replaced at the moment. :-)
I can only think of a few digital cameras with a cult followings for the colors. M9, a900, Contax N digital and the Nikon d2x come to mind. I have almost picked up an m9 several times over the last decade.
@genji Can do! Thus far, the camera was received with no delays/issues and NKIR people have been communicative via Facebook messenger. Turn around time is 4-6 weeks, so I’ll know more then. Just remind me/ask specifics—happy to answer.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
@genji@ Can do! Thus far, the camera was received with no delays/issues and NKIR people have been communicative via Facebook messenger. Turn around time is 4-6 weeks, so I’ll know more then. Just remind me/ask specifics—happy to answer.
Thank you! Seems like I’ll have to reactivate my long dormant FB account if I want to proceed.
I was re-reading this thread, and perhaps I missed it, but can anyone link me to some systematic testing between the CV 28v2 and 28 Cron v1 or v2 (tripod, leica sensor stack, etc). I find a lot of video reviews and people with opinions about both lenses, but I would like to see some systematic testing for my own understanding (and honestly too much bias in Leica land for me, despite I own and like some Leica glass).
Especially WO at mid distance—I am sure the CV 28v2 will beat the Crons for resolution across the frame, but I’d like to see if there’s an appreciable difference in rendering the way I’d use a 28/2.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I was re-reading this thread, and perhaps I missed it, but can anyone link me to some systematic testing between the CV 28v2 and 28 Cron v1 or v2 (tripod, leica sensor stack, etc). I find a lot of video reviews and people with opinions about both lenses, but I would like to see some systematic testing for my own understanding (and honestly too much bias in Leica land for me, despite I own and like some Leica glass).
Especially WO at mid distance—I am sure the CV 28v2 will beat the Crons for resolution across the frame, but I’d like to see if there’s an appreciable difference in rendering the way I’d use a 28/2.
Newsflash! Humble Pie Edition. Despite my prior misgivings, the Ultron 28/2 v2 turns out to be most impressive. Even if I do get a Summicron 28 v1 or v2 as is my intention, I’ll hold on to the Ultron. I’d like to take some more pictures with the Ultron before I post my detailed impressions as promised but this will have to wait until the heavy rain that’s predicted for the next few days has eased.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I was re-reading this thread, and perhaps I missed it, but can anyone link me to some systematic testing between the CV 28v2 and 28 Cron v1 or v2 (tripod, leica sensor stack, etc). I find a lot of video reviews and people with opinions about both lenses, but I would like to see some systematic testing for my own understanding (and honestly too much bias in Leica land for me, despite I own and like some Leica glass).
Especially WO at mid distance—I am sure the CV 28v2 will beat the Crons for resolution across the frame, but I’d like to see if there’s an appreciable difference in rendering the way I’d use a 28/2.
...Show more →
I posted several times in this thread. Check the link below where I have uploaded test shots with the Ultron II and Summicron Asph II.
Not using M camera though, but a Kolari UT modded Nikon Z6. I did a quick comparison with my cron v2 on a M240 and Z6UT, and the difference was that the Z6UT had more vignetting, but less color shift ("Italian flag" issue). Regarding field curvature and corner sharpness etc., I couldn't detect any difference.
genji wrote:
Newsflash! Humble Pie Edition. Despite my prior misgivings, the Ultron 28/2 v2 turns out to be most impressive. Even if I do get a Summicron 28 v1 or v2 as is my intention, I’ll hold on to the Ultron. I’d like to take some more pictures with the Ultron before I post my detailed impressions as promised but this will have to wait until the heavy rain that’s predicted for the next few days has eased.
No surprise to me.
I owned the Summicron Asph II and ordered the Ultron Asph II while the former was in Wetzlar for service. I have now sold the Leica lens. Technically, the Voigtländer is overall better than the Leica lens.
LarsHP wrote:
I posted several times in this thread. Check the link below where I have uploaded test shots with the Ultron II and Summicron Asph II.
Not using M camera though, but a Kolari UT modded Nikon Z6. I did a quick comparison with my cron v2 on a M240 and Z6UT, and the difference was that the Z6UT had more vignetting, but less color shift ("Italian flag" issue). Regarding field curvature and corner sharpness etc., I couldn't detect any difference.
Thanks @LarsHP and @naturephoto1. as far as I’m concerned, a UTI and native sensor are the same to me effectively. Just what I am hoping for Curious to hear your thoughts as well @genji
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Thanks @LarsHP@ and @naturephoto1. as far as I’m concerned, a UTI and native sensor are the same to me effectively. Just what I am hoping for Curious to hear your thoughts as well @genji@
I owned the Summicron Asph II and ordered the Ultron Asph II while the former was in Wetzlar for service. I have now sold the Leica lens. Technically, the Voigtländer is overall better than the Leica lens.
No surprise to me that the Ultron is technically superior to the Summicron but if technical excellence was my primary criterion for choosing a lens I’d be a Peter Karbe fan.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Why didn't you send your Sony to Kolari instead?
Because the UT (works out to 0.9) is not as thin as the NKIR v3+ (0.75), and while this may not affect many modern RF lenses, other lenses like the Contax G line I believe will do better with thinner while not negatively affecting most current M glass. Additionally, the color management/WB issues seem better on the NKIR versus the Kolari with the UT vs. V3+. On top of that, NKIR told me they are trying out a newer thinner (V5), and that filter is (0.58), so I am hoping for further improvements on those more difficult lenses, so I am hoping that passes into production and I get that (should know soon). Lastly, I can test my NKIR (either V3+ or V5) against Sebboh's Kolari UT as we live near and are friends. The NKIR mod is also cheaper a bit and less of a known quantity, which naturally heightens my interest as well.
Honestly, it was a surprise to me that the Ultron II was sharper across the frame than my Summicron-M Asph II (both wide open). In terms of bokeh, they both have their strengths and weaknesses; the Ultron smoother in the central area, the Summicron in the sides and corners at medium focus distance. My biggest complaint about the Ultron II is that its vignetting is so strong that I consider it roughly a f/2.4 lens with a small hot spot in the center.
genji wrote:
No surprise to me that the Ultron is technically superior to the Summicron but if technical excellence was my primary criterion for choosing a lens I’d be a Peter Karbe fan.
