Juha Kannisto wrote:
catacore wrote:
Guys, I was just wondering (after reading all this thread, of course) what's your opinion on adapting this lens on Sony cameras when comparing its performance against the Brightin Star 2.8/28 on a Leica M camera? I am asking because many M-mount users seem happy with the BS lens performance for their used shooting scenarios (not landscapes or flat subjects) and I was wondering if the Color-Skopar 2.8/28 on a Sony camera would look same or worse than the BS on a Leica M or Sony UT-modified camera.
I do have the Thypoch Simera 1.4/28 lens but it is for sale because I consider it too big for a "just in case" carry situation (besides, I don't shoot much 28mm FL, if at all), but I am still eyeing this Color-Skopar (probably GAS induced) since is so small and lightweight. Even the Ultron is too big in my book, so I am not considering it at all, but this C-S is the same size as my 2.8/40 Heliar or 2.2/50 C-S, so happy to carry it with me everyday "just in case"....
Or, alternatively, do you think there is any 28mm small E-mount lens going to be launched any time soon? (No, I don't want that Viltrox 4.5/28 AF lens).
I'm quite happy with my Color-Skopar 28/2.8 VM Type II on my unmodified Sony cameras. I've used it on my A7C and A7CII. It does need f8 for best corner-to-corner sharpness at infinity shots though. I think the BS 28/2.8 is never sharp to the corners on Sony or even native M cameras based on what I've read about it (it should perform fairly similarly to MS-Optics 28/2-II which I have). There's also the Samyang Remaster Slim to be released soon for native E-mount which comes with a 28mm f3.5 lens module (I should receive my set tomorrow). It's also a very slim and low-weight option.
Some samples with CV 28/2.8 on my unmodified Sony cameras, pretty much all at f8 or wide open f2.8:
I think the main issue with CV 28/2.8 is that it has quite strong vignetting especially at widest apertures but also when stopped down to some extent. It could be reduced in PP though.
F-mount version would be quite a bit bigger, longer and heavier with an F to E-mount adapter and it's not the same optical design as the VM version. In my opinion the VM version performs quite well enough on Sony as-is and I wouldn't go for adapted SLR versions if size and weight are important.
Thanks Juha, your pictures are very telling, as always. And for me, at least, the 2.8/28 C-S's IQ looks absolutely fine.
Have not been following the "Samyang's lens trio" announcement, but I think I'll hold my horses for now to see what's about this new 3-in-1 pancake lens. Then I'll decide. Thanks again!
After shooting with the CV 28mm f/2.8 Color-Skopar for a while, I’ve found that stopping it down half a stop to f/3.2 makes a significant difference, especially in the mid-field. This improvement also comes from the lens’s noticeable field curvature. Stopping down increases depth of field and helps achieve a more even performance across the frame.
Regarding the field curvature I mentioned earlier, here's a further discussion with samples showing how the lens performs when focused at the center or mid-field. One might assume, based on the resolution comparisons in this review, that the CV 28/2.8 doesn't perform as well as the other lenses compared here at mid-field. However, this is also influenced by its higher field curvature.
This is the smallest lens in my Leica M system, and the strength and texture of such a tiny lens due to the use of brass often makes you overlook its optical qualities until you are amazed by the result!
Thanks to @Fred Miranda. By using Leica 28mm F5.6 settings, I got a huge improvement in vignetting which I think is the only downside to this lens.
This is the smallest lens in my Leica M system, and the strength and texture of such a tiny lens due to the use of brass often makes you overlook its optical qualities until you are amazed by the result!
Thanks to @Fred Miranda@. By using Leica 28mm F5.6 settings, I got a huge improvement in vignetting which I think is the only downside to this lens.
Great samples. I have to agree that the CV 28mm f/2.8 at f/5.6 is an outstanding lens, delivering high resolution and contrast across the frame. It performs on par with the best 28mm lenses but in a much more compact form. A perfect choice for spontaneous moments and street photography, as you’ve shown!
Malabito wrote:
Hi! can anyone comment in how is the focus throw of this lens? How does it compare to the 40mm heliar, or the 28mm summaron. Is it as slow?
Thanks!!!
It depends on the model. The Voigtlander 28mm f/2.8 Color-Skopar Type I (brass) has a long 180-degree focus throw. The aluminum Type II has a much shorter throw at about 120°.
Fred Miranda wrote:
It depends on the model. The Voigtlander 28mm f/2.8 Color-Skopar Type I (brass) has a long 180-degree focus throw. The aluminum Type II has a much shorter throw at about 120°.
Thanks! Type I is like the 40mm Heliar. Hard choice.... Looks vs functionality, I prefer the shorter throw.
Right now I'm shooting with the Voigtlander 28mm f2.8 Color-Skopar in silver on the M10-P Safari. I've been using the hood from the CV 50mm f3.5 APO-Lanthar Olive edition with it, and there's no vignetting at all with this combo.
Fred Miranda wrote:
....I've been using the hood from the CV 50mm f3.5 APO-Lanthar Olive edition with it, and there's no vignetting at all with this combo.
Aesthetically, this is a great pairing with that hood.
Has anyone gotten a chance to compare this lens to the Voigtlander 28mm f3.5? I recently acquired a Minolta CLE, and the camera's 28mm frameline is quite good, bright and unclutter. I pair the CLE with the 3.5 skopar, and the size is about perfect. I am curious if the newer 2.8 will perform noticeably better. I wonder the difference from f5.6 to f8 will be big enough to warrant an upgrade? Will the difference be visible on film. I also have the Voigtlander 28mm f2, but it looks just a touch too big on the CLE, so I think the new 2.8 type II will look much better on a CLE.
I briefly owned the 28mm f3.5, and currently own the 28mm f2.0 and the CLE. I returned the 3.5 due to smearing on digital sensors. Sharpness is fine in the center and stopped down to f8/11 it does ok in the corners on film. Based on Fred's reviews/pics I would say the newer 2.8 is the better lens, but not by much. Fred mentioned it performs similar to the 2.0, except a little more vignetting at 2.8. Another thing to consider is the older Voigtlander lenses are known to develop haze, including the 28 3.5.
I use the 28mm f2.0 and Nokton 40mm f1.4 on the CLE and they are great match for such a small camera. The difference in size between the 2.0 and 2.8 28mms is not that great.
m43hero wrote:
I briefly owned the 28mm f3.5, and currently own the 28mm f2.0 and the CLE. I returned the 3.5 due to smearing on digital sensors. Sharpness is fine in the center and stopped down to f8/11 it does ok in the corners on film. Based on Fred's reviews/pics I would say the newer 2.8 is the better lens, but not by much. Fred mentioned it performs similar to the 2.0, except a little more vignetting at 2.8. Another thing to consider is the older Voigtlander lenses are known to develop haze, including the 28 3.5.
I use the 28mm f2.0 and Nokton 40mm f1.4 on the CLE and they are great match for such a small camera. The difference in size between the 2.0 and 2.8 28mms is not that great....Show more →
m43hero:
I'm curious which camera the Voigtlander 28/3.5 was mounted on. I own this lens, and my experience on the M240, M10M, and M10-R is that there is no "smearing." Actually, I don't know exactly what that means, though I assume you mean a significant loss of detail at the edges. At any rate, this is simply a counterpoint in case others are considering this lens on recent Leica M-mount bodies.
Smearing, as in the outer 1/3 of the image being considerably less sharp. This was on a Sony A7R2 camera, so probably due to the thick sensor glass.
juanj wrote:
m43hero:
I'm curious which camera the Voigtlander 28/3.5 was mounted on. I own this lens, and my experience on the M240, M10M, and M10-R is that there is no "smearing." Actually, I don't know exactly what that means, though I assume you mean a significant loss of detail at the edges. At any rate, this is simply a counterpoint in case others are considering this lens on recent Leica M-mount bodies.
If anyone is looking for an ultra-thin UV filter for their Voigtlander 28mm f/2.8 Type I, the one I bought in Japan is now available on eBay: https://www.ebay.com/itm/317034474950
Which of these silver lenses do you find more aesthetically pleasing?
On the left is the Voigtlander 28mm f/2.8 Color-Skopar Type II (silver anodized aluminum), and on the right is the Voigtlander 28mm f/2.8 Color-Skopar Type I (chrome brass).
Both have the same length and identical optical design.
