I picked up my 50/3.5 Type I Two Tone lens with a trade in at Map Camera on Friday lunch break so I can enjoy shooting with it from Saturday
No time to shoot today but Saturday's weather forecast looks perfect so hopefully I can spend a lot of time with it tomorrow. So far I just confirmed that hard infinity is perfect with my Rayqual adapter. This lens should be able to focus down to 33.4 cm with CV VM-E closer focus adapter II, whereas Type II would be able to go 28.9 cm (based on Cosina's table of close-focus distances for the adapter). I will use my Rayqual for the most part though to be able to utilize hard infinity and to keep it lighter. I also checked the weight on my kitchen scale and it came up as 230g without caps or hood, so very close to Fred's 229g result. I get 137g for Color-Skopar 50/2.2 on the same scale (without caps & hood).
With the 50/3.5 the glass of the back element is quite recessed and not close to the mount. It might be part of the reason why it performs so well on Sony too. In contrast with 50/2.2 the back element's glass is very close and not recessed at all.
My two APO 50/3.5 arrived today.
Type I Black and Type II Silver.
Lovely lenses but again quality control issues strike again... both copies have a front focus.
The Type II silver lens has a nice sizeable piece of lint inside what looks to be in the middle of the lenses possibly in near the aperture assembly.
I'm now thoroughly fed up with 3 poor samples of Voigtlander lenses in a row. My rangefinder is accurate. My Zeiss Planar, Summicron-m 50mm V, Nokton 75/1.5, Ultron 28mm ASPH II, Tele-Elmarit 90mm, Skopar 35mm, Skopar 21mm are all accurate.
It would seem that both lenses are not cam'd on the ring that moves the rangefinder focus. Unlike both my Zeiss and Summicron that are slightly cut to adapt the lens focal length to the rangefinder focal length.
The reason I looked if the ring has a cam is because infinity focus matches my camera's rangefinder, but at anything closer than infinity the rangefinder starts progressively front focusing. All my 50mm and longer lenses have an angled or a cam ring and track focus properly throughout the focus range.
Fred Miranda wrote:
On the subject of APO and its qualities, I highly recommend this video featuring Peter Karbe, Leica lens designer. Pay special attention starting at the 26-minute mark.
I only watched a bit of it (starting at 25-min) ... will revisit the rest later.
We've come a long way since 30 was considered the baseline for "good". Seeing "tight" above 80 almost across the board is a bit mind boggling. Seeing the overlay on the falloff and how that relates to transitions, as well as resolving capability beyond our current sensors (follow the curve), still well above the 30 / 50 levels, is impressive to be sure.
A few things that kinda kept creeping in on me, even while diggin' on it ... size. Physical size needed to achieve such impressive results. Inability to use on an M mount. One thing about the M mount or, rather the L mount, is it is restricted to EVF. While viewfinder lag is certainly PDG for most things, I still find times when I prefer the M's RF / OVF to my SL's EVF.
I did also appreciate the falloff explanation / comp of f/2 in the APO vs. the f/1.4 of the non-APO.
Impressive engineering all around, indeed. And yet ... I'm still not ready to add one to my bag. With lots of excellent "Near APO" glass available, I'm a bit torn between the character (I like some SA in my mono, for instance) available of non-APO (read, "almost APO"), and the "perfection" of APO. Even within Leica's stables are lenses that are really good, buy didn't get the APO nomenclature. Never mind (okay, sorta) the size, weight, $$$ differences the APO brings to the table. That last % of correction is expensive to achieve (size, weight, $$$), but if you want it ...
My two APO 50/3.5 arrived today.
Type I Black and Type II Silver.
Lovely lenses but again quality control issues strike again... both copies have a front focus.
The Type II silver lens has a nice sizeable piece of lint inside what looks to be in the middle of the lenses possibly in near the aperture assembly.
I'm now thoroughly fed up with 3 poor samples of Voigtlander lenses in a row. My rangefinder is accurate. My Zeiss Planar, Summicron-m 50mm V, Nokton 75/1.5, Ultron 28mm ASPH II, Tele-Elmarit 90mm, Skopar 35mm, Skopar 21mm are all accurate.
It would seem that both lenses are not cam'd on the ring that moves the rangefinder focus. Unlike both my Zeiss and Summicron that are slightly cut to adapt the lens focal length to the rangefinder focal length.
The reason I looked if the ring has a cam is because infinity focus matches my camera's rangefinder, but at anything closer than infinity the rangefinder starts progressively front focusing. All my 50mm and longer lenses have an angled or a cam ring and track focus properly throughout the focus range.
Thanks for posting and sorry you had bum luck again.
This is why I’ve given up trying to save a few $$ and buying from overseas. Buying local makes it much much easier to deal with any issues.
I know you don’t have that option, but for those who do, buy local.
My two APO 50/3.5 arrived today.
Type I Black and Type II Silver.
Lovely lenses but again quality control issues strike again... both copies have a front focus.
The Type II silver lens has a nice sizeable piece of lint inside what looks to be in the middle of the lenses possibly in near the aperture assembly.
I'm now thoroughly fed up with 3 poor samples of Voigtlander lenses in a row. My rangefinder is accurate. My Zeiss Planar, Summicron-m 50mm V, Nokton 75/1.5, Ultron 28mm ASPH II, Tele-Elmarit 90mm, Skopar 35mm, Skopar 21mm are all accurate.
It would seem that both lenses are not cam'd on the ring that moves the rangefinder focus. Unlike both my Zeiss and Summicron that are slightly cut to adapt the lens focal length to the rangefinder focal length.
The reason I looked if the ring has a cam is because infinity focus matches my camera's rangefinder, but at anything closer than infinity the rangefinder starts progressively front focusing. All my 50mm and longer lenses have an angled or a cam ring and track focus properly throughout the focus range.
That looks quite troubling. Is it possible to exchange the lens?
I just checked my three copies for dust in the elements and alignment with the rangefinder. Like the chrome pre-production version, the other two copies are also perfectly aligned at 0.7m, 2m, and 5m. Their infinity hard stops are identical, which I used to compare their resolution performance.
Regarding dust or lint, I didn’t find any particles in any of the three lenses. It seems you might have had some bad luck. I hope you can arrange an exchange. If not, try removing the rear core to see if you can clean the dust. @yukosteel's advice might be helpful here.
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I picked up my 50/3.5 Type I Two Tone lens with a trade in at Map Camera on Friday lunch break so I can enjoy shooting with it from Saturday
No time to shoot today but Saturday's weather forecast looks perfect so hopefully I can spend a lot of time with it tomorrow. So far I just confirmed that hard infinity is perfect with my Rayqual adapter. This lens should be able to focus down to 33.4 cm with CV VM-E closer focus adapter II, whereas Type II would be able to go 28.9 cm (based on Cosina's table of close-focus distances for the adapter). I will use my Rayqual for the most part though to be able to utilize hard infinity and to keep it lighter. I also checked the weight on my kitchen scale and it came up as 230g without caps or hood, so very close to Fred's 229g result. I get 137g for Color-Skopar 50/2.2 on the same scale (without caps & hood).
With the 50/3.5 the glass of the back element is quite recessed and not close to the mount. It might be part of the reason why it performs so well on Sony too. In contrast with 50/2.2 the back element's glass is very close and not recessed at all....Show more →
Congratulations Juha!
The Voigtlander VM-E close-up adapter II extends by 4.5mm, just like the Techart LM-EA9 AF adapter. This means that using the Type I version with these close-up adapters gives you the same magnification as using the Type I without any adapter.
It was great to find out that the CV 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar Type I Two-Tone is actually lighter than advertised. Cosina should probably update this info.
Can’t wait to see your samples on Saturday! We already know it will perform really well, but I think you’ll also enjoy how it renders images.
highdesertmesa wrote:
Nice! You may have answered this earlier in the thread, but does the black paint Type II still have a brass focusing ring? Hoping the paint would wear off to brass and not silver.
The brass material for the Type II Black Paint is located on the inner tube (where the distance engravings are), as well as around the two poles and the mount. Unfortunately, it does not extend to the focusing ring, aperture area, or the front of the lens. While this design choice appears to enhance durability, it also means that wear and tear won't develop a 'patina' on the ring areas, which may or may not be a concern.
RustyBug wrote:
I only watched a bit of it (starting at 25-min) ... will revisit the rest later.
We've come a long way since 30 was considered the baseline for "good". Seeing "tight" above 80 almost across the board is a bit mind boggling. Seeing the overlay on the falloff and how that relates to transitions, as well as resolving capability beyond our current sensors (follow the curve), still well above the 30 / 50 levels, is impressive to be sure.
A few things that kinda kept creeping in on me, even while diggin' on it ... size. Physical size needed to achieve such impressive results. Inability to use on an M mount. One thing about the M mount or, rather the L mount, is it is restricted to EVF. While viewfinder lag is certainly PDG for most things, I still find times when I prefer the M's RF / OVF to my SL's EVF.
I did also appreciate the falloff explanation / comp of f/2 in the APO vs. the f/1.4 of the non-APO.
Impressive engineering all around, indeed. And yet ... I'm still not ready to add one to my bag. With lots of excellent "Near APO" glass available, I'm a bit torn between the character (I like some SA in my mono, for instance) available of non-APO (read, "almost APO"), and the "perfection" of APO. Even within Leica's stables are lenses that are really good, buy didn't get the APO nomenclature. Never mind (okay, sorta) the size, weight, $$$ differences the APO brings to the table. That last % of correction is expensive to achieve (size, weight, $$$), but if you want it ...
Still, impressive, impressive, impressive. ...Show more →
I agree that some aberrations can be appealing depending on the subject, but over the years, I've found that a well-corrected APO lens offers its own unique "character," especially with SL lenses. The high contrast and resolution in the focused area are noticeable, even in resized images (especially contrast as Peter noted). The same applies to the Voigtlander APO-Lanthar lenses. It’s not just about the blur... it’s a different kind of separation that works exceptionally well.
The good news is that we don't have to spend a fortune to achieve this effect. I highly recommend watching the entire video.
My two APO 50/3.5 arrived today.
Type I Black and Type II Silver.
Lovely lenses but again quality control issues strike again... both copies have a front focus.
The Type II silver lens has a nice sizeable piece of lint inside what looks to be in the middle of the lenses possibly in near the aperture assembly.
I'm now thoroughly fed up with 3 poor samples of Voigtlander lenses in a row. My rangefinder is accurate. My Zeiss Planar, Summicron-m 50mm V, Nokton 75/1.5, Ultron 28mm ASPH II, Tele-Elmarit 90mm, Skopar 35mm, Skopar 21mm are all accurate.
It would seem that both lenses are not cam'd on the ring that moves the rangefinder focus. Unlike both my Zeiss and Summicron that are slightly cut to adapt the lens focal length to the rangefinder focal length.
The reason I looked if the ring has a cam is because infinity focus matches my camera's rangefinder, but at anything closer than infinity the rangefinder starts progressively front focusing. All my 50mm and longer lenses have an angled or a cam ring and track focus properly throughout the focus range.
I’m wondering if you are deliberately sent the runt of the litter copies because you have to order from abroad. So the ‘defective’ lenses are sent to places that do not have any local distributors, with the assumption being those areas will just be grateful to be getting anything.
Sounds wacky, but you have had the worst luck with gear.
Desmolicious wrote:
I’m wondering if you are deliberately sent the runt of the litter copies because you have to order from abroad. So the ‘defective’ lenses are sent to places that do not have any local distributors, with the assumption being those areas will just be grateful to be getting anything.
Sounds wacky, but you have had the worst luck with gear.
There are so many variables with M lenses when used on a rangefinder, it’s not surprising to me. I’ve moved to the SL3 entirely, so thankfully I don’t have to worry about rangefinder calibration issues. Now it’s just the normal is it centered and is infinity at the hardtop correct (I have a reference lens I know to be correct to set the infinity hard stop on my macro adapter).
Leica saw the SL series and SL lenses project as an escape from the confines of the M lens design constraints, but they still kept size/weight in proportion to the camera bodies. APO can most certainly be achieved at light-moderate weights and sizing, in manual focus lenses.
Examples are the M 35/2 at 320g; the CV 35/2 at 305g; CV 50/2 at 290g; M 50/2 at 300g and the older M-APO lenses at 75/2 (430g) and 90/2 (530g). Ironically, these last two were overbuilt on their simpler designs of 7/5 and 5/5. The SL lenses feature super image quality wide open, which necessitated a design stretch.
The take homes here are:
. APO can be achieved at all normal focal lengths;
. APO lenses can be engineered to perform at below the 80% mark;
. APO and weight/size are not mutually exclusive;
. APO and design complexity are not necessarily correlated;
. All APO lenses do have strong performance, starting wide open unless designed not to, as in the 90/2 M lens and early Otuses.
The APO lenses developed in the 2010s were seen by Leica and Zeiss as landmark lenses that needed to be given grandiose size and presentation - Otuses and SL. But in just a few years after that, the new breed appeared.
They are still a novelty in the marketplace, and the effort that goes into them focused on technical perfection in fast lenses; at this elevated level, makers may need time to engineer other photographic aspects into them. Many modern lenses are close to APO and are wonderful options - the gap is reducing.
To my knowledge this current thread deals with what may be only the second APO lens to lack aspherical surfacing (Cosina make them both). It's also the slowest, smallest and lightest, so it's a breakthrough of sorts. Maybe not the last of its kind as well as the first.
Fred Miranda wrote:
That looks quite troubling. Is it possible to exchange the lens?
I just checked my three copies for dust in the elements and alignment with the rangefinder. Like the chrome pre-production version, the other two copies are also perfectly aligned at 0.7m, 2m, and 5m. Their infinity hard stops are identical, which I used to compare their resolution performance.
Regarding dust or lint, I didn’t find any particles in any of the three lenses. It seems you might have had some bad luck. I hope you can arrange an exchange. If not, try removing the rear core to see if you can clean the dust. @yukosteel@'s advice might be helpful here....Show more →
Unfortunately our customs and excise rules here are strangely complicated, enforced by officials who have no idea how things work. With the Skopar lens, I enquired with UPS how much it would cost to return the lens, since it arrived from Robert White via UPS. It cost around £47 to ship from the UK to me, however, the return would cost around £201! On top of that, I will have no way of claiming back the import duties I paid, which work out to around 16.5% of the invoice amount.
Robert White has offered to enquire about return shipping of all three lenses, but I have no hopes that it will be economically feasible. Since the Skopar will be returned to Cosina Japan, and likely be looked at and deemed " in spec". I'm just very pessimistic about the problem.
Regarding the lint, I don't think that would be a difficult fix. But that is the least of my concern. The front focus issue make the lenses practically useless on the M11. Removing a shim won't fix the issue since that influences the focus issue equally over the entire range, and therefor will create a back focus problem when it comes to infinity subjects.
The non linear behaviour could be a camera issue, but seeing that none of my other lenses, of which I have several, show this type of behaviour. I can quite confidently rule out a camera issue. Besides, I have no issue with the Nokton 75mm f/1.5 with which I can consistently achieve focus at wide open aperture. The M11 rangefinder is fantastic with accuracy, and my eyes are up to the task.
At this point, if I were an impulsive person, I would have considered selling everything and moving back to Nikon. The stress or anxiety involved with getting stuff shipped to an African country, and then testing for a string of issues to determine if its a good lens copy, is just sucking the joy out photography for me. It's just not worth it. I would gladly pay double for Voigtlander if they can guarantee their quality.
In this case I bought two APO 50/3.5 lenses and both are not good. Its absurd.
Desmolicious wrote:
I’m wondering if you are deliberately sent the runt of the litter copies because you have to order from abroad. So the ‘defective’ lenses are sent to places that do not have any local distributors, with the assumption being those areas will just be grateful to be getting anything.
Sounds wacky, but you have had the worst luck with gear.
It feels like a curse that I've dealt with pretty much since the beginning of my photography days. However, since moving over to Leica, it's become much much worse. My luck with new Leica glass is even worse than what I'm experiencing with Voigtlander.
highdesertmesa wrote:
There are so many variables with M lenses when used on a rangefinder, it’s not surprising to me. I’ve moved to the SL3 entirely, so thankfully I don’t have to worry about rangefinder calibration issues. Now it’s just the normal is it centered and is infinity at the hardtop correct (I have a reference lens I know to be correct to set the infinity hard stop on my macro adapter).
I'm close to just throwing in the towel. At this point I've wasted enough money with these three lenses that I could have just booked a flight to Germany, cherry picked a lens and flown back for about the same money.
For me to sell any Leica equipment, I would have to try South Africa, and even then, there is virtually no demand.
I've done some more testing between the two copies of the APO 50/3.5 lenses, and they aren't the same. Quite some variation. Non are perfect.
I took my new 50/3.5 Duo-Tone (official label seems to be Two Tone) out for a long walk today, mostly around Nakano and Shinjuku. I'm really happy with my copy and also happy to see that it works so well on Sony (as already reported by Fred). Sad to hear about the copy variation on hmzimelka's case...
I applied my favorite preset on them in C1 Pro and exported from Raw. No other adjustments except some exposure tweaks on a few shots, and highlights adjustment on one or two.
hmzimelka wrote:
It feels like a curse that I've dealt with pretty much since the beginning of my photography days. However, since moving over to Leica, it's become much much worse. My luck with new Leica glass is even worse than what I'm experiencing with Voigtlander.
I'm close to just throwing in the towel. At this point I've wasted enough money with these three lenses that I could have just booked a flight to Germany, cherry picked a lens and flown back for about the same money.
For me to sell any Leica equipment, I would have to try South Africa, and even then, there is virtually no demand.
I've done some more testing between the two copies of the APO 50/3.5 lenses, and they aren't the same. Quite some variation. Non are perfect....Show more →
Having spent considerable time in Africa myself I can fully sympathise with the difficulties you are dealing with. Don't despair there are solutions. I was fortunate enough to have a good support system in Europe, and the U.S.. Since things were not available in the local markets, and import and returns were just impossible, they would buy, inspect to make sure everything was of the quality needed and then ship to me, or have it carried in when a friend was coming back in Country. I think you could likely set up similar arrangements for camera equipment with a friend in Japan. He could shop the local market, test, then ship. Maybe in send to someone in a neighboring African Country that travels to your Country frequently so he can hand carry in for you. These are just the realities of life in such Countries, and we must develop networks to deal with them.
Don't let this destroy your enjoyment of photography.
Maybe I missed it in here somewhere, what are the prices in the US for the Type I two tone and where can we buy? Looks like B&H and Cameraquest don’t have them yet
hmzimelka wrote:
Regarding the lint, I don't think that would be a difficult fix. But that is the least of my concern. The front focus issue make the lenses practically useless on the M11. Removing a shim won't fix the issue since that influences the focus issue equally over the entire range, and therefor will create a back focus problem when it comes to infinity subjects.
Noticing front-focus in an f/3.5 lens indicates it is severely misaligned. If your lens is indeed front-focusing, removing a mount shim, or in other words, decreasing the distance between the lens and the sensor, will correct the issue. However, as you mentioned, this adjustment could alter the lens alignment at long distances. In some cases, this can be the right fix if Cosina didn't use the correct size shims, and tweaking it resolves everything from close focus to infinity.
Most recent Cosina lenses don't include shims in the mount. Instead, they usually have "rangefinder adjustment" shims, which are smaller and require more disassembly but are often accessible. For example, the Voigtlander 28mm f/1.5 Nokton has such shims that can be accessed without even removing the lens mount.
rsolti13 wrote:
Maybe I missed it in here somewhere, what are the prices in the US for the Type I two tone and where can we buy? Looks like B&H and Cameraquest don’t have them yet
Cosina has not yet released the US prices for the Voigtlander 50mm f/3.5 APO-Lanthar. Some styles might cost slightly more. The pricing details are expected to be available today or tomorrow.
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I took my new 50/3.5 Duo-Tone (official label seems to be Two Tone) out for a long walk today, mostly around Nakano and Shinjuku. I'm really happy with my copy and also happy to see that it works so well on Sony (as already reported by Fred). Sad to hear about the copy variation on hmzimelka's case...
I applied my favorite preset on them in C1 Pro and exported from Raw. No other adjustments except some exposure tweaks on a few shots, and highlights adjustment on one or two....Show more →
Thanks for posting this gallery, Juha.
It shows my favorite parts of town and tests the CV 50/3.5 APO in extreme contrast situations, including backlighting. It's interesting to see how this lens compares to the MS-Optics from your other galleries. The APO lens has a unique look, with no astigmatism, spherical aberration, or axial chromatic aberration, even in high-contrast areas. The detail is impressive without looking oversharpened, showing real detail and micro-contrast.
To me, it's like using the bigger CV 50/2 APO stopped down a bit, but with more character in the rendering, making the overall image more interesting.
