Samples 3: Various distances, mostly wide open (Sony A7R II)
Most images were taken wide open, with two taken at f/5.6. They were captured under morning light around 9-10am at a mix of close and mid-range distances. Every image in this set was taken with the Sony A7R II.
Vignetting and distortion were not corrected in any of the samples. Most images use the Adobe Color profile or were converted to monochrome.
Mar 17, 2026 at 11:30 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
RoamingScott wrote:
It seems to be area-of-frame dependent, but overall these Nok samples do seem to have the better contrast in general, and they should, being stopped down. It's funny to still see the Nok exhibit more ghosting and LoCA than the Septon in some cases even being stopped down.
Scott, I don't think that the higher LoCA (aka axial CA) is that surprising. Axial CA isn't dependent on the amount the lens is stopped down, but on the aperture at which it is used and the Nokton has no APD elements to suppress axial CA, whereas the Septon has one (small) APD element. I think given their design you would expect slightly better control of axial CA from the Septon and that is what you see.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Scott, I don't think that the higher LoCA (aka axial CA) is that surprising. Axial CA isn't dependent on the amount the lens is stopped down, but on the aperture at which it is used and the Nokton has no APD elements to suppress axial CA, whereas the Septon has one (small) APD element. I think given their design you would expect slightly better control of axial CA from the Septon and that is what you see.
I didn't say it was surprising, I said it was funny. I'm not surprised at all, as someone that shot the Nok and found its behaviors and quirks frustrating and uncompelling.
RoamingScott wrote:
I didn't say it was surprising, I said it was funny. I'm not surprised at all, as someone that shot the Nok and found its behaviors and quirks frustrating and uncompelling.
You might feel more satisfied sticking with APO lenses so you have to deal with the frustration you mentioned with imperfections. The interesting thing is, many photographers actually enjoy the traits you see as flaws. You've made it clear that the Nokton, Septon, and TTA aren't your favorites, which makes me think the CV 35/2 APO-Lanthar would suit your style better...or do you not like the rendering on that one either?
Fred Miranda wrote:
You might feel more satisfied sticking with APO lenses so you have to deal with the frustration you mentioned with imperfections. The interesting thing is, many photographers actually enjoy the traits you see as flaws. You've made it clear that the Nokton, Septon, and TTA aren't your favorites, which makes me think the CV 35/2 APO-Lanthar would suit your style better...or do you not like the rendering on that one either?
I seem to enjoy the rendering of the APO lenses more than the average FM poster, many of whom decry the "quality" of the bokeh, which I find...indefensible
Overall, I don't worry about what others seem to enjoy because it quite often is of no relevance to my preferences. I like the TTA 40 a lot and the 75 even more, not sure why you think I don't.
Regardless, I opened my conversation around the Septon in the OG thread with the fact that the Ultron 40/2 was the best balance of size and rendering, and seeing these samples, I still think that's the case. It's a rare day I get nervous images out of the Ultron in the same way as the Septon is drawing here.
If people enjoy the nervousness, it seems fairly easy to replicate on the Septon, so that's good news.
RoamingScott wrote:
I seem to enjoy the rendering of the APO lenses more than the average FM poster, many of whom decry the "quality" of the bokeh, which I find...indefensible
Overall, I don't worry about what others seem to enjoy because it quite often is of no relevance to my preferences. I like the TTA 40 a lot and the 75 even more, not sure why you think I don't.
Regardless, I opened my conversation around the Septon in the OG thread with the fact that the Ultron 40/2 was the best balance of size and rendering, and seeing these samples, I still think that's the case. It's a rare day I get nervous images out of the Ultron in the same way as the Septon is drawing here.
If people enjoy the nervousness, it seems fairly easy to replicate on the Septon, so that's good news....Show more →
You must have a different copy of the Voigtlander 35/2 Ultron than I do. I do agree that the CV 40/2 Septon and the CV 35/2 Ultron share a lot in common. Both deliver excellent resolution and contrast while still offering character in their rendering. They follow a similar design philosophy and are both very compact.
For anyone unfamiliar with the CV 35/2 Ultron's rendering, here is a comparison I made a while back with the CV 35/1.5 Nokton. You can see a lot of structure and highlight outlining in the Ultron's rendering:
Fred Miranda wrote:
You must have a different copy of the Voigtlander 35/2 Ultron than I do. I do agree that the CV 40/2 Septon and the CV 35/2 Ultron share a lot in common. Both deliver excellent resolution and contrast while still offering character in their rendering. They follow a similar design philosophy and are both very compact.
For anyone unfamiliar with the CV 35/2 Ultron's rendering, here is a comparison I made a while back with the CV 35/1.5 Nokton. You can see a lot of structure and highlight outlining in the Ultron's rendering:
The 40 ultron f mount has smoother bokeh than the septon, but still with a little bit of character. It's quite sharp too.
At f2 theres a strong central hotspot, distortion. I don't notice the hotspot at f2.8. The distagon 35/1.4 has the same thing and it can be nice for portraits with that one. I havent shot with this a tonne but i didnt love it to start off with. Felt it lacked transparency, something about the colours being a bit crunchy, the out of focus areas (not bokeh) and the hotspot + distortion. But it's quite sharp (compared to my other f mounts at least) and makes for some interesting shots. I think it can produce nice images with some colour editing.
The focus ring is so small on mine, but it works. Need to be careful not to touch the aperture ring as well as that's quite close too.
Mines the one just before this latest model (SL II n as opposed to SL II s). I got this version to use on the fm2n and was going for the smallest possible but i regret that a little bit now - though i havent held the newer one and it might make it over the threshold for comfortable carry once mounted on Sony.
On the other hand, and other than the CA, the nokton is a veeeery clean image and oozes transparency. The ultron images got cinched a bit, a bit seared, including the colour/tones - at least it feels that way to me. It can still take nice images but I wouldn't ever call it transparent. I checked centering and it was fine ... I suspect the septon might have a touch of it too, getting a whiff of it in some of the samples but I could also be talking out my butt and I don't think it's as bad in that regard from what I can tell so far.
Again, still very nice images possible with the ultron. Just rubs me the wrong way and quite often so far. Tones..colours..contrast..saturation... something. Wish I could tell you what it is exactly. I'm open to keep trying with it though and perhaps a lot of that can be overcome with editing the colours.
Nokton quite a bit heavier comparitvely (the smaller SE version, and even vs the ultron on a metal mount adaptor) and sometimes the bokeh is a bit too clean.
For some reason the character lenses have peaked my interest recently. Perhaps because the noktons, distagon and apo already have me happy with those looks (for the most part - nothing is perfect for all situations). Considering both the 35/1.4 classic and this septon, though it might be a bit much.
TTA is nice too but I just enjoy manual focus more, less with people but still.
.
Here's an example of the "worst" bokeh I've ever gotten out of the 40 Ultron wide open. If you look in the top left, you can see the balls start to behave somewhat like the Septon, becoming "gumdrop" shaped to a degree, but never fully falling apart like the Septon. And this is only at the very edges of the frame.
In general, the Ultron has very predictable and consistent bokeh across the majority of the frame despite still having some imperfections with the bokeh balls. These are the types of images I'm mentally referencing when I look at the Septon examples. It's this blend of consistency and imperfection that I find highly balanced and visually appealing compared to the overall chaos the Nokton and Septon can produce wide open.
The Ultron is as sharp as I'd want a lens to be wide open for the way I use it. The Septon also appears to be a step backwards here, though who knows, because we aren't seeing full res examples.
Cool comparison, the 40 Nokton stopped down to f2 to me looks better in almost all cases except Scene 5. The contrast and sharpness of the Nokton I think all look better, with more pleasing(less busy) bokeh to boot. The contrast and sharpness I sorta expect being stopped down usually puts these CV lenses in a better sweet spot. But surprised about the bokeh too.
The TTA comparison I think is less clear cut. I feel like the Septon is sharper but the bokeh is still worse.
I can't comment on the Ultron 40mm f/2 Aspherical SL IIs' performance or rendering since I haven't tried this SLR lens. That said, for anyone considering the Septon, it is indeed similar to the 35/2 Ultron M-mount in both performance and rendering, though its drawing style and the shape of off-axis specular highlights show some differences.
All this discussion about bokeh being better or worse really shows how subjective it is. Some photographers will prefer the Nokton's rendering, others the TTA or the Septon, and some may not care for any of them. That is why I think these rendering tests are so valuable, the results often speak louder than words. When reviewing these lenses, the best I can do is show how they render side by side and share my personal opinion, which of course may not match everyone's tastes. After spending quite a bit of time with it and testing it thoroughly, I have to say I really enjoy the Voigtlander 40mm f/2 Septon's rendering just as much as the CV 35mm f/2 Ultron, and it is also quite similar in character to the Leica 35mm f/1.4 Summilux FLE.
It is far from perfect and there are compromises made to achieve its compact pancake size. It's refreshing when a new lens brings personality and a touch of imperfection to the rendering instead of looking like just another modern lens. The specular highlights share a lot with older vintage lenses, which is one reason I'm excited to shoot with it. Honestly, all these lenses are already sharp enough, guys!
I think people who wants it will really want it for the size. Its the closest thing to a true pancake on FE mount with I think less compromised optics(and use) compare to the Viltrox 28 f4.5(some people have better experience on that than me..mine only works about 50% of the time).
I don't think its for me because I just have too many lenses in this range(both optically and use) that I don't think I'll add to it. But its cool that its there, and not too expensive neither.
If Sony comes out with a native 40G update that is smaller than the OG(like the Nikon 40 f2 maybe) that might actually tempt me because it'll be AF and weather proofed.
Right now my favorite 50 set up which is very compact is A7CR/Techart Pro/ Cron 50, but that set up with ZM Planar or CV Color Skopar 2.2 would be more affordable than the Cron and also give fantastic results. I don’t think the IQ of a 50 mm F 2 pancake would be comparable to those set ups and also not much smaller. This is a golden age for great compact 50’s, even if not pancake
Well, sure, I could just use the Viltrox Air 2.0 50, which only weighs 200g and even has autofocus. It's probably psychosomatic that I don't really warm to it, even though it's a really good lens.
