NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: MEPER on December 25, 2022, 21:19:50
-
Has anybody tried the new Voigtländer Z-lenses?
These (3 for DX and 4 for FX). I link to German version as fewer are shown in English version in the overview of the Z-mount lenses:
https://www.voigtlaender.de/z-anschluss/ (https://www.voigtlaender.de/z-anschluss/)
The 50/2 APO-Lanthar shows good results in this test. Better than Nikkor 50/1.8 Z which I thought was a near perfect lens.
https://www.cameralabs.com/voigtlander-50mm-f2-apo-lanthar-review/ (https://www.cameralabs.com/voigtlander-50mm-f2-apo-lanthar-review/)
As a Z50 user the 35/1.2 could be tempting (if Nikon will continue this line of DX bodies). I already have the 25/4 snap-shot Skopar which is a very good lens.
The new Z-versions has contacts which makes focusing easier.
-
The Cosina homepage has better information (here the lens cross section of the lens is correct). There are some errors (copy & paste I think) at the Voigtländer page.
https://www.cosina.co.jp/voigtlander/en/ (https://www.cosina.co.jp/voigtlander/en/)
The 65/2 APO is interesting as it is a "true APO". Many times the "APO" is a bit "so so".....
From this test:
https://www.closeuphotography.com/voigtlander-apo-lanthar-65-mm-f2-macro-lens-test (https://www.closeuphotography.com/voigtlander-apo-lanthar-65-mm-f2-macro-lens-test)
I quote this from Closeupphotography:
"When I visited the Cosina factory last month I specifically asked how well this lens is corrected and the rep explained confidently that the APO-Lanthar 65 was designed to perform at the very highest level compared to any lens on consumer market today, even better than the excellent APO-Lanthar 125mm lens. I was a little skeptical because the only other fast f/2 macro lenses that I know of, the Zeiss ZF 100mm f/2 and the Olympus OM 90mm f/2 and both are well known for having issues with LoCAs."
With contacts for Z-mount it could be quite nice even I know that the Z-105/2.8 Micro is very good.
-
The Voigtländer 35mm f/1.2 is excellent with my Z fc. A very neat package that merges "old fashion" and modern system interface very well.
-
I can see it is in stock in a shop close to where I live. I might take a walk during the following days. Then I can see if I can resist the temptation.
I can check if they give me a nice sample that is super-sharp at 1.2.
I considered the 35/2.5 Color-Skopar "pancake" in Leica-M mount (I have adapter).
This lens gets very good reviews but mis the contacts and also nice with the large focus ring on 35/1.2 lens.
35/2.5 covers FX and is cheaper than 35/1.2 so it also depends on how much I need 1.2 and how it performs at 1.2.
-
Perhaps not in the Noct league at f/1.2, but the 35/1.2 has nothing to be ashamed off ....
It will however *not* cover the entire FX frame. Not surprising as it is designed for DX.
-
Merry Christmas, Birna. Can you show us how much it does cover?
-
It covers 1:1 (24x24) format on the newer cameras.
-
How can we push Nikon to produce a 24 x 24 DX square format camera?
It will have about 50% more pixels than the usual 24 x 16 sensor?
A 24MP becomes a 36MP sensor using same small lenses. If all DX-lenses have 24 x 24 "image circle"? <-- if you only need 16mm in one direction you could make the image circle a tiny bit smaller?
-
Any FX camera will do. If the size option of 1:1 (24x24) isn't in the menu, one can always crop later.
24x24 for a DX camera has no meaning as the sensor would need to be "full size" or nearly so. So would make the camera bigger as well.
-
Ok, so if a FX camera is used and DX lens has contacts and communicates "DX" to the camera then there will be a need to force FX-mode? <-- is this possible (I have never owned a FX-camera)? but nice if 24 x 24 can be selected from menu.
For some images if DX-lens is used at 1.2 then probably most of the image will be blurred anyway and maybe the natural vignetting could be used as a feature in "full" FX-mode :-)
-
Nah. The edges of the imaging circle are not *that* blurred. The image is quite sharp within the designated format.
Some DX lenses, like the Viltrox line, force the camera into DX mode. Others like the Voigtländer do not and one can either shoot to get severely vignetted frames, or manually put the camera to DX.
-
This is the Voigtländer 35mm f/1.2 set wide open on my Z6 in FX mode. The image circle will be soft-edged at f/1.2 and will be very sharp at f/16.
Straigfht through Photo Ninja, no correction of geometry or vignetting. The lens has quite evident barrel distortion up close which can easily be corrected is desired. The chromatic aberration is kept quite low. There is some flare that contributes to the softening of the image unless one increases contrast later in the work flow.
I did this hand-held and focusing any f/1.2 lens at close range is a challenge so no guarantee sharpness is optimal for the scene. Depth of field is wafer thin. However, the outcome does look good in my eyes.
-
It is quite interesting to see how much of the image circle that can be used.
It is usable at 1.2.
This review of it is not so positive. But some of the sample images at 1.2 looks ok. The X should be the same as the Z version.
https://www.lenstip.com/638.1-Lens_review-Voigtlander_Nokton_35_mm_f_1.2_X___Z_review.html (https://www.lenstip.com/638.1-Lens_review-Voigtlander_Nokton_35_mm_f_1.2_X___Z_review.html)
In the review he mention that even stopped down the lens never gets really sharp in the corners (DX)?
-
Thank you, Birna. This talk of 24X24 format comes full circle, pardon my pun, as I am reminded that in 1960 I bought my first 35mm camera, a little, well used motorized Robot 24X24 format camera.
-
The Fuji X version apparently is a different design from the new Z lens. Voigtländer (Cosina) might have traded low geometric distortion for better handling of coma, for example. There are a lot of discrepancies from the linked report (X model) to my own experiences with the Z version.
-
The lens "cross-views" looks identical on X and Z version:
https://www.cosina.co.jp/voigtlander/en/x-mount/nokton-35mm-f1-2/ (https://www.cosina.co.jp/voigtlander/en/x-mount/nokton-35mm-f1-2/)
https://www.cosina.co.jp/voigtlander/en/z-mount/nokton-d35mm-f1-2/ (https://www.cosina.co.jp/voigtlander/en/z-mount/nokton-d35mm-f1-2/)
But that does not mean they are 100% identical. They could have tweaked it a little bit. The Z is the latest version.
Hopefully it is not sample variation.
It is an advantage to bring the camera to a physical shop and try out a sample and only buy it if it delivers as expected.
-
I have impatiently waited for Voigtlander to finally offer Z mount full-frame lenses. When they appeared last summer, I bought both the 50mm & 35mm f/2.0 APOs. I also purchased the 40mm f/1.2 NOKTON when it came out. For years I mused on another forum why Nikon insisted on using that "Green Dot" down in the bottom lefthand corner of the viewfinder to aid in manual focusing. The moveable focusing square had all of the built in capabilities to serve the same purpose, with some minor firmware tweaks. Finally, the Z mount Voigtlander lenses, being chipped, have that function. I used Voigtlanders, F mount for years and they were excellent performers; these new ones, IMHO, are even better. They are easy to focus and are sharp, pleasing bokeh and lighter to carry than the huge Nikon "S" lenses. As one who has been photographing for 60 years, I have a built-in love of primes and manual focusing; shooting is fun again.
FWIW, Voigtlander just announced a 50mm f/1.0 NOKTON.
Photo taken with a z7 II and the 50mm f/2.0 APO at f/2
-
Added a better 50mm f/2 APO example, shot at f/2 and a color example from the 35mm f/2 APO also shot at f/2.
-
Today I finally received my Voigtländer 65mm f/2 APO-Lanthar Macro in native Z mount. I got it from Grays in London and went through a long and tiresome process in order to have the lens shipped. It crossed the North Sea no less than three - 3 - times during the 7 weeks required for transport from London to Norway. Sigh.
Briefly tested it and is this the epitome of super sharpness for close-ups ... Yes and yes. It is very beautifully made as well.
-
This is a 100% crop from a test shot with the Voigtländer 65mm f/2 on Z9. Not very exciting test subject of course in the darkness all around me at present. However, consider this is at f/2 ISO 1600 with Z9 hand-held at slow speed, run straight through NX Studio with no tweaking.
Frankly I had to look twice to believe my eyes.
-
I have had the Voigtlander 65mm (Sony mount with adapter to Nikon Z) for some time, and also have the new Z version. I love sharpness, yet this lens is, IMO, so sharp that I don't use it because it is too sharp in many cases.
-
"so sharp that I don't use it because it is too sharp in many cases"
That must be a first!!
However, I agree that this wouldn't be the lens of choice for portraits of young people :)
-
"so sharp that I don't use it because it is too sharp in many cases"
That must be a first!!
Exactly! LOL.
I find myself using the Z 105 MC macro instead, which is sharp enough, but still more gentle than the Voigtlander 65mm. However, I also have the Voigtlander 110mm (Sony mount, and adapter) yet, for some reason, I don't like it or use it.
Here are a couple photos taken recently with the Z 105 MC that are sharp enough, but still have a little forgiveness.
-
65 does look sharp I agree.
Z105 is - Velvet smoothness, that is such a nice rending
-
This discussion forced me into picking up the 65mm Z-mount. I really like it and the minimal amount of chromatic aberration. Shooting wide open has a bit of vignetting, but the sharpness is amazing. Here are a couple of images showing lack of CA and a 100% crop showing detail on a cherry blossom stem. Taken with Z9.
-
Looks like a stellar performer! Congrats ;)
-
I got my 35mm Fotodiox extension tube for the Z mount today. Very well built as one would expect from its high asking price .... It brings the 65/2 APO-Lanthar to 1:1 magnification. The excellent control of chromatic aberrations is still visible at 1:1, however the field is no longer perfectly flat. I've seen far worse, though. As expected spherical aberration will slowly creep in when the lens is pushed this far off its design domain, but again hardly anything to worry about. It is worth keeping in mind that adding extension never keeps image quality, contrary to frequently made assumptions ('just air is added'). If one doubts the validity of my statement just try adding such extension to say the 50 or 85 f/1.8 Z Nikkors :) The decline in image quality is very obvious.
The example below is with Z9 hand-held at ISO 1600 and 1/50sec at a nominal f/2 (effective f-number at least f/4 due to the extension added). Unlike the Micro- and MC-Nikkors the Voigtländer 65 does not report effective apertures; however assuming a unit pupil factor it would be f/3 effective at 0.5X.
Even though my quick-and-dirty test is just that, I think it's fair to assume the 65 APO will continue to deliver high quality results even when set to the range 0.5-1X.
-
Some more from the lens. I can't find anything to not like. Perhaps the worst thing about the lens is that there is some small amount of ring bokeh visible in the lower left of the third image, but only because I have increased contrast in that area slightly.
-
Nikon don't designate any of their lenses with the APO suffix. Does anybody know whether the Z 105 MC is still an APO lens design?
-
Nikon don't designate any of their lenses with the APO suffix. Does anybody know whether the Z 105 MC is still an APO lens design?
The Z 105 MC is APO enough for me. Earlier on, some of the Nikon enlarger lenses were designated APO, although there is to my knowledge no standard for what is APO.
-
Many thanks for your explanation Michael - I have the Z 105 MC and love it
-
I have had the Voigtlander 65mm (Sony mount with adapter to Nikon Z) for some time, and also have the new Z version. I love sharpness, yet this lens is, IMO, so sharp that I don't use it because it is too sharp in many cases.
Thom Hogan has just reviewed this lens:
https://www.zsystemuser.com/z-mount-lenses/third-party-lenses/reviews-of-third-party-z/voigtlander-65mm-f2-macro.html
"I'm just not feeling the significant gain over the 50mm f/2.8 MC other than that one stop. Sure, the 65mm f/2 is just a much better build quality..."
On the other hand, most comments here suggest this lens has exceptional sharpness. Of course, Thom only reviewed one lens, and while it didn't appear to have any obvious flaws like decentering, can we blame sample variation for a less than perfect example?
-
Perhaps there is sample variation amongst reviewers?
-
I like Thom Hogan's lens reviews, at least his Nikon reviews, but can't agree with him here. I find the Voigtlander 65mm very sharp and I have two versions of this lens, the one that fits the Nikon mirrorless and the Sony version with an adapter, and both are, IMO, tack sharp. And just to make this more confusing, I feel the Nikon 50mm f/2.8 MC is NOT sharp enough and fine enough. I have that lens too but never use it for the reasons I mentioned. Lloyd Chambers finds the Voigtlander 65mm ultra sharp as I do. So, as they say, go figure.
Thom Hogan has not reviewed Voigtlanders, and Chambers has, although Chambers never looked into the Voigtlander 125mm APO-Lanthar, although I pointed it out to him a couple of times.
And so, I have no explanation for Hogan's review of the Voigtlander 65mm.
-
Perhaps there is sample variation amongst reviewers?
;D ;D
-
Any lens performing nearly APO with flat field and excellent sharpness even wide open at f/2, plus having high contrast as well, is exceptional. The 65/2 APO-Lanthar belongs to this exquisite class of lenses.
-
.
I don't own any Voigtlander lenses in the Nikon Z mount, but I do own the Voigtlander Nokton 75mm f/1.5 aspherical lens in M mount. It's about the same price as the V65mm f2 lens in Z mount.
The V75/1.5's M mount is easily adapted to any mirrorless camera - I love how it looks on my Nikon Z6 and Fuji XE2 digital cameras.
My V75 is sharp enough for my use, but what I especially love about it is it's stunning bokeh and 3D like pop (the orange and red blobs in the photos' background are an orange & an apple on my kitchen countertop).
I'd love to see a shootout between these two excellent lenses. From what I've read, I suspect the V65 is probably sharper, but the V75 might have better bokeh.
-
.
I don't own any Voigtlander lenses in the Nikon Z mount, but I do own the Voigtlander Nokton 75mm f/1.5 aspherical lens in M mount. It's about the same price as the V65mm f2 lens in Z mount.
The V75/1.5's M mount is easily adapted to any mirrorless camera - I love how it looks on my Nikon Z6 and Fuji XE2 digital cameras.
My V75 is sharp enough for my use, but what I especially love about it is it's stunning bokeh and 3D like pop (the orange and red blobs in the photos' background are an orange & an apple on my kitchen countertop).
I'd love to see a shoot out between these two excellent lenses. From what I've read, I suspect the V65 is probably a bit sharper, but the V75 might have the better bokeh.
Yes, in my experience the V65 does not have that bokeh.
-
Thom Hogan has just reviewed this lens:
https://www.zsystemuser.com/z-mount-lenses/third-party-lenses/reviews-of-third-party-z/voigtlander-65mm-f2-macro.html
"I'm just not feeling the significant gain over the 50mm f/2.8 MC other than that one stop. Sure, the 65mm f/2 is just a much better build quality..."
On the other hand, most comments here suggest this lens has exceptional sharpness. Of course, Thom only reviewed one lens, and while it didn't appear to have any obvious flaws like decentering, can we blame sample variation for a less than perfect example?
Thom says in this review: "Optically, the Voigtlander 65mm f/2 is somewhat unique, having a concave front element." That's not "unique". I happen to own two lenses (Zeiss Milvus 85mm, Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4) that also have concave front elements. Also, don't some of the Zeiss Otus lenses have them? Maybe Thom is not familiar with Zeiss lenses?
.
-
It has been used before:
-
And here:
https://lenslegend.com/carl-zeiss-ultron-50mm-f1-8-lens-review/ (https://lenslegend.com/carl-zeiss-ultron-50mm-f1-8-lens-review/)
-
More:
http://forum.mflenses.com/concave-lenses-list-t36591.html (http://forum.mflenses.com/concave-lenses-list-t36591.html)
-
Thom says in this review: "Optically, the Voigtlander 65mm f/2 is somewhat unique, having a concave front element." That's not "unique". I happen to own two lenses (Zeiss Milvus 85mm, Zeiss Milvus 50/1.4) that also have concave front elements. Also, don't some of the Zeiss Otus lenses have them? Maybe Thom is not familiar with Zeiss lenses?
.
You need to read the whole sentence or at least the word before "unique" ie. he states: "somewhat unique"
-
.......but it looks like that lenses with concave front element is quite special. It could be a goal to collect all lenses made with concave front element :-)