Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Native Lens Sample Image Showcase' started by chalkdust, Aug 19, 2017.
CA seems to me to be well controlled:
out of focus in front:
out of focus behind
The bokeh looks a bit "bubbly" in that last shot. For me that's not necessarily a bad thing, especially not seeing the nice round shapes, but the bokeh police will disapprove I'm sure .
How can anyone not like bubble bokeh?!
Impressive lens! The APO glass is clearly evident, very clean edges indeed.
Bubble tea, bubble bath, Tiny Bubbles In My Wine... Although I see a bit of bubble bokeh in the last image, in general, I do not think this is a very bubbly lens - at least not that a person could count on getting bubble bokeh. The clean edges are fairly dependable though. The only color fringe I have found is in image #3 of the first set where a slightly out of focus parts of the twig cross the white sky background, there are a few pixels of red or redish blue.
I am really enjoying this focal length, a tight normal. It is not for showing the big picture, but it works well for showing "look at this interesting thing I noticed." And having the very close focus ability works beautifully with the "interesting thing" style of photography.
CA police also isnt satisfied:
www.photomacrography.net :: View topic - First images from Apo-Lanthar 65mm are online
Use it and enjoy
I agree with Dave. If one of these fell into my bag I wouldn't worry about bokeh or CA, I'd just use it.
Me neither. Longitudinal CA, better known as "bokeh fringing", usually disappears at smaller apertures which I usually revert to anyway when doing close-up work; I often end up somewhere between f/8 and f/16. Having seen the test shots, I don't think this lens deservers the APO designation. Personally I wouldn't go for this lens for a number of reasons: I don't need f/2 for close-ups, it's heavy and large, I'd rather have a longer focal length like 100mm and I'd prefer a slower lens without CA. F/5.6 is plenty fast for me in close-up, most of my lenses are somewhere between f/3.5 and f/5.6. I use the term "close-up" instead of "macro" because purists insist that macro means 1:1 (life-size) reproduction ratio or larger.
I must be getting old and lazy(er) as the size is daunting, to me at least.
Photos look good! It looks like a well corrected lens. Size is the only issue... 2 reviews/more photos:
マップカメラ | KASYAPA | 437:フォクトレンダー史上最高のマクロレンズ『Voigtlander MACRO APO-LANTHAR 65mm F2 Aspherical』 | Carl Zeiss & Voigtlander
Rolling Review: Voigtlander 65 mm F2 Macro APO-Lanthar - phillipreeve.net
Glowing review on Rolling Review: Voigtlander 65 mm F2 Macro APO-Lanthar - phillipreeve.net and on FM too.
The images here and elsewhere look pretty good to me, enough that I think it may be quite a while before used copies become available.
A few from yesterday's morning walk...
All of these are Sony A7ii + CV65
All shot at f/5.6
All are presented uncropped.
Wonderful pics Bert .
I feel this GAS ailment heading my way now .
I am finding some interesting comparisons on various other boards comparing this lens to some very fine optics. The consensus seems to be very positive for this 65mm APO-Lanthar. I only have subjective, anecdotal data to share. I feel very comfortable with this focal length, I think because I spent so much time using 50mm on a 1.3 crop size sensor. So this field of view is perfect for me. Secondly, I prefer manual focus over auto focus. In my hands, autofocus means "focus on something." Third, I have no other very close focus lenses and I am interested in trying that kind of photography. So I had three reasons to get this lens even if the optics turned out to be just good. I think this will become my standard lens. My other lenses will be used for special situations. This one lens gives me so many possibilities to photograph the interesting things in my life.
Its size and weight are not a problem for me at all. I am becoming very accustomed to its dimensions.
However, I think many people will not like the 65mm field of view. And many will not be comfortable with manual focus. This lens is not a good tool for those people. I am finding really nothing to complain about with it. But that is only my subjective opinion.
I think I know exactly what you mean, Bert. Too many times I get all wrapped up in "what is the subject?" and all that, and miss seeing what I'm looking at. The three manual focus lenses I use give me a reason to stop and take a breath before I go clicking the shutter aimlessly.
I'm with you Bert! That's why I am enjoying older manual focus lenses so much. It really does forces you to slow down to think about what you're composing and is beneficial to (Oh, look...a squirrel!) those of us with a bit of ADD.
One lens on the other end of the scale that I would recommend for close up fun, is the Vivitar 28mm f/2.8 Close Focus, made by Komine. The focusing distance is minimal, sharpness, color, bokeh, and distortion are excellent, and a nice complement focal length to the 65mm for a wider close up. Can still be had for the price of a large one topping pizza too!
And it's so small, it'll fit in your pocket.
Some cloudy day shots. Simple ARW to JPG, "uncooked"
long distance, f/4.0:
indication of resolution, same image:
raindrops on hood, f/2.0 trying to find LoCA. To my eye, if LoCA is there, it is not prominent.
Still enjoying the way it draws, though I have not gotten out much lately...
A7ii + Voigtlander 65mm APO-Lanthar Macro F2 @ f/5.6