With all that Olympus E-M5 buzz we don’t have to forget that there has been another very exciting new introduction. The new Voigtländer Nokton 17.5mm f/0.95 lens! The Spanish website DSLRmagazine (Click here) posted a short hands-on article and video (the one you see here on top). That lens is twice as luminous as the [shoplink 29192 ebay]Leica 35mm f/1.4 (and costs many times less)[/shoplink]. Valentin Sama says the lens has a top notch build quality (as expected) and the new pull down aperture ring which allows smooth rotation is completely noise-free (super news for filmmakers). The focusing ring is very long which is a good news if you want a precise focusing, bad news when you are in hurry 🙂 The only major difference with the also superb [shoplink 15659 ebay]Voigtländer Nokton 25mm f/0.95[/shoplink] is the major size and weight of the lens (See size comaprison here). What I haven’t found yet are image samples. Did you?
A first preorder is available here in [shoplink 29193 ebay]Europe on eBay (Click here)[/shoplink]. The lens should ship by late March /early April.
50 Responses
It is odd that there are many photos of people fondling the lens and yet no sample pictures taken with it!
Oh, the eBay price is a rip off.
Thats actually the retail price of the lens.
http://www.voigtlaender.de/cms/voigtlaender/voigtlaender_cms.nsf/id/pa_fdih8rbj9k.html
It will take some time for the prices to come down. The sellers are just cashing in on the pre order craze.
Those are Mr. Reeeee’s hands…and he is not sharing that lens with anyone!!!! LOL!
First sample is here from the cp+
http://news.mapcamera.com/media/contents/sp/cp_plus2012/v9.jpg
from this website
http://news.mapcamera.com/sittoku.php?itemid=13361
Not sure if it is the production version.
Thanks for the link.:)
What a waste though..
Aoooh so beautiful on E-M5. 😉
mainly interested how the lens renders wideopen with people as subject
damn..looking at the measurements its as heavy and even larger then the nokton 50mm f/1.1
13 elements in 9 groups – lot’s of premium glass!
Heavy yes, but you are going to get amazing low light images in a field of view ideal for nightime social events.
Hmm, DoF pulling in videos! (Assuming the camera compensates the change in amount of light intelligently while recording video)
Lens? What lens? I don’t see any lens around here. 😉
@Admin
Thanks for a great website!
A request: In future, in addition to embedding videos in your posts, please include a text link (the URL). iPads users (and Mac users who don’t have Flash installed) sometimes can’t see embedded videos, but if we go to the video via a link, that usually works. Thanks again!
Bravo! Author! I’ve never been so moved.
One of the year’s best films.
Sure to get Oscar recognition.
The silent aperture mechanism is good news for filmmakers but I have to tell you that I modded all my Konica Hexanon lenses to have a continuous and silent aperture mechanism and all it took me was watchmakers screwdrivers and about 2min per lens. 🙂
Can you elaborate further? or better post some nice video-instructions??
Thanks!
why are people so fascinated about the f0.95 on tiny m43 sensor
this 17.5 f0.95 on m43 is the same as 35mm f2 on full frame..
and as everybody know there are much faster 35mm lenses than f2 : P
Except for the fact, that it’s much brighter then a f2.
It’s still 0.95 for light gathering, whatever the sensor size.
Aperture F stop is aperture F stop, and focal length is focal length.
Film or sensor size has nothing to do with it.
Granted a smaller image circle means a smaller objective diameter, so fast lenses for small film or sensor sizes are smaller than the larger format counterparts.
“why are people so fascinated about the f0.95 on tiny m43 sensor
this 17.5 f0.95 on m43 is the same as 35mm f2 on full frame..
and as everybody know there are much faster 35mm lenses than f2”
Just to clarify for all that subscribe to this misguided mantra…
The FOV of the 17.5mm on a m43 camera will be equivalent to a 35mm FOV on a FF sensor camera. Likewise, the DOF characteristics of an f/0.95 on a m43 camera, are roughly equivalent to that of about f/2.0 on a FF camera.
However, the LIGHT GATHERING ABILITY of a lens with f/0.95 on a m43 camera is the SAME as the LIGHT GATHERING ABILITY of an equivalent lens with f/0.95 mounted on a FF camera… not more, not less.
So yes, for m43 or FF a lens this fast is certainly something very desirable.
Voilà!
Why are people so interested in relentlessly blathering about full frame equivalents of micro 4/3 lenses?
If you have a micro 4/3 camera then does a 35mm f/1.9 lens help you get shallow depth of field at 35mm equivalent? No.
Is a full frame camera anywhere near as cheap as a micro 4/3 camera? No.
Do full frame cameras all offer the video capabilities of the GH2? No.
yes, why be fascinated by one of the fastest lenses available on any system?
and then as you point out the DoF is less due to m43 crop factor, so all the more reason to be fascinated
for 1500 you get manual focus and some silica = Voigtländer epic win. its probably fused silica but still… at least with 12mm you get AF and “pro”.
can m43 voitglander lenses work in sony Amount?
@MK
While I agree that the list price of this lens is beyond my current m43 needs, it’s appeal is certainly undeniable.
For many of us who started photography with cameras from the 60’s and 70’s, manual focus only is not an major issue, actually in some cases I do prefer it to AF for maximum control the same way I prefer manual exposure and custom WB when I need shot to shot consistency under stable lighting for predictable results and less post-processing time.
However, what you do gain with this lens beyond the Oly 12mm f/2.0 (a great lens BTW), is a little over 2-stops of additional light gathering ability (f2 -> f1.4 -> f1 -> f0.95), very useful for low-light photography among others.
+++
That’s an accurate description.
It IS a control issue, but also using lens like this there is the physical connection. Holding and working with the aperture and focus rings is part of the process. It’s VERY different from using auto-focus lenses. There seems a huge disconnect when working through menus, tapping little buttons and holding a camera away from your face to compose. Lenses like this make the process of capturing images feel somehow more real.
And yes, this lens is incredibly appealing. It would make a natural companion to my Nokton 25mm, but is out of range price wise. Maybe if I sold a couple of other lenses I could justify it.
i believe these are fixed to m4/3 mount. buy the M-mounts instead and buy a M-mount converter for NEX
The Nokton 17.5mm and 25mm lenses are native Micro Four Thirds mount lenses. They’re not available with Leica M mounts.
You can get a M4/3 to NEX adaptor on eBay for about $30, but my guess is that it would vignette quite a bit.
http://www.ebay.com/itm/M4-3-Micro-4-3-lens-Sony-E-Mount-Adapter-NEX-3-NEX-5-NEX-VG10-/250900246628?pt=UK_Photography_CameraLenses_Lens_caps_hoods_adaptors_ET&hash=item3a6ad1f064#ht_1577wt_1165
But CV makes very fast m-mount stuff including a 35/1.2 that gives a summilux a run for its money in how it renders and a 50/1.1 that is supposed to be nice as well.
I will absolutely not pay a manual focus lens with such high price. Olympus 17mm is smaller, optically better, and also much cheaper.
Optically better?? 2.8 vs 0.95?
I would be cool to have a 7/0,95 Voigtländer lens, as it might be very useful for astrophotography…
LOL. Seriously, who buy a 35mm lens with a sharp f-stop for shallow depth of field? I use m4/3 so I have more depth of field, why the hell do so many trolls comment that a fast f-stop is only for depth of field. Even 0.9 would be too shallow for what I would want most of the time, I just love the stop because going down a bit is still wide open and sharp. A fully open f-stop is always fuzzy. the advantage of the smaller number is that your sweet spot on the lens is going to be a lower f-stop. So now I got a 1.4 sharp night time street lens that works great for video and nothing like that on full frame to my knowledge. And this is really ideal for video where you can just lower shutter speed. 🙂
+1
+10
Because trolls don’t know what they’re talking about?
And in a twist on Godwin’s law, typically, they trot out the tired “FF equivalence” argument. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Godwin's_law) dpreview discussions usually get there quickly.
Few lenses are sharp wide open, so it’s nice to have for flexibility to have a lens get sharper, faster.
Wish Oly would redo that crap 17 mm f2.8 with a faster aperture, like 1.4.
Wouldn’t be the same size methinks :/
I don’t have an m43 body but I’m considering one. How easy would it be to focus this at .95 in a street shooting type of situation? On a real rangefinder I’ve gotten pretty good and it’s relatively easy, but without an ovf or focus peaking, I’m concerned about being able to focus quickly at .95.
It will be not that easy/fast, but at least, without nd filter you will not be allowed to shoot wide open.
@brudy
For daytime street photography what I usually do is set the aperture as needed (with M or A modes) and then prefocus the lens to about the hyperfocal length for maximum DOF and shoot away. No need to mess with focus at all until the aperture is changed.
“That lens is twice as luminous as the Leica 35mm f/1.4 (and costs many times less).”
What a dumb comparison. A Voigltander 35 F/1.4 is four time smaller (than this 17mm0.95), four time cheaper, and can cover a full frame sensor.
But it’s not 17.5 millimeters, now, is it?
@brudy
For instance, if you set this lens aperture to f/4 and focus manually on any object about 5m away, that will give you ACCEPTABLE sharpness that extends from about 3m from the camera to infinity. As long as you keep the aperture and focus distance constant, this will work day night under any lighting condition.
I enjoy manual focus lenses much more than the autofocus counterpart, And I was born in the era of cheap plastic video cameras.
But I absolutely LOATHE long focus throws.
Who in their right mind like this? Even when you have to get an accurate focus, it shouldn’t be hard given that the ring has got the right friction.
This is a real concern for me.
It’s an absolute pain trying to focus in a split second without shaking the entire thing.
Being a native m4/3 lens, does screen / EVF magnify automatically when using the focus ring?
no
For the benefit of those who are new to m43.
A lens designed for a particular camera has the following basic characteristics:
1. Focal length
2. Wide open aperture f-stop
3. Image circle diameter (at the sensor plane)
4. Angle of view
If you use a full frame (FF) lens (35mm film or equivalent sensor) on a m43 camera 1/2 of the image circle diameter will not be used and the angle of view is cut by 1/2 – hence the 2x “crop factor”.
A FF 50mm lens has an angle of view of about 47 degrees – similar to the human eye’s angle of view – therefore “normal”. Used on an m43 camera this lens would be a 2x telephoto with an angle of view of about 24 degrees.
The 17.5mm m43 Nokton has an angle of view of about 63 degrees, which is what a FF 35mm lens has on a FF camera.
Depth of field at a particular aperture iris setting (f-stop) is related to the sensor size. Smaller sensors have more depth of field (DOF) than their FF counterparts at the same f-stop, which is usually a benefit of the smaller format.
If you want shallow depth of field, it is easier to obtain with a larger format camera. Obsession with shallow depth of field is because we are used to seeing portraits taken with larger format cameras.
The FF 35mm lens at f/2.8 will have about 4foot 5inches DOF for a subject 10 feet away. The m43 17.5mm Nokton has to be opened up to f/1.4 to get the same DOF for this subject. At f/2.8 the Nokton has over 10 feet DOF for the same subject.
Moral of the story is that it is easier to keep your subjects in focus with the smaller format.
The m43 Nokton 17.5mm and 25mm both focus to about 6 inches, so hence the long focus throw.
Obviously these lenses are only for those who can afford them, but on a comparative basis they are tremendous value.
Its light gathering capabilities isn’t greater than that of a f 2.0 35 mm lens. The difference is that the minuscule m43 sensor requires less light. This for exposure it is a true f/0,95, but it doesn’t gather more light as such.
No, actually this is incorrect but somewhat on the right track. It can be confusing, but the smaller imaging circle allows for elements with less curvature and better and more exact converging point. So when you run the f-stop equation of the lens, the median for the focal point is positioned different and fives you a lower f-stop. It is the same mechanic that influences f-stop sweet spot and diffraction. Hence why 4/3 lenses are more sharp than ff counterparts at the same f-stop. Look at Medium format and compare to ff. Can’t hardly get under 2.8 on them and they are usually stopped down to 16. Interesting though, there are exception such as some Leica f/1 lenses and the famous Kubrick f 0.7- but this is only possible is a standard lens (40-50mm) because the curvature of field is so limited that light beams go parallel throughout.
Anyway, I don’t know much but this is a distinct and funny advantage of 4/3 along with others. With FF low light looks batter but opening up a lens as adverse consequences. Also curvature of field hurts wider formats so that wide angle landscape lenses suffer from less sharp corners, were on 4/3 it is easier to manufacture a wide angle lens with sharp corners. Just check out mtf on fisheyes and wide angles from the two systems and you will see the drop off by percentage is much less extreme on 4/3. Best to carry both systems with you and understand them for what they are.
How much is this going to cost in the US?