Click on the audio play button to listen to this 10 minute audio on real world testing and a quick review of Voigtlander Ultron 40mm F2.0 SL-II Lens vs Nikon’s 45mm F2.8P lens… real world!!
Thoughts On Testing And A Quick Lens Review
Click on the audio play button to listen to this 10 minute audio on real world testing and a quick review of Voigtlander Ultron 40mm F2.0 SL-II Lens vs Nikon’s 45mm F2.8P lens… real world!!
Figital Revolution 
Thanks so much for the real world review! I just wanted to add that all Cosina-Voigtlander lenses in the Pentax K mount have been discontinued, but there still seem to be a few places online with them in-stock.
i’ve been noticing recently that looking at the digital image and the print can lead me sometimes to very different conclusions on whether i like the picture or not.
Also another thing to consider when reading these tests online is that they are really just a comparison between two individual lenses. They lens you try could be different as well.
Great reminder Steve, I love to hear about your process.
I had the same experience when getting into medium format. My dream was to get a Hasselblad sense they are so much cheaper on the used marked compared to when I was in college. I also wanted to get a 645 camera so I purchased a cheaper Bronica ETRS
We all know the reputation that Carl Zeiss 50mm t lenses have and how sharp they are but I found that the Zenzanon actually looks nicer. With the Zenzanon 75mm mc the portraits come out much nicer. It has a nicer compression of space and it renders the soft focus better.
I love using both lenses but I just can’t get the same look with the Carl Zeiss.
I think we lose or miss the subjectivity that is involved in photography.
Funnily enough I was going out this morning to buy a used Nikon 18-200mm VR lens for my D2X, now I’m in doubt again. Just kidding but what you said makes so much sense of course and even on this purchase I’ve spent hours and hours pouring over tests, reviews etc and still I’m not sure. I guess when buying say a lens such as the above the main problem is that it is a “compromise” purchase because if money were no object one would probably go out and buy maybe the 14-24 f/2.8 + maybe the 17-55 f/2.8 + 70-200 f/2.8 for their needs on a DX format Nikon camera, well I would for my particular needs.
Now in my search I’d read many reviews on the Sigma 18-250 and how great it was, even tried it out at a trade fair the other week though on a Canon body. However, not that many pictures taken by this lens around to view compared with shots taken by the Nikon and the Nikon shots across the board of focal lengths I like so why look elsewhere I decided? No problem with Sigma lenses, I used to have their 18-200 mounted on my D200 for most of the time I owned it and loved it. Just go with your own eyes and buy for you – I laugh when I hear these guys talk about MTF tests and so and so recommends this over that, all subjective and as you so rightly said REAL WORLD testing is the only thing that matters and NOT what expert No1 or No2 declares. It’s YOU after all that has to live with and shoot with any lens purchase.
Regarding Aspherical lenses Stephen, I tend to agree with you re: bokeh etc but just wondering if you’ve ever tried the Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.5 on any of your Leicas over the years? Easily the best bang for buck lens purchase I’ve ever made personally and welded to the front of my M6, I love the bokeh of this lens and of course it is obviously very sharp.