A Dream Lens for Leica M-Mount Users! | Voigtlander APO-Lanthar 35mm F2 VM 

Thanks for watching Wolfgang and congrats on the 50

Agree. Really good rendering for the price. Looking forward to the 50 F1

Thank you!

Thanks Clarence. I think most APO lenses will have a more clinical look to them. Lenses that are too corrected can look this way. Sometimes the imperfections in older lenses make for more interesting pics ;)

Thank you 🙏

Once you go APO it’s hard to go back. 1.4 lenses will be a thing of the past haha

Thanks for watching Marc

Not sure of the year mine is. I think it’s the second version of the rigid.

Thanks for watching

Thanks for watching, much appreciated. In my personal opinion I would opt for the Sigma 35 f2. It’s a stunning lens and performs beautifully on the S1R. The Voigtlander is also good but I feel the versatility of the Sigma is the deciding factor for me

Didn’t know that about the aperture. Yes the lens is high resolving so wouldn’t be surprised about it’s performance. Impressive though regardless

Agree. Different look compared to APO.

Fantastic pair of lenses

Thanks for watching. Had to crop as the vignetting was quite severe. Yes it’s a great lens though Voigtlander did a fantastic job with it

Prob the APO will be better

Thanks for watching. Definitely a lens to consider

Of course. I meant it can resolve 50 plus megapixel sensors. It’s not designed only for them. Anything less is more than fine

Hi! I’ve joined up with Geek Culture! Thanks for coming by :)

@@GeekCulture Congratulations ! And, of course, followed ...

No it can’t. You will need to select the 35mm crop in the camera

Thanks for watching. Sigma’s will have slightly more chromatic aberration vs this but it also has autofocus. This does pair well with the FPL though as The cameras focus peaking is very accurate. Voigtländer’s 50 APO is superior to the TT artisan I feel

@@GeekCulture Thank you so much for taking the time to reply. One of the coolest and least used features on the Sigma FPL is the QR code generator and scanner. Its a way for people to document and share camera settings with other FP owners. I would love if a reviewer such as yourself took their informative videos about the camera and took them up a notch by sharing the exact settings for different scenarios so that the viewers, who also own the FP or FPL, could attempt the same shots.

The M10-R is a brushed metal button. It’s the same as the MP that I have in the video.

Haha very true

Supposedly the 50 1.4 Lux is an APO lens but not labeled, but I think f2 is prob a much easier and cost effective aperture to produce

@@GeekCulture that makes the 50 Lux a bargain. Not sure that I've seen the same level of performance from it compared to my APO 50 for SL though.

Thanks for watching. No it doesn’t

Thanks Jan

Yeah. She is a beauty

Personal preference. Understand

The 35mm f/1.2 Nokton might be more up your alley then. I've had two of them (v1 / v2) and they're just *muah*.

Indeed

Thanks Alfred!

you will see more sharpness and less CA, however some prefer a more softer look for film. Just depends really.

Thank you

I love the new 35 1.4 GM. Fantastic lens. Color is hard to say as I didn’t test both lenses on the same body. I feel Sony’s color issue was more to do with the processor than the lens. The newer cameras have rectified this

True but still the chrome ring isn’t necessary

Thanks for watching

Lol!

Congrats

Thanks for watching. Photographers even from the film era dodged and burned their photos (edited them) to achieve a certain look. Yes properly metered images will negate some editing at times but if you want a certain look or feel that’s where editing comes into play.

@@GeekCulture Yes, I'm pretty much aware of film negatives "burning" in lab processing (there are hundreds of ways to undertake them either by combing different ratios of the chemical components in the bath solution, increasing the light exposure time on the photography paper (for stronger contrast) or even choosing special papers for specific results. After all, I was a professional photographer for major fashion trade magazines during the 70's. However, what I meant on my comments, is a completely different subject altogether. For instances, I have noticed that most, if not all, the photos that you post edited in Lightroom "suffered" from tonal range adjustments in order to fix underexposed shadows, overexposed highlights and then correcting midtones contrast. Since the need for these post editing tweaks were absolutely not necessary for the average optimal rendering of film shots, one tends to take for granted that such film era commonality is perceived on today's digital photography as an exceptional achievement. I am just guessing but perhaps such technical digital fallibility derives from the fact that digital camera sensors are capable to capture only about half of the 10,000 levels of light (from total black to total white) yielded by the human eye and the fastest silver nitrate emulsion on a film celluloid base captured the equivalent of today's digital measurements of 400 megapixels (There are not, to this date and to the best of my knowledge, any digital camera so powerful (except the Fujifilm GFX100, but restricted to a Pixel-Shift Multi-Shot mode by combining 16 raw images using FUJIFILM's Pixel Shift combiner software, which can then be output as a DNG file for further processing). In 1957, my Kodak point-and-shoot all plastic tiny camera could do all that on-the-go for 10 bucks, not 10000. Furthermore, regarding the massive technical discrepancies between the two photography processes, more than just a matter of fact that the ordinary flaws encountered on the majority of "as shot" digital photos led to the creation of dozens of photo editors, enhancers and correcting software. During the film era, there was none. Real mothers never give birth to clone siblings. It's about time for today's young generations of cameras engineers to close the gap of their absent history minded parameters of excellence to honor their only photography mother. $$$ will follow as a natural aftermath. Even after the introduction of the first commercial fully digital camera at 1988 Photokina by Fujifilm ( FUJIX DS-1P), 34 years ago, digital camera manufactures have not yet figured out how to combine the most critical elements for a practical error-proof IQ system to level up to those film era ones. Finally, sirs, just for the record, in 1957 my dad, an Oscar Nominee Director, gave me for my birthday present a small, all-plastic, point-and-shoot film camera. 36 shots in a roll of film Just an OVF, a click button and a film rewind lever. ALL, and I mean, ALL, the photos came out just tack sharp and no need for any post tonal range editing. No menus, no fancy marketing gimmicks. The art of photography during the film era was a true exercise of watching, feeling, framing and clicking and the cameras that helped me doing that I felt them as an extension of my own arms, not weird, clumsy computer bricks shaped as cameras. 90% of all historic hall of fame iconic photographs were taken with film. This is not my opinion. It is a fact supported by millions of admirers of Ansel Adams (American 1902-1984) ... Robert Capa (American 1913-1954) ... Henri Cartier Bresson (French 1908-2004) ... Man Ray (American 1890-1976) ... Robert Frank (American 1924) . Gee, I'm still curious, sirs.

Sirs, I left out from my previous comment another post editing technique very commonly used by professional photographers during the film era> The pushing or pulling process that involves shooting and developing film at a different ASA (ISO) than what the film is rated for. Here is a summary of how this clever film tweak works out: Push - Low light and shutter speed not suitable for handheld photos. Low light is the most common reason people push. As a guide, when shooting handheld with an SLR, it’s best to keep your shutter at or above 60th of a second. With a rangefinder, you want to stay at or above a 30th of a second shutter speed-for anything lower you should either use a tripod or push your film a stop or two. Push - Creative effects - Pushing is a fun way to change the look and many people push B&W and color film to get more contrast and increased grain - the more you push it the more contrasty and grainy your photos will be. Color film will have more saturation and possible color shifts. Push - An overcast day or the sun is going down. Shoot a 100-speed film and gain two extra stops (+2) by shooting at ISO 400 and develop it at ISO 400. Pull/Push - You didn’t change the speed on your camera. You shoot 400 film at 100 ISO. Develop it at 400 (+2 Stops) and your photos should come out fine. Pull - Sunny, bright, and high-contrast light. Pulling film reduces contrast and brings out details in the shadows. Pull - Creative effects - Pulling film mutes colors and flattens the image with less contrast. I am aware that all of these intended results can be also obtained in this digital era. However, not as easy and not as fast as the film pushing/pull technique, I presume. By the way, I am curious, you, as fully acknowledged experts on digital photography, teach me how to "mimic" the push/pull film tweak in a digital camera, before post editing processes, please. Thank you so much, sirs.

Thanks

You are right you do not need to spend your money on Leica products but it’s a choice some choose to make. Nothing wrong with either. Having said that congrats on the A7RIV and the Voigtlander. Nice combo

Agree. All black is much better

Haven’t tried the 35 APO from Leica so hard to say. Friends of mine that have it rave about the performance

@@GeekCulture its not only the performance but the value as well,

Thanks for watching.