Carl Zeiss Hologon - history, versions, knowledge, links, pictures

Raid, from what I have read and heard during the time when I researched the 16/8 prior tofinding a sample, DAG was always named as the first shop to use for the best possible conversion in the US. You are surely in good hands.

As I read you have a M240 with live view to try, do try it - it is one of the few camera bodies that allows full metering and even live view for most precise framing.

Regarding the 21/4 CV lens I am of no help as I never had a sample of these to try. What one reads and sees though it is a highly recommended 21mm to be used on the Leica M, both film and digital.

The comparison is also quite far apart.
The M8 sensor has without e shadow of a doubt a better acuity on the pixel level (difference in the sensor glass layer design between M8 and M9).
The Hologon is without a doubt among the very sharpest and across the frame most even performing “21mm” (on the M8).
I do not know at all how the 21/4 CV compares in this regard.

Should the Hologon show more resolution, maybe the lower sensor resolution of the M8 vs M9 is “caught up” with those two theoretical advantages, maybe not. This would be interesting to see in a direct comparison.

I could offer another comparison once back, but unfortunately my M9 is still out of service (sensor corrosion), as I seem to have quite a collection of 21mm lenses - no 21/4 CV among them but a 21/3.4 SEM among a few others. I chalk this down on my “to do out of curiosity list” ;-)

In any event the biggest limitation of the Hologon will always be it’s value in practicality, having a fixed aperture of f8 + making the use of it’s centre filter quite mandatory as of the strong light falloff and it’s strong drawbacks when planning to use it on full frame digital sensors.

There was a link to a blog post in this thread earlier where the Hologon was tested on a Sony full frame mirrorless camera - this makes that issue most apparent (as apparently those Sony mirrorless perform the worst among the full frame sensor options as of their sensor design not being suited to such extreme symmetrical wide angle designs with heavily smeared outer perimeters).
 
Thank you, Dirk.

Yes, if you could find your 21/3.4SEM and use it to get some images that you could compare somehow with your own images taken with the Hologon, this would be very useful as I have never seen a side by side comparison for these two lenses. I still have the M240, so I will start with this camera once I get from DAG the Hologon back.
I have a CV 25/4 and I have used it with film cameras and with digital cameras. It is a great little lens. I have not used any CV 21mm lens though. I doubt it very much that optically it is a match for the Hologon in terms of "no distortion anywhere", but it is most likely an excellent lens. If anyone has the Hologon and the CV 21 lens, please compare them for us here.
 
Corran said:
I doubt you want to hear this, but IMO, none. The CV 21/4 on the M9, especially with a profile, looks amazing. The 21 and 25 from Voigtlander are some of the best lenses I have used, especially the 25. And especially on film, but they do work fine on the M9 and a profile cleans up any small issues arising from the traditional design.

This thread isn't about other lenses so I have refrained from posting images from said lenses (or the 15mm). If you would like to see that perhaps start a thread for CV Wide Angles or something? I would be happy to contribute.

I also have some classic Zeiss lenses like the 21mm and 35mm Biogon and 50mm f/1.5 Sonnar. I do like the classic lenses and they have a softer global contrast that sometimes can be really nice, especially in certain lighting situations and for certain prints.
Click to expand...

Nobody ever said that people should not post images from lenses that could be viewed as being competitors for the Hologon. I have a feeling that the differences are mainly in distortion and in tonality when making larger prints maybe. Images posted here may not reveal differences in tonality.
 
raid said:
If anyone has the Hologon and the CV 21 lens, please compare them for us here.
Click to expand...

I have both lenses, the CV 21mm for Nikon RF.

This is an outstanding lens, but, as I am not a wideangle photographer, I did not use it much. Note also please that I never use digital cameras, I never will.

I will look up my files. If I find someting, I'll post it here.

Erik.
 
That would be very useful, Erik. The comparisons may differ from film to digital, but any existing distortion would still show if it is present.
 
Here you go.

Nikon S2, SC Skopar 21mm f/4, Tmax400.

Erik.

39422821245_031e401512_z.jpg
 
Once I get back my Hologon, I need a CV 15/4 III loaner from someone so that I can compare.
 
The barrel distortion that Phil sees, is because the house is from before the war.

Raid, indeed, there is a big difference between 21mm and 16mm focal lenghts.

Wide lenses can be fun, but they are hard to handle.

Erik.
 
If I decide one day to sell my Hologon, I doubt it that I will lose a lot of money. Until then (if at all), I will try to enjoy using this unique lens.
 
raid said:
Nobody ever said that people should not post images from lenses that could be viewed as being competitors for the Hologon. I have a feeling that the differences are mainly in distortion and in tonality when making larger prints maybe. Images posted here may not reveal differences in tonality.
Click to expand...

Well I didn't think it was appropriate due to the thread title and location (Zeiss subforum) but hey why not.

I don't see any noticeable distortion in the Voigtlander 15mm myself, and I am usually a bit of a stickler for that. It's less than 1-2% if any. Tonality will be a matter of light, film, development, etc., less so the lens, IMO.

Here's a few images I've taken with my Voigtlander 15mm:

rff-15-1.jpg


rff-15-2.jpg


rff-15-3.jpg
 
Erik van Straten said:
The barrel distortion that Phil sees, is because the house is from before the war.

Raid, indeed, there is a big difference between 21mm and 16mm focal lenghts.

Wide lenses can be fun, but they are hard to handle.

Erik.
Click to expand...

I actually saw the distortion first in the right side of the bookcase.
I'm just splitting hairs because it is a very good image. Just the straight lines make the very small amount of distortion visible.

Phil Forrest
 
Phil_F_NM said:
Just the straight lines make the very small amount of distortion visible.
Click to expand...

Only lenses like the Hypergon and the Hologon are completely distortion free. All other lenses have it more or less. The important question is: is the distortion acceptable.

A truly devoted photographer of architecture needs lenses that are distortion free, but ordinary mortals do not.

Erik.
 
Sometimes it is the wish for the exotic that results in buying a lens such as the Hologon.
This is fine.
I already have lenses from 7.5mm-21mm for SLR cameras that allow me to use them with adapters on Leica cameras, but I have been intrigued by the claims about the Hologon providing images with zero distortion. A similar fascination led me to buy the Hasselblad SWC for its 38mm Biogon.
 
Peter Karbe (Leica, Wetzlar) just emailed me that he will check out from the Leica Museum a Hologon to test it for me with a M9. Now this is such a nice gesture from this well known lens designer with Leica. I hope that he will give me the best-ever possible tips.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top