edgar Posted May 16, 2003 Share Posted May 16, 2003 I have recently added to my Leica M set a Voigtlander 15mm super wide heliar. I'm very surprised for its performances and really satisfied. Someone told me that the 12mm is even more adviceable and better in terms of global quality? It worths to change the 15mm with the 12mm, considering the small difference in focal lenght and the double cost? Any suggestions? Thanks in advance and regard Elio Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
janvanhove Posted May 16, 2003 Share Posted May 16, 2003 Just remember that the 3mm difference that far down the wide-angle scale means a huge difference in angle of coverage !I've never used the 12mm but i've read around that it's a little too extreme for it's own good. But hey, if extreme wide is what you want, you don't have any better option... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bishop_vc Posted May 16, 2003 Share Posted May 16, 2003 Elio, <br><br> Here's a <a href="http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/12mm.shtml">review</a> on Luminous Landscape.<br><br> Regards,<br><br> Steve Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul hart Posted May 16, 2003 Share Posted May 16, 2003 I had the 12 and sold it. I now have the 15. The 12 is a heavier lens and has the subjective feel of being better made. The finder is significantly better made than the one supplied with the 15. I found the 12 just a bit too extreme - I agree with the other post that you do notice the extra 3 more than you may expect, and I just find the 15 less 'in your face' wideangle than the 12. Only you can decide whether it's worth the extra cost - rent one for a while and try it out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skip_williams Posted May 16, 2003 Share Posted May 16, 2003 As others mention, the 12 is REEEEAL wide, where as the 15 is just very, very wide. Subjects appear to recede very quickly from the forground with the 12. FYI, the HFOV is 110 degreees for the 15 and 121 for the 12. My advice is to use the 15 and if you REALLY need more, then go for the 12. The CV bubble-level also is a BIG help with the 12mm, almost a necessity if you're doing shots with level horizons. Factor that and a double-shoe into your total cost of ownership. Personally, I find that the 15 is often too wide and the corners too extreme. I use the 21/4 much more than the 15. Sip Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
marke_gilbert Posted May 16, 2003 Share Posted May 16, 2003 I had the 15, tried the 12, and loved it. 15 is long gone, I get quite a bit of use from the 12. In terms of build quality, no comparison, although the 15 certainly didn't feel cheap. <P>Images from either one are really nice, yes there is more light falloff with the 12mm, but thats not always a bad thing. <P> Either lens will take you awhile to move beyond the gimmick effect shots, and then they really come into their own. There is a considerable difference in angle of view, but in my case, I always feel like I could use a little more. Best, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pete1 Posted May 16, 2003 Share Posted May 16, 2003 I have both. They are different lenses. The difference in angle is much greater when you see it than when you read the numbers. The 15 is much easier to use - it is more forgiving. The 12 is a difficult lens to use well, but when you do, oh man does it give results. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cameron_sawyer Posted May 17, 2003 Share Posted May 17, 2003 I've had both, and found the 12 to be practically unusable. It is so wide that it is really hard to put subjects in some kind of reasonable juxtaposition to one another. The perspective is really unnatural, in an unpleasant way. I think a full frame fisheye is more natural and pleasant for this extreme angle of view. I sold mine and bought the 15mm Heliar and have never missed the 12mm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alex_Es Posted May 17, 2003 Share Posted May 17, 2003 The 12 is a gas. It takes a while to get used to--that is amending your world view to 12mm. Once you do that you will enter a wonderland of possibilities. The VC 15/4.5 was a bit of chore to get used to but once I did--wow. The same is happening with the VC 12/5.6 which I use exclusively with a grey special edition Bessa L. I have never used a bubble and won't. It slows me down and it looks funny. (I do street photography, mind.) The light fall off at the edges is something that does not botter me. I use a 77mm filter holder with a polarizer. It acts primarily as an ND filter in very bright sunlight (I use ISO 800 film almost exclusively.) I also use a skylight filter. This is to protect the front element. The 12/5.6 has taken longer to know that the 15/4.5. You do need patience for it. Once you start to see the world in 12mm you will find this a gem of a lens to use. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
henry_ting2 Posted May 18, 2003 Share Posted May 18, 2003 Alex, how do you use a skylight filter for your 15mm VL for protection? I thought its protruding front glass prevents one from using it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now