Voigtlander f0.95 25mm vs Angenieux t2.2 17.5-70mm super 16mm lens

M

meltedspider

Member
Hi folks,

Just got me a GH2 with the kit 14-140mm lens and am looking to upgrade. I have the budget to either go for the Voigtlander f0.95 or a vintage Angenieux t2.2 17.5-70mm super 16mm lens with a Denz PL mount adapter. I have a music video shoot coming up in 2 weeks time and really need a great all round lens for the shoot. If I go for the Angenieux, I'll use the ETC crop mode and I have the Quantum beta v5 patch installed. So, my question is which lens to go for? I understand the Angenieux will most likely give a softer image and in ETC crop mode which is 2.6x plus the micro four third 2x that's 4.6x! so I'd be getting roughly a 80mm to 320mm focal length. Decisions, decisions! With the Angenieux I'll also have the PL mount so in case I need more lenses i can always rent PL mount cine lenses like Zeiss CP.2's from the local rental house! Is the Voigtlander overrated or is it really that good? Anyways, hope you guys can help me out here. Thanks for taking your time!
 
Neither would be suitable for an all-purpose, all-around lens. I've got both, and I would be hesitant to rely on either as my go-to lens. They're also completely opposite ends of the spectrum; one is a native m43 lens with its main claim to fame being its 0.95 speed, but it's a fixed focal length. The other is a zoom that will vignette terribly on a GH2, unless you use ETC mode, at which point it becomes a quite telephoto zoom. Fast, yes, but practical? Not really.
 
Barry_Green said:
Neither would be suitable for an all-purpose, all-around lens. I've got both, and I would be hesitant to rely on either as my go-to lens. They're also completely opposite ends of the spectrum; one is a native m43 lens with its main claim to fame being its 0.95 speed, but it's a fixed focal length. The other is a zoom that will vignette terribly on a GH2, unless you use ETC mode, at which point it becomes a quite telephoto zoom. Fast, yes, but practical? Not really.
Click to expand...

Thanks Barry for your input, much appreciated! They are absolutely at both ends of the spectrum. What if I were to rephrase it and say which one of these lenses would be a good "specialty" lens to compliment the kit 14-140mm lens? I know the Voigtlander would be great for low light and shallow DOF and the Angenieux would perhaps give a softer, grainier look especially with ETC mode. What would you suggest out of these two? I know theres a plethora of lenses to choose from but somehow I've got stuck on these two! Thanks in advance for your reply!
 
I agree with Barry.

Also, having a lot of experience with ETC mode I'd say it's definitely a taste thing. You've got to put in approximately two times the effort to get a good image. But, I think it's worth it and if you can grab some S16 lenses without breaking the bank, it is an awesome thing to have two different looks available to you in one camera. When I test out the 25/0.95 I'll definitely report on it, but you can check vimeo for some S16 + GH2 footage: www.vimeo.com/campcomet

It's super fun stuff. Matty_G and I are gonna test out some baby Cooke S16 lenses really soon with it.

Zeiss Superspeed S16 Zoom | Etc mode | I think it's 800 ISO (might be 400) | 1/40 shutter and super mild noise reduction:

Click the pic for a 1080 PNG.
 
meltedspider said:
What if I were to rephrase it and say which one of these lenses would be a good "specialty" lens to compliment the kit 14-140mm lens?
Click to expand...
Unquestionably and without a doubt, the Voigtlander is the more usable of the two in that scenario. Gorgeous images, beautiful manual focus capability, extremely insanely wide-open iris. It will give you capabilities the 14-140 just doesn't have.

The S16 lens is a fast long zoom, if that's what you need; as compared to the 14-140 it would be about a 45-180 equivalent. So it would overlap much of the range of your existing 14-140. Granted it would be faster. But ... well, let's put it this way, I've got all three of those lenses (14-140, Voigt 25mm, and Angenieux 17-70) and I use the 14-140 about 80% of the time, the Voigtlander about 5-10% of the time, and I don't think I've ever really bothered to even put the 17-70 on the GH2 twice. I did once, but not twice, just ... I dunno, it (to me) makes little to no sense.

But, as said, hey, it's all up to you and what you want to shoot.
 
Barry_Green said:
Unquestionably and without a doubt, the Voigtlander is the more usable of the two in that scenario. Gorgeous images, beautiful manual focus capability, extremely insanely wide-open iris. It will give you capabilities the 14-140 just doesn't have.

But, as said, hey, it's all up to you and what you want to shoot.
Click to expand...

Yeah, if I had to choose between the two without freedom to use both, then the Voigtlander. I want to try the voigt with a .55x Wide Angle adapter, 72mm thread so it clears the edges. See what kind of 12mm that would look like.
 
A fast prime is a good companion to a general-purpose zoom.
I have a Voigtlander 25mm 0.95, and it's the best lens I've ever bought (so far!) Don't expect miracles, but there's nothing quite like one. If you need the speed option, then it's a sensible choice.

Kholi said:
Yeah, if I had to choose between the two without freedom to use both, then the Voigtlander. I want to try the voigt with a .55x Wide Angle adapter, 72mm thread so it clears the edges. See what kind of 12mm that would look like.
Click to expand...
I would also like to see how the results of this combination look!
 
Kholi, great example shot there!
I looked at some of your footage, and I must admit that its surprisingly steady considering how much magnification there is. Tell me you're not doing this handheld??

Meanwhile, its interesting to hear the 14-140 being recommended as a good "all purpose zoom". Can you zoom with that during a shot without seeing the aperture adjust? There's another thread I just saw that describes the lack of a native constant aperture zoom.
http://www.dvxuser.com/V6/showthread.php?271417-Constant-aperture-zoom-with-IS
My kit (14-45) seems mostly useful as a variable prime, adjusted before the shot and never during. I picture a good all purpose versatile zoom being able to zoom like a fixed lens camera while shooting.
 
All handheld. And definitely NOT steady. Haha. Shakiest hands ever.

I am not sure about the 14-140. Haven't used it in ages.
 
Point is, when using the etc mode, I picture everything shot on a tripod because of exaggerated movements.
I forgot that these are 16mm lenses which are wider to begin with. Also, less rolling shutter at that size, right?
 
M. Gilden said:
Point is, when using the etc mode, I picture everything shot on a tripod because of exaggerated movements.
I forgot that these are 16mm lenses which are wider to begin with. Also, less rolling shutter at that size, right?
Click to expand...

Ah, yeah. I mean I haven't tested it but I can tell. Being on the 100 end of the 10-100 S16 zoom it's not bad at all. And that's handheld.

Also, for calculations, I think the ETC mode is supposed to be 4.6x FF35 format, or somewhere around 3.4x compared to S35

It looks fine to my eyes, though, and with all the confusion on crop factor I'm just gonna ignore the numbers and go with what I feel looks good to me.
 
Kholi said:
Ah, yeah. I mean I haven't tested it but I can tell. Being on the 100 end of the 10-100 S16 zoom it's not bad at all. And that's handheld.

Also, for calculations, I think the ETC mode is supposed to be 4.6x FF35 format, or somewhere around 3.4x compared to S35

It looks fine to my eyes, though, and with all the confusion on crop factor I'm just gonna ignore the numbers and go with what I feel looks good to me.
Click to expand...

Nice. Also, I like that you did the comparison to FF35 first. ::snicker:: ;)
 
M. Gilden said:
Nice. Also, I like that you did the comparison to FF35 first. ::snicker:: ;)
Click to expand...
Specifically because I was responding to you. Hahaha. Made sure to go back and add that.

By the way totally teasing. In case it didn't come off right.
 
Last edited:
why are people still zooming?? please stop, it looks amateur/lame/tv-newsy and you'll just be pissed off there aren't many dslr zoom lenses with a constant aperture. everything will improve if you change the way you shoot/edit to eliminate those oh so awkward and distracting long zooming shots! ;)
 
averan said:
why are people still zooming?? please stop, it looks amateur/lame/tv-newsy and you'll just be pissed off there aren't many dslr zoom lenses with a constant aperture. everything will improve if you change the way you shoot/edit to eliminate those oh so awkward and distracting long zooming shots! ;)
Click to expand...
Has it ever occurred to you that perhaps some of us are actually capturing tv/news style footage in the first place?If shooting narrative film, I agree that zoom will be a huge no-no. But I've also shot my share of documentary/live events toknow that sometimes a zoom is not only useful, but mandatory.
.[\quote] Oh, and Kholi, I got it, it was totally an appreciated comment, don't worry. ;-)
Click to expand...
 
yep. it totally occurred to me that there are people trying to use a dslr for the wrong type of project. i use a zoom lens for all my documentary work, but it doesn't mean that i actually zoom in/out during a shot! go ahead and try to zoom, but more likely than not, you're just setting yourself up for failure. if live events and zooming while recording are your priority, then i suggest that a dslr is NOT the right tool for the job. that's what an hmc150/40 is for.
 
averan said:
why are people still zooming?? please stop, it looks amateur/lame/tv-newsy and you'll just be pissed off there aren't many dslr zoom lenses with a constant aperture. everything will improve if you change the way you shoot/edit to eliminate those oh so awkward and distracting long zooming shots! ;)
Click to expand...

I watched the movie Hancock last night. You might drop Peter Berg a line, as he didn't get your memo about zooms looking amateurish to the tune of $625,000,000.

All the Best!

Dave
 
everything in moderation my friend. i occasionally do slow fake zooms in post for effect. everything has its use and place, but if you're trying to make a piece of gear do something it can't you'll just be frustrated until you change your approach and learn to work with what you've got....or get the right tool for the job!

i'm surprised i even have to explain any of this, but there it is. take it or leave it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top