ultrawide day lens review 2: Voigtlander 15/4.5 Super-Wide Heliar Aspherical II

Voigtlander 15/4.5 II welded to cojones' stealthified (i.e. electrical-taped) Leica M8

Nikon D90, AFS 105/2.8 VR Micro and diffused SB900

For a while, the Voigtlander screwmount 15/4.5 (21mm equiv.) used to be the widest lens you could get for the M mount - until they brought out the insane 12/5.6, which is so wide you get your knuckles in the photo by gripping the camera normally. It lacked rangefinder coupling - not a big deal when the depth of field scale at f22 stretches 3/4 the way around the lens barrel, but the focus ring only moves 1/4 turn - but for close in work, estimating distances could be a little hit and miss. So Voigtlander made us all happy and released a proper M-mount version earlier this year. I've been shooting with one since launch day (serial # 36!) and couldn't be happier.

Sunset wisps, Kuala Lumpur

Leica M8, Voigtlander 15/4.5 II

Optical performance

There is really very little to say in this section that is other than good. Designing a wideangle lens for a mirrorless system is significantly easier than for an SLR; you don't have to make a telecentric design, so you can use fewer elements and make the whole optical formula symmetrical, or near to it. It's even easier if the maximum aperture is just f4.5 - not fast by anybody's standards. Fortunately the lens plays nice with lower shutter speeds, as it's so wide you have to be shaking quite a bit for motion blur to be visible in the final image. You can easily get sharp images handheld down to 1/10s.

The image is sharp all over, even in the corners, from maximum aperture to around f16, where diffraction starts taking over (on the M8 at least). Stopping down does not increase sharpness; it's already pretty much maxed out at f4.5, which is not to say it's a mediocre performer - far from it. In fact, on a per-pixel basis, I'd say it's about as sharp as the Leica 35/2 Summicron-M ASPH - which means it sits right up there on my list of sharpest lenses alongside other greats such as the 50/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH (a good copy), the Nikon AFS 300/2.8 VRII N, and the Nikon PC 85/2.5 Tilt-Shift Micro.

I don't see any chromatic aberration.

Contrast is excellent. Look at the shot below: the dark areas were very nearly pure black. Impressive, considering the sky was fairly overcast.

Enjoying glimpses of the sun, Kuala Lumpur

Leica M8, Voigtlander 15/4.5 II

The one area where stopping down does improve things is if you don't like vignetting: the 15/4.5 II vignettes like crazy wide open, perhaps a stop and a half or so on the M8. You can easily fix this if you're shooting RAW and using Photoshop, of course. Personally, I like it; it adds to the look and feel of the image. I'm guilty of even adding more sometimes - both to images shot with this lens, and more clinical lenses like the 35 'cron and 50 'lux.

It's difficult to comment on color transmission because I don't have a 52mm UVIR filter to go on the front, and we all know how responsive the M8 is to wavelengths we can't see. But in a quick and dirty comparison, color rendition is similar to the 35/2 Summicron-M ASPH without a UVIR filter - which suggests similar optical transmission properties.

Let's not bother talking about bokeh because there isn't any with a lens this wide and slow.

Spiral I, Kuala Lumpur

Leica M8, Voigtlander 15/4.5 II

Build quality and tactility

I must be one of the few photographers who puts an inordinate amount of importance on the way a lens handles: I like things that feel like vintage instruments, rather than melted plastic superblobs which have billions of buttons that do different things depending on which mode you're in, and which other button you've held down. Leica lenses feel amazing (at least those ones that aren't defective!). They're very smooth and precise without having any slop or backlash. And the weight adds to that feeling of solidity. Zeiss is pretty close, but they use more aluminum so they don't feel quite as solid.

Voigtlander is somewhat variable - the 50/1.5 Nokton Aspherical I also have is both light yet reasonably solid and precise at the same time, but the focusing ring has some backlash and drag that makes it easy to shift slightly off the critical point of focus. On the other hand, if the 15/4.5 II had the Leica badge on the front, I don't think I'd have expressed any disappointment at the build quality. It's nicely made, precise, without slop, and the aperture stops have a nice positive click to them. The built in hood is to protect both the front element and stop you from sticking your fingers into the frame (admittedly, I've done that a couple of times when not paying attention - you really need to use an external finder, but I find them inconvenient so I don't bother and just guesstimate the frame coverage). If I was to nitpick, the only place where the build quality lags a little is the lack of beveling on the ring edges: look at a Leica lens and notice how focusing and aperture rings are beveled.

But I digress. Let's just say that for the money, in fact, any money, it's a little jewel.

Trying to see the forest for the trees (on the full size image, I can make out individual leaves in the corners. Sharp enough for you? It is for me. And that was shot wide open...)

Leica M8, Voigtlander 15/4.5 II

Spiral II, Kuala Lumpur

Leica M8, Voigtlander 15/4.5 II

Conclusion

At US$500 or so, and considering the target audience of Leica M shooters, this lens is not only a bargain, but unique: the only similar focal length Leica has is in the 16-18-21 Tri-Elmar, and that's horribly expensive and huge. It's also not as sharp. The Voigtlander 15/4.5 II, on the other hand, is so small that you could conceivably lose it in a large pocket. It feels great to use. And the optics are fantastic.

Spiral III, Kuala Lumpur

Leica M8, Voigtlander 15/4.5 II

Above all of that, though, I love the way this lens draws. I can't put my finger on it. It's contrasty, sharp, and vignettes to produce what I always think of as that classic 'rangefinder look'. I loved the 24mm length on my D3, but sometimes wanted wider. At 21 equivalent, the 15/4.5 II is nearly perfect. Now if only it could be a stop faster so I could use it at night and indoors. It's also great for fast shooting: use the depth of field scales to prefocus, aim in vaguely the right direction (the huge FOV takes care of the rest) and bang away.

Recommended? Definitely. Do you need the finder too? I don't know. Personally I don't bother, since RF framing is so loose anyway and this is a zone-focus-shoot-from-the-hip lens anyway. So, stop wasting time and go buy one. Then make pictures. Done.

Cave god, Batu Caves, Kuala Lumpur

Leica M8, Voigtlander 15/4.5 II

four hommages and a note on style

Hommage a Cartier-Bresson: Builder, Kuala Lumpur

Leica M8, Voigtlander 15/4.5 Super-Wide Heliar M ASPH II

If you look closely at the work of the great photographers of the small format era - say since Oskar Barnack defined the 36x24mm frame - it's quite obvious they have their own distinctive style, regardless of the subject or camera used.

HCB had his trademark timing; capturing the decisive moment. The ultimate ability to tell an entire story in a single image. He worked with a screwmount Leica; anybody who's shot with one of these will know what a pain it is to work with. You focus manually, through a little window, which is NOT the same as the viewfinder window. The viewfinder only shows one focal length; use an external finder or guesstimate the coverage. It gets better; shutter speed is set on two dials (one for slow speeds, one for fast speeds) due to a mechanical quirk. You have to wind it with a knob, and rewind it with another knob - but don't let go, or else the film will release itself and you'll have to start again. The meter was separate, of course. He had to work with the slow films of the day - ISO 400 being virtually unheard of, and full of grain. The upshot is a huge penalty: you pick reaction time or technical perfection, but not both. HCB did the best he could with the latter, and went for timing. It is often said that he only used 35 and 50mm lenses - true - probably because they were the fastest available, and the easiest to frame with on the early Leicas, plus offering sufficient depth of field where required. But most importantly, a wide-normal lets you have subject AND context. This is very important for photojournalism - the Tiananmen square shot would have been meaningless without the tanks behind the student. HCB's work was very much about both timing and context.

Hommage a Salgado, Canacona, Goa

Leica M8, 50/1.4 Summilux-M ASPH

Salgado uses heavy darkroom work - mostly strategic dodging and burning (though his masks could have used a little tightening up on occasion to avoid haloes) to create beautiful tonal separation of his subject from the environment. He too shot with a Leica (now Canon digital), but one with the benefit of a built in meter, lever winding, a single shutter dial, a unified viewfinder/rangefinder, and faster films. Salgado uses the background not just to support the main subject and give context, but also to blend in with the entire frame and set the mood for the image. The result: a style that looks almost like a painting. When one looks at his images, you get the feeling that it's more about the mood and atmosphere than precise timing.

Hommage a Majoli: Rush Hour, JR Yurakucho Station, Tokyo

Nikon D3, AFS 14-24/2.8 G

Majoli has settled into the digital realm perhaps better than Salgado (we believe he uses assistants for his Photoshop work, and the other two photographers mentioned here are dead). In fact, his style is defined by it. Working within the limitations of a couple of Olympus point and shoots, he uses negative space - caused by underexposure to preserve the highlight tones in the limited dynamic range recordable by the camera - to define his subjects. It's also a very stealthy, covert, gritty way of working. You feel like you're there, and you feel the dust in the air, the gravel on the ground, and fear whatever might be lurking in the shadows. Let's call it subject isolation.

Hommage Ansel Adams: Knives, Meribel, Les Trois Vallees, French Alps

Nikon D2H, AFS 70-200/2.8 VR with 2x TC

The final photographer is one who is not a photojournalist. Ansel Adams worked with large format cameras that required very precise technical skills to shoot, and first class darkroom work afterwards. He too relied on timing; the same mountain can be flat and boring, or incredibly arresting depending on the time of day and prevalent atmospheric conditions. Still, landscapes move a lot slower than life, so we'll call him the perfectionist: in control of far more variables than a photojournalist.

I'll get to the point now. The average photographer has access to equipment that has far greater potential than any of these legends - yet they somehow still managed to produce images with an aesthetic and integrity few can match today. The average cameraphone has more resolution and less lag than the Leica III that HCB used. Salgado only recently discovered Photoshop and the precision of the tools available within, as well as the control afforded by a good pen tablet. Majoli still uses point and shoots from eight years ago - with glacial shutter lag and write times, poor autofocus, and dodgy image quality above ISO 200. The pro FF cameras - D3x, 1DsIII, 5DII - have nearly as much resolution and dynamic range as what Ansel had to work with, and they don't weigh twenty pounds and required exposure times in minutes. Hell, we have cameras like the D3 that are a) affordable b) deliver comparable clean resolution to medium format film c) can shoot nine perfectly exposed, perfectly focused frames in a second d) are 256 times more sensitive than ISO 100 film e) have stunning optics available to them.

So there is absolutely no reason why - given practice - we can't produce work that is not only like these four masters, but combines the best properties of both. This is the style I'm pushing myself to deliver in my images: the timing of HCB, the aesthetics of Salgado, the grittiness of Majoli, and the technical quality of Adams. Equipment excuses are not an option. Use whatever works for you, but even the cheapest new DSLR - a Nikon D40 and a fast prime - will get you there if used carefully.

Perhaps the best takeaway is that one has to define their own style, and figure out how to get there - but most importantly, have the dedication and patience to do so.