44 thoughts on “Review: Voigtlander VM 28mm 2.0 Ultron Type I”

1. Nice sample images and sorrow review of this 28mm Ultron lens. As always.

   I noticed quite a lot of the samples where shot on the M10. Might it be that your opinion about the M10 is changing in favor of of the Leica? 😉

   Reply

   1. Not at all.
      The digital M cameras offer an awful user experience, a disastrous one taking into account their price.
      Nevertheless there are lenses – and this 28mm 2.0 is clearly one of those – that work better on a thinner sensor stack, so why would I prefer using them on a camera they perform worse on?

      Reply

      1. I‘m with you with your concerns regarding the Leica M camera line. After Leica has released the M11 I think it is a missed chance to introduce a digital viewfinder with an EVF or OEVF (like Fuji). Take the Leica Q body and add an M mount please.

         There seem to be a small discussion between Leica users if adding an integrated EVF to M bodies would be the future or death of Leica M cameras. For me a Leica X-Pro M would be a reason to spend €€€ for one of those. (especially with integrate Z-Axis AF like the Techart AF adapter).

         Reply

         1. If there was a camera like that, a Leica Q with M bayonet and good EVF – and Leica has access to really good EVFs – I would definitely be interested in that.
            If they would at least offer an M camera with tiltable screen that would already be a good starting point.
            Judging by a survey from Leica I had been invited to we might actually see a tiltable display in the not so distant future, I just fear it will be on the SL line only.

            Reply

            1. I am replying about 2 years too late but the whole appeal of a Leica M camera body is the clean simple user experience. I look through the viewfinder and I see a focussing patch and frame lines for the lense I have mounted. I can then go about my photography without anything getting in the way. If Leica move in the direction of EVFs/clutter the viewfinder/try to automate the experience of taking photos a lot of Leica users would just look for old models to avoid this.

      2. “ The digital M cameras offer an awful user experience, a disastrous one taking into account their price.”

         I always find it odd when I read such a statement without any sort of qualification. It is obviously not for you or your shooting style, but given that dozens of extremely talented photographers find that it is their tool of preference, and they produce stunning work with it, wouldn’t that make you think that you maybe just don’t know how to make best use of it?

         As well as many great photographers of the past, I’m thinking of work by Alex Webb, Sebastian Salgado, Penti Sammallahti, David Alan Harvey, among many others.

         Reply

         1. Guess one really has to wonder what those extremely talented photographers would be able to achieve with a better camera then.

            But I guess the important part of your comment was mentioning “the past”. I don’t live in the past where nothing better than Leica M cameras was available.
            This is 2023, not 1958 anymore.

            Reply

            1. Such a limiting reply. So many talented photographers still prefer Leica M cameras, despite their premium price. One of the things they praise is the simplicity and directness of the experience. I use both a Sony A7rIV and a Leica M 246. While I like both, I find that for the sort of work I do – environmental portraiture, the Leica has many advantages, smaller size, clearer, more direct viewfinder, more direct controls, much faster zone focusing (when appropriate). As a do-it-all gadget, able to ‘do’ macro, sports, wildlife photography, and every other hobbyist genre, the Sony is, of course, more versatile, but none of that even remotely interests me, or many Leica M shooters who choose the M for what it does excellently.

2. For E mount usage, would a front filter application be suitable to augment the thick sensor glass for Sony, similar to the same application of a filter in front of a ZM 35/1.4 lens, which does fix a lot of the corner issues in Sony bodies?

   Reply

   1. I am pretty sure an appropriate front filter would improve the performance, but I lack the capabilities to calculate which one it is and I also don’t own a bunch of different filters to find out by trial and error which one it is.

      Reply

3. Thanks for the wonderful review Bastian!

   Would you ever consider buying, say, an a7iii and then replacing the filter stack on it to be optimized for M mount lenses? I feel like that would be the best solution to the problem of M mount lenses on Sony, though an expensive one to be sure.

   For this lens, I really love the contrast of it and the colors but I prefer my 7a 28mm 1.4 FE+ due to the faster aperture and maybe slightly better cohesion with the FE filter stack. I don’t love the poor QC with cheaper Chinese lenses though as my 7a is modestly decentered and sometimes this is noticeable in various images. I also don’t love the idea of adapting VM lenses because I feel like I would kick myself if V came out with E mount versions / analogs as they sometimes seem to do

   Reply

   1. If I was living in the US I would probably already have a Kolari modded Sony camera, yes.

      Reply

4. On a more pedestrian subject: I wonder what Bastian take on focusing lever (type I) vs focusing tab (type II) is.

   Reply

   1. I am not really a fan of either, but if it has to be one I prefer the lever.

      Reply

5. Thanks as always for the thorough and intelligent Bastian 🙂 I enjoy my CV 28/2 ASPH—really an attractive balance of IQ, rendering, size, ergo, price and versatility.

   A consideration for you or your readers if you’re not aware is a sensor mod by NKIR. I had my a7r2 modded my NKIR. All things considered, I preferred it over the Kolari route as it’s was a bit cheaper, thinner sensor and is better regarding WB issues. Here a couple links for those interested. My only regret is I didn’t do it sooner!

   https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1544095/0

   https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1710969/0

   Reply

   1. Was hoping this offer might be from the EU, but seems I have to keep waiting for someone to show up…

      Reply

      1. You’re opposed to international (US or China), or is it a logistical/situationally difficult thing?

         For what it’s worth, I communicated with the NKIR people on Facebook messenger and had a smooth experience, including shipping, payment and expediency.

         Reply

         1. Purely an issue with German customs.
            Also knows as the world’s worst cockblocker.

            Luckily (most of) you guys have no idea how much trouble it is dealing with them.

            Reply

            1. Atrocious. What a pain! You need a camera mule.

               Interesting and odd they make it so hard. I’ll google it as now I am curious.

6. Excellent review as always.

   I have the lens myself and found the Zeiss Biogon 28mm ZM lens profile in Adobe Camera Raw useful with the Ultron II since vignetting stopped down appears to be very similar and distortion correction is good (but not perfect). I expect the profile is the same in Lightroom.

   Reply

   1. I will have a look at that one!

      Reply

7. Nice images. But my question is purely about location. When I saw the images, especially the one of a tram running down a street, my immediate thought was “This looks like Zurich and that street looks like Bahnhoffstrasse”. Is that right. (Just curious. I have not been there since about 2000 but somehow I thought myself very comfortable there.

   Reply

   1. You are correct, it is Bahnhofstrasse in Zürich 🙂

      Reply

8. Man, I hope someday they make something like this but optimized for E mount… A tiny but very well corrected 28/2 would certainly fill a hole in the lineup. Personally speaking I’m more interested in a small MF 28mm than any other non-UWA/macro FL.

   Reply

   1. I doubt that will happen.

      The reason is the thick sensor glass layer in mirrorless cameras (Leica excluded). In order to make a lens work well in the sides and corners, when there is about 2.5mm glass on top of the sensor, the angle of light can’t be as steep, compared to cameras with sensor glass thickness of only about 1mm (Leica M cameras).

      Put in other words: If Cosina was to modify the 28mm Ultron for E mount sensors, it would most likely be a considerably larger lens, since the design would need a markedly longer exit pupil.

      Reply

      1. Interesting, I’d still be happy enough with a larger CV 28/2 tho, something in between the size of this one and the 7Artisans 28mm 1.4 pictured at the top (which itself is about the size of the Sony 28/2)…

         As the Alternatives section points out, it’s slim pickings for 28mm (manual or otherwise) on E-mount, I think they could offer something different enough from the glut of 24s & 35s.

         Reply

9. Hello: I’m a bit confused about whether the Ultron 28/2.0 is or is not a good fit on a Sony FE. I have a Sony a7riii and am in need of a manual focus 28mm lens to be used for zone focussing adapted onto my camera body. I have been using, at your site’s recommendation the 28/3.5 Pentax K and it is a beautiful lens, but it has a very short focus throw which makes zone focussing a bit tougher. My question: Should I stick with the Pentax with the short focus throw or get an Ultron 28/2.0 with the longer and, for me, more convenient focus throw. Thanks for any input you are able to give.

   Reply

   1. There are some disadvantages using this lens on a Sony camera compared to a Leica camera as outlined in the review.
      Therefore I would rather recommend to stick with the Pentax for now.

      Reply

      1. Thanks. A follow-up question: Do the disadvantages of using the VM on a Sony R body diminish or even disappear at f8 and f11? I’d be using those apertures for street shooting with zone focus. Would you still suggest the Pentax over the VM for those limited uses? Again, thanks so much.

         Reply

         1. At f/8 to f/11 the differences are not that noticeable anymore. But will there be a benefit over the Pentax lens? Mainly size I guess.

            Reply

10. Years worth of comments asking about a good and compact 28mm E-mount on various online forums and posts.

    I feel that Voigtländer are the only company who might come to the rescue and finally make one.

    The FE28 Sony really has almost none of special qualities of the Ultron. I use it sometimes but never get excited to go out and shoot with it. The bokeh can be quite smooth WO but it does strange things when stopped down (not really sharpening up nicely in the same way the 35ZA Sonnar didn’t either). Images can look quite poor at landscape distances. At first looks like it has a nice character but really it does not – you have to spend ages in PS to get a really nice image from it, although it can be done. Colour and sharpness are both similar to the Sony kit lens. I feel like the optical design is probably quite good but the quality of the glass used is simply not as good as we see from Voigtländer. Close up image quality is very poor indeed. At least it makes you really concentrate on great composition and light when out shooting! The kit lens that came on the original A7 is just as good in some situations.

    I bought the Ultron a few weeks ago based on this review and I must say it does everything I would want in a 28mm – colour, clarity and smoothness all nice. Excellent in fact. (on Leica M).

    The Sigma 28mm f1.4 is stunning but weighs almost 1KG.

    The GM 24-70mm (both versions) are quite nice at 28mm but you have to fiddle around and make sure it’s at 28 all the time – also very heavy.

    The 24GM is actually a fantastic lens.

    Loxia 25 is fantastic but wider. Batis is 23mm (nicer IQ than the FE28 though).

    There are lots of excellent quality adapted SLR lenses both AF and MF that perform very well optically and also look/feel a bit strange when mounted to the camera (some of the Canon L glass with an AF adapter is quite nice to use though).

    A 28mm APO Lanthar E-Mount would be really nice please Voigtländer. Or even just a 28mm Ultron, would look super cool on the A7 and sell like hot cakes in America.

    Reply

11. Another 28mm lens that can be adapted to a Sony mount is the Minolta 28 2.8 m Rokkor. While many copies of the lens have a problem with “white dots,” it is said that that imperfection does not impact image quality, a dubious proposition. But, if a non-defective copy could be found, that might be a good 28mm solution for Sony users. Any feedback on that lens and its workability on Sony? Thanks.

    Reply

    1. Because of the white dots issue I always stayed away from this lens, it will not deal any better with the Sony’s thicker filter stack than the other 28mm rangefinder lenses.

       Reply

12. I’ve noticed that, in adapting two different 28mm lenses to my Sony a7riii, the distance scales on the lenses are substantially inaccurate. The two lenses where this issue has appeared are the Minolta 28mm 2.8 m-Rokkor and the latest model of Voightlander Ultron. I used an Urth adapter and, while the quality of the images was fine, the distance scales on the lenses were substantially off. For example, if I used magnified focus on a subject and nailed the focus, the distance scale on the lens when so focussed would be way off, showing a vastly different distance than the actual distance. Any explanation? I’m feeling the adapter is throwing the distance scale off. If so, is there a M to FE adapter that produces more accurate distance-scale results?

    Reply

    1. Most adapters (especially cheap ones like the Urth you are using) are deliberatly being produced a bit too short to avoid returns (people will very likely return an adapter if they cannot focus at infinity but are unlikely to return it only because the distance scale is off).
       For Leica M lenses my recommendation is getting a metabones Leica M -> Sony E adapter.
       They are the most accurate I came across, I have two of these myself for that very reason.

       Reply

13. My goodness I would but an E-mount optimized version of this lens so quickly if they made one

    Reply

14. link to 7Artisans 28mm 1.4 in the Alternatives section is wrong – it goes back to this URL.

    Thanks for all the great info!

    Reply

    1. Fixed, thanks!

       Reply

15. Strange question, how’s the focus breathing performance in case you know?

    (Also something to add in future reviews e.g. simply good, bad etc.)

    Thanks to yall for providing the webs with good testing
    MfG

    Reply

16. Hello
    First, thanks to all the team for the very detailed and interesting reviews you publish

    Second, my experience is that you can have both :
    – a reasonably thin sensor glass
    – autofocus with leica M mount lenses
    Just use a Nikon Z6 or Z7 + TechArt adapter (the last version (version 2) is somehow expensive, but works really well, within some limits)
    The sensor glass on Nikon Z is said to be a little thicker than on the Leica SL (which is the second best for that after Leica M). In practice, it is very workable, and a very good proposition if you concentrate on Leica M mount lenses

    Third, the Pentax 28mm 3.5 is really good
    And the 28mm M-Rokkor has a vintage look and is a little soft, not like modern Voigtlander lenses

    Reply

17. The examples you show between the M body vs. the Sony body … CLEARLY SHOW the difference that the Leica microlenses make. One of the most compelling differences I’ve seen in a while.

    The color shift is well documented, but the amount of OOF difference in those corner shots is indisuptable, how much difference the microlenses make with M mount lenses.

    Thanks for the comps.

    Reply

    1. The OOF differences are not because of micro lenses, this is due to different filter stack thickness.

       Reply

       1. The combination … but, either way … the optical path through the two different bodies are clearly of a different projection.

          Not sure why you discount the microlenses as part of the optical projection, but still the proof is in the pudding, that the rangefinder lens on the rangefinder body has a different optical quality to it.

          Again, thanks for the comps so clearly illustrating this.

          Reply

          1. No not the combination.
             The M11’s sensor does not feature micro lenses anymore and if they were relevant for the corner performance of the lenses they would perform much worse on the M11 which they don’t.

             Reply