Introduction
Between 2015 and 2016 Cosina released three ultra wide angle lenses for M-mount, the VM 10mm 5.6 Hyper-Wide Heliar, the VM 15mm 4.5 Super-Wide-Heliar III and this VM 12mm 5.6 Ultra-Wide-Heliar III. While the 10mm and 15mm are still in production 10 years later, this 12mm has been discontinued after 3 years only. What was the reason for that? Let’s find out in this review.
Lens is being tested on 42mp Sony A7rII and 24mp Leica M10
Sample Images
Many of the Sample images in this review can be found in full resolution here.
Contents
Specifications / Version History
So far there have been 4 different versions of this lens:
- Voigtlander 12mm 5.6 Ultra-Wide-Heliar
M39 (no rangefinder couling), 162g, 77mm filter thread via adapter ring, MFD 0.3 m, removable hood, 10/8 design, 9 aperture blades, 2000-2010 - Voigtlander VM 12mm 5.6 Ultra-Wide-Heliar II
M-mount (rangefinder couling), 230g, 67mm filter thread, MFD 0.5 m, non removable hood, 10/8 design (unchanged from MK I), 10 aperture blades, 2010-2016 - Voigtlander VM 12mm 5.6 Ultra-Wide-Heliar III
M-mount (rangefinder coupling), 281g, no filter thread, MFD 0.5 m, non removable hood, 12/10 design, 10 aperture blades, 2016-2019 - Voigtlander 12mm 5.6 Ultra-Wide-Heliar E III
E-mount, 350g, no filter thread, MFD 0.3 m, non removable hood, 12/10 design (unchanged from M-mount MK III version), 10 aperture blades, 2016-2019
These are the specs of the E-mount version:
-
- Diameter: 65 mm
- Field of view: 121° (diagonally)
- Length: 58 mm
- Weight: 281g (without caps)
- Filter Diameter: –
- Number of Aperture Blades: 10 (straight)
- Elements/Groups: 12/10
- Close Focusing Distance: 0.50 m
- Maximum Magnification: 1:27
- Mount: Leica M, Sony E
buy from ebay.com | ebay.de starting at $500 (affiliate links)
Disclosure
This Voigtländer VM 12mm 5.6 Ultra-Wide-Heliar III was kindly provided by our reader Olaf Leismann for review purposes. Thanks a lot!
Handling / Build Quality
This Voigtländer VM 12mm 5.6 Ultra-Wide-Heliar III features Cosina’s most common casing design: anodized matte black aluminium with red/white markings that are engraved and filled with paint and a small red dot for easier mounting.
The hill/valley focus ring has perfectly even resistance and travels almost exactly 90° from the minimum focus distance of 0.5 m to infinity.
The aperture ring has half-stop click stops that are spaced equidistantly as it should be.
There is a significant amount of rangefinder blockage with this lens, but if you are using this lens on a rangefinder camera without liveview you need an external finder for framing anyway.
The Mark III version of this 12mm 5.6 and also the 15mm 4.5 are significantly bigger than their predecessors. I don’t have a sample of the 12mm 5.6 II here, but I added my 15mm 4.5 II with shaved-off hood for a comparison. The 12mm 5.6 II has a similar casing length, only its front diameter is a a bit higher. Taking into account the non removable hoods, we also see that this 12mm 5.6 III is barely any smaller than the Laowa 9mm 5.6.
Being an M-mount lens, you can adapt it to all kinds of mirrorless cameras.
Vignetting
light falloff
Because of the non removable hood it is harder to get decent values on light fall off with our usual method that yields those nice charts.
| f/5.6 | 3.5 EV |
| f/8.0 | 3.4 EV |
| f/11 | 3.4 EV |
The problem with these compact ultra wide angle lenses designed for M-mount is, that stopping down often doesn’t help with reducing the vignetting, and this is exactly the case here.
These vignetting figures are still similar to other compact ultra wide angle lenses for M-mount. If this is something that bothers you, I recommend having a closer look at the Laowa 15mm 2.0 M, which stopped down to f/5.6 or further “only” has 2 EV vignetting.
color cast
One of the reasons for Cosina updating these Mk II ultra wide angle lenses must have been the “italian flag” color cast on Leica’s sensors (have a look at my Voigtlander VM 15mm 4.5 II review) that occured with them. Luckily that is indeed gone, but there is still some greenish color cast in the corners on Sony’s BSI sensors as well as on the Leica M10/M11.
You can check out my article How to: Correcting Color Cast in Lightroom where I explain different methods to fix this.
Sharpness
infinity (24mp Leica M10, 42mp Sony A7rII)
On the Leica M10 the Voigtländer VM 12mm 5.6 III shows a decent, but not a great peformance. While center and midframe look good from f/5.6, the corners do benefit from stopping down, but they never look great.
One would think that the performance would be worse on the Sony A7rII because of its thicker filter stack, but except for a more pronounced midzone dip the lens performs very similar here. This is why I am guessing the M-mount and E-mount versions of this lens share the same exact optics.
Compared to my experiences with the Voigtländer VM 10mm 5.6 and VM 15mm 4.5 III, this 12mm’s performance is closer to the 10mm’s, which also isn’t that great. In terms of sharpness I also hardly see an improvement over the earlier versions of this lens.
close (0.5 m, 1:27)
100% crops from center, A7rII
While the E-mount version features a minimum focus distance of 0.3 m, this M-mount version only offers 0.5 m, leading to an even worse maximum magnification. For comparison, the Laowa 9mm 5.6 offers a minimum focus distance of 0.12 m, leading to a maximum magnification of 1:4.8 and thanks to its floating elements design almost perfectly corrects field curvature even at these close distances.
Flare resistance
As always evaluating flare is a complex matter since you can get any lens to look bad if you push it hard enough and a slight change of scenario can affect results a lot.
Modern Voigtländer lenses often perform well in this category and this 12mm 5.6 is no exception. As ghosting hardly is an issue at all and there is only a specific position of the sun at the corner of the frame that leads to some veiling flare.
Coma
In the sharpness section we have seen that the corner performance isn’t amazing and that is still visible here. Coma isn’t really an issue though – considering this lens’ maximum aperture of f/5.6 that doesn’t come as a big surprise though.
Distortion
Leica M10 | Voigtländer VM 12mm 5.6 III | f/11
The lens shows low yet slightly wavy distortion. Lightroom/Photoshop features a correction profile (for the E-mount version of this lens) which I used for many of the sample pictures in this review.
Sunstars
As is the case for many of Cosina’s VM lenses also this 12mm 5.6 III creates well defined 10-pointed sunstars from f/5.6 to f/16. At f/22 the opening becomes perfectly round, so no sunstars at that setting. Not that I recommend anyone using f/22 anyway…
Chromatic Aberrations
lateral
Many ultra wide angle lenses show some lateral CA in the corners and this VM 12mm 5.6 III is no exception. They are not very strong though and still easily corrected in post.
longitudinal
As this is a very wide and rather slow lens longitudinal CA (loCA) are nothing to worry about.
Conclusion
good
|
average
|
not good
|
As said in the beginning, Cosina released the VM 10mm 5.6 Hyper-Wide Heliar, the VM 15mm 4.5 Super-Wide-Heliar III and this VM 12mm 5.6 Ultra-Wide-Heliar III at roughly the same time.
I know many people who bought the 15mm 4.5, as its focal length is not that extreme, it is a bit faster and could take normal filters. It also has the best corner sharpness of all three.
I also know some people who bought the 10mm 5.6 (me included) as it was the widest rectilinear lens at that time.
But when it comes to this 12mm 5.6, it has all the disadvantages of the 10mm 5.6 (not great corner sharpness, f/5.6 maximum aperture, no filter thread), but it didn’t have the the world record focal length. So next to the 10mm 5.6 and the 15mm 4.5, it didn’t look very appealing to me, and I guess I wasn’t alone with that.
Now, almost a decade after its release, there are also some new options available that you might want to have a look at, so check out the next section.
buy from ebay.com | ebay.de starting at $500 (affiliate links)
Alternatives
Laowa 9mm 5.6:
Despite being wider, the Laowa 9mm 5.6 performs better than either, the Voigtländer 10mm 5.6 or this 12mm 5.6, which is why it is my personal lens of choice in this focal length range. The difference between 9mm and 12mm is rather massive though.
buy from the manufacturer’s homepage | B&H | ebay.com | ebay.de for $699 (M-mount) and $599 (E/Z/L-mount) (affiliate links)
Voigtlander 10mm 5.6 E Hyper Wide Heliar:
Similar performance as this 12mm 5.6 while being a bit wider, still in production. As the aforementioned Laowa 9mm 5.6 is the better performer I cannot really recommend this 10mm lens anymore.
buy from ebay.com | ebay.de | amazon.com | amazon.de | B&H for 749$ (affiliate links)
Voigtlander 12mm 5.6 Ultra Wide Heliar I and II:
If you are shooting with an analogue M-mount camera or the latest M11 with BSI sensor, the earlier versions of this 12mm 5.6 are actually the better choice. The optical performance is very similar, but the older models are smaller, a bit cheaper and feature normal filter threads.
If you are using an M8/9/10 you have to deal with the ugly italian flag vignetting though, which this latest MK III version got rid of.
buy from ebay.com | ebay.de starting at $400 (affiliate links)
Laowa 11mm 4.5 C-Dreamer:
Another very interesting alternative to this 12mm 5.6. While their price is similar the 11mm has some advantages: it is a bit faster and has a normal 62mm filter thread.
Deciding between these two, I would go for the 11mm Laowa.
buy from the manufacturer’s homepage for $539 (M-mount) and $489 (E/Z/L-mount) (affiliate links)
Laowa 12-24mm 5.6:
In the M-mount world zoom lenses are very rare and the so far most appealing one comes from Laowa. In terms of sharpness it performs better at 12mm than this Voigtländer prime and brings a whole lot of versatility to the table. A lens that doesn’t get nearly the love from the M users that it actually deserves.
buy from manufacturer’s homepage | amazon.com | amazon.de | ebay.com | ebay.de | B&H for $649 (E/RF/Z) to 699$ (M-mount) (affiliate links)
Further Sample Images
Many of the sample images in this review can be found in full resolution here.
Further Reading
- All M-mount Reviews
- Review: Laowa 15mm 5.0 M Cookie
- Review: Thypoch 28mm 1.4 Simera M
- Review: Voigtländer 50mm 1.1 Nokton
- Review: Leica 90mm 2.0 Summicron-M pre Asph
Support Us
Did you find this article useful or just liked reading it? Treat us to a coffee!
via Paypal
This site contains affiliate links. If you make a purchase using any of the links marked as affiliate links, I may receive a small commission at no additional cost to you. This helps support the creation of future content.
Latest posts by BastianK (see all)
- Review: Sigma 135mm 1.4 Art DG – The actual Bokeh Master - October 25, 2025
- Analogue Adventures – Part 45: Fujichrome Provia 400X (expired) - October 22, 2025
- Review: Viltrox AF 85mm 2.0 FE Evo - October 20, 2025
Bonjour,
Another interesting story, even when the lens does not interest me, I like to read what you say about it!
I do have a question though…
What do you do in post process? Do you make verticals parallel?
In the old days, the sixties when I first used a wider then 50mm lens I was so disappointed…, the mountains on my landscapes looked like they were eroded to hills…
And still up till now 35 is already a wide angle, that I will only use when I can’t step backwards.
You know how to use these lenses and make beautiful pictures with them.
Yes, it is a simple thing to do these days e.g. in Lightroom.
Many thanks for the review, Bastian, I am always curious about performance of Voigtländer lenses on other cameras, although I’m not a Leica M shooter.
In the lack of many new manual focus lenses for E-mount, have you considered reviewing compact cine lenses?
Laowa has a few new series of compact ultra wide cine lenses, including a 12mm Zero D (https://laowacine.com/product/laowa-12mm-t2-9-lite-zero-d-vv-cine/), which judging by their higher price point, suggest better build quality and tighter tolerances.
I personally refuse to shoot autofocus lenses, as I loose control in choosing focus point. I don’t shoot fast moving objects nor do commercial work, so autofocus takes away control instead of providing a solution. I hope Laowa doesn’t envision a future exclusively dedicated to autofocus photography lenses.
Laowa makes a standard (non-cine) 12/2.8 that’s available in both AF and MF versions for E mount, the former with a 5 blade aperture and the latter with a 14 blade one… The latter might be heavier, I’m not positive, but it looks nicer to handle than the geared cine version either way.
https://www.venuslens.net/product/laowa-12mm-f-2-8-lite-zero-d-ff/?srsltid=AfmBOoo6Bu_3fsDrZ9rZwbz_sRSu6W7SsbODOVA-q78_AjfKjkBwTXPp
And they are all optically the same.
Thank you, Frank and Bastian, for your kind replies.
The new Laowa AF 12mm f/2.8 Zero-D Lite (https://www.venuslens.net/product/laowa-12mm-f-2-8-lite-zero-d-ff/) has a different optical formula than the original MF 12mm f/2.8 Zero-D (https://www.venuslens.net/product/laowa-12mm-f2-8-zero-d/). In the “Features” section of the new AF Lite 12mm lens, Laowa claims that:
“The original 12mm f/2.8 Zero-D was highly praised for its image quality. However, the new 12mm f/2.8 Lite Zero-D FF takes it even further, with improved sharpness and reduced chromatic aberration. This impressive image quality benefits landscape, architecture, and astrophotographers who demand edge-to-edge clarity.”
Laowa shows side by side comparison images, and there are two different lens element diagrams – 16 elements in10 groups vs 16 elements in 9 groups – and MTF charts respectively.
Laowa does not offer a diagram of the optical formula nor MTF chart for the 12mm T2.9 Lite Zero-D VV Cine lens (https://laowacine.com/product/laowa-12mm-t2-9-lite-zero-d-vv-cine/), as is customary for Cine lenses, but it does list that it has 16 elements in 9 groups, as does the new and improved Lite AF version. This suggests that the new cine lens has the newer and improved optical formula of the Lite AF version, with a superior optical performance to the original MF 12mm f/2/8 Zero-D lens.
The newer 12mm lens also has a slightly shorter minimum focus distance of 14cm, versus the 18 cm of the original MF 12mm lens.
Another Cine lens I consider interesting for photography use, is Laowa’s 180mm T 4.6 Sword FF Macro lens from its Sword Cine Series (https://laowacine.com/product/sword-macro-cine-full-frame-lens-series/), as this is not a focal length to be found in MF for E-mount. With a weight of 734gr it’s a hefty one, but still lighter than my CV 110mm f/2.5 Apo Lanthar.
Have a good one
The new 12mm 2.8 has already been reviewed here, MF Cine and AF Still versions.
” The new Laowa AF 12mm f/2.8 Zero-D Lite (https://www.venuslens.net/product/laowa-12mm-f-2-8-lite-zero-d-ff/) has a different optical formula than the original MF 12mm f/2.8 Zero-D (https://www.venuslens.net/product/laowa-12mm-f2-8-zero-d/). ”
Look closer, the second one you linked is a DSLR era lens that just happened to be sold for mirrorless mounts too, and the first one you linked is a native mirrorless design that’s available in BOTH AF and MF versions, plus the cine version, all three of those are the same formula as Bastian said, and a much more recent design than the old DSLR 12/2.8.
Ergo, Laowa hasn’t abandoned MF at all, for now.
Thanks Bastian, I didn’t realize you had also covered the MF Cine version of the new 12mm f/2.8 Zero-D Lite. From the title of the review., with “AF” in it, I skipped it. My mistake.
Cheers!
You don’t need the cine version for MF, there’s a fully MF non-cine version of it. Click the second drop down menu after picking the mount.
Many thanks, Frank, you’re absolutely right, and your pointer is spot on: ” look closer”.
I just assumed it was an AF lens and never thought to look for an MF version on the website.
Everybody is so focused on AF – pun intended – that unless you watch the whole YouTube reviews, or look closer in the description on Laowa’s website, you may just assume it’s a new AF lens, and not immediately guess there’s also a MF version hidden in there in a drop menu.
It wouldn’t hurt to add “AF/MF” to the product title on the website, and feature images of both versions on an equal basis.
Considering the longer focus throw and more dampened focus ring of the Cine version, I would still go for the Cine lens. I love the feel of a more solid construction, and highly value the precision of a more dampened focus ring.
I saw somewhere – Sony Alpha Rumors I believe – that Laowa has an AF 180mm f/ 4.5 APO Macro coming soon, so I hope they follow the logic of the 10mm and 12mm AF lenses, and offer a MF and Cine version as well.
Cheers!