Review: Voigtlander 21mm F3.5 Color-Skopar

The Voigtlander 3.5/21 is a tiny, relatively affordable, manual focus lens for the Sony FE system. In this review I evaluate it’s performance.

Image Samples

You can find most images shown in this image in full resolution in this album.


Diameter 63 mm
Length 40 mm
Filter Thread 52 mm
Weight 230 g
Max. Magnification
Close Focusing Distance from the sensor 0.2 m
Number of aperture blades 10
Elements/ Groups 9/8

The Voigtlander 3.5/21 sells for $699 at CameraQuestB&H or€ at (affiliate links). If you purchase the lens through one of these affiliate-links I get a small compensation with no additional cost to you. 


  • 4.6.19: A few minor changes, long-term conclusion and new samples
  • 6.11.18: Updated Alternatives, Sharpness, Alternatives and conclusion


I bought this lens at full retail price from my own money.


The Voigtlander Color-Skopar 21mm F3.5 is a fully manual lens so you have to change focus and aperture by yourself. The camera can’t change the aperture so S- and P-mode will not work as with native lenses.

It has electronic contacts to communicate with the camera though. That provides correct EXIF-data, the OSS in all Sony cameras with IBIS will automatically know the correct focal length and the focus magnification can be automatically activated when the focus ring gets turned. Unlike Loxia lenses the Voigtlander has a distance encoder so the camera will show a pretty much useless digital distance scale and stabilization might be a bit more effective.

Build quality and handling

The Voigtlander 21mm F3.5 feels really solid. The lens hull is made from nothing but metal and tolerances are very low. Most but not all markings are engraved.

There is no gasket around the mount and Voigtlander does not claim any weather resistance.

Of course I can’t tell you how durable the lens will be in the long term. All I can do is give you my superficial impression which is very positive in this case. Should you ever need a repair keep in mind that with Voigtlander lenses these are usually done in Japan and take several weeks.


If you have used Zeiss Loxia lenses you will probably have been frustrated by the fact that there is no good place to grab them when you change lenses. This is not an issue with the Voigtlander since you can easily grab it by its base which is textured for better grip.

Focus Ring

The focus ring travels around 120 degrees from 20 cm to 1 m and a further 23 degrees to infinity. I think that is a very reasonable transmission for a macro but it is a bit slower to focus precisely at longer distances. The ring itself is well textured and the resistance is about perfect.

Aperture ring

The aperture ring situated at the front is a joy to use. It is made from metal with distinctive stops and a very pleasant resistance. I would have preferred 1/2 or even full stops but 1/3 stops work ok. The Voigtlander stops down to f/22.


The Voigtlander 3.5/21 has a solid yet low profile hood which adds just 10 mm to the length so I always leave it on the camera for lens protection.

Size and Weight

Voigtlander 3.5/21 | Loxia 2.8/21 | FE 4/16-35

The Voigtlander 3.5/21 is a very small lens, significantly smaller than it’s competitors and I think that is one of it’s most important qualities.

Close Focus

The Voigtlander focuses down to 20cm which can give an interesting perspective emphasizing a subject while including the background.

Optical performance

These results are based on the use with a Sony Alpha 7II.

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 will affect results a lot.

I think the Voigtlander compares well to other lenses, especially in regards to veiling flare.

But not everything is perfect and I lost a few images in very demanding scenarios to ghosting. Sensor reflections can also be a serious issue and I am not talking about the very flare prone a7 but the a7II.

Here is a comparison with the Loxia 2.8/21 and FE 4/16-35:

I will post a few more scenarios in the next update.


Voigtlander lenses are known for their very defined 10-pointed sunstars. Personally I like this effect a lot, other people don’t. You just need to stop down to f/4 until they are very well defined.


Not a very important aspect with a super wide angle lens but bokeh is rather smooth.

Chromatic Aberrations

Unsurprisingly for a slow wide-angle axial CA is well controlled.


As I have come to expect with smaller Voigtlander lenses vignetting is very high at 2.6 stops wide open which is reduced to still high 1.9 stops from f/5.6.

Aperture Vignetting
f/3.5 2.6 EV
f/4 2.3 EV
f/5.6 1.9 EV
f/8 1.9 EV
f/11 1.9 EV


The Voigtlander 3.5/21 shows a small amount of barrel distortion. +4 in LR corrects it very well.

before/after correction


f/3.5: Excellent in the center, good to very good in the midframe area and not that great in the extreme corners.

f/4: slight improvement in the corners

f/5.6: midframe is very good now, corners are good.

f/8: ever so slightly softer in the center, very good across the frame.

f/11: significantly softer everywhere

All in all a very good performance. The Voigtlander is not the sharpest wide-angle in the system but unless you compare it to other lenses directly you probably won’t notice that.


Zeiss Loxia 2.8/21: The Loxia is nearly twice the weight and price but it is a bit sharper especially in the midframe region where it also has higher contrast. Check out Fred’s well done comparison which mirrors my experience. Flare resistance is different: In my comparisons the Voigtlander was better for one scenario while the Loxia was better in others. So if you are after the very best performance go for the Loxia. If very good is good enough for you and size and/or price are more important go for the Voigtlander.
review | 394 g  | $1499

Tokina Firin 2/20: I haven’t  compared them directly but I think that the slightly more expensive Firin is a little sharper and of course 1.5 stops faster which together with good coma-correction make it an obvious choice for astro. Because of better flare resistance, nice sunstars, better close-focus ability and smaller size I would prefer the Voigtlander as a landscape lens.
review | 490 g | $799

Voigtlander 1.4/21: The soon to be released big brother of the 3.5/21 weights 568g and costs twice as much so it will fill a very different niche.

Sony FE 4/16-35 ZA: The only thing these two lenses share is the focal length. The Sony is much larger, heavier and more expensive but also more flexible with AF and a super handy zoom range. If you don’t enjoy using tripods the optical stabilizer also makes a bigger difference than I would have thought. Performance wise the Voigtlander is a little sharper in the corners while the Zeiss beats it in the midframe region. Flare resistance of the Voigtlander is significantly better but not perfect and sunstars are much more defined.
review | 518 g | about $1348 

Zeiss Batis 2.8/18: A little sharper, much higher volume, more expensive and I wouldn’t discount the difference in focal length, for a super wide angle 3 mm are very significant.
review | 330g | about $1500

Canon nFD 2.8/20: If you are on a tight budget the Canon is a decent wideangle solution. You need to stop it down to f/5.6 for good and to f/11 for very good across the frame sharpness and you have to consider the weak flare resistance but I was quite happy with the results in the end. If you can afford it the Voigtlander is a more versatile and significantly smaller lens .
review | 305 g | about $200 used 

Samyang 2.8/24: Again a rather different focal length. The even smaller Samyang is half the price but it also performs worse in regards to sharpness and especially flare resistance. Handling is also less pleasant but it offers AF.
review | 93g | $349

Preliminary Conclusion


  • Size
  • Price
  • Build quality
  • Handling
  • Sunstars
  • Distortion
  • Sharpness 

  • midzone dip

  • Vignetting

Cosina has answered our calls for smaller lenses and released the Voigtlander 3.5/21 at nearly half the size and weight of the competing Loxia 2.8/21. It a very well made small lens and one of the most pleasant to handle lenses in the system.

Performance in general is on a high level with some minor tradeoffs you expect in such a small an (relatively) affordable lens. Sharpness is very good when the Voigtlander is stopped down a little but not quite as high as with the Loxia 2.8/21. But at nearly half the weight and price it would be unrealistic to expect it to be on the same level. Vignetting is also pretty high and remains close to two stops stopped down. Apart from these minor deficits I find little to complain about.

After owning it for more than half a year I can say that the little Voigtlander has worked really well as part of my compact travel kit consisting of 3.5/21, 1.2/40 and Contax 2.8/90.

The Voigtlander 3.5/21 finds a good balance between small size, performance and competitive price. It is an easy recommendation for longer hikes.

The Voigtlander 3.5/21 sells for $699 at CameraQuestB&H or
749€ at (affiliate links).
If this review was helpful to you, please consider using one of my affiliate links. I will receive a small commission on your purchase and there is no added cost to you. 

More Image Samples

You can find most images shown in this image in full resolution in this album.

 Other articles

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.

The following two tabs change content below.
I have two hobbies: Photography and photographic gear. Both are related only to a small degree.

Latest posts by Phillip Reeve (see all)

106 thoughts on “Review: Voigtlander 21mm F3.5 Color-Skopar”

  1. Hi Phillip!

    I posted this on the 65 macro thread, seems it got stuck (assumed spam?)

    I just discovered some of these Voigtlanders (the 65 is one, but it seems that all of the non wides do) report focusing distance to the body, whereas nine of the Loxias don’t.

    This is relevant because focus distance is required for 5 axis stabilization (without it, with just focal length, you get 3 axis).

    Could you test this and report it in your future reviews? It should be simple enough to test (even for lenses you don’t have in hand): just see if focus distance is/was reported in the EXIF data.

    Thanks for your efforts!

      1. Didn’t think of that. Are they straight out of camera? Flickr must be removing the tag, because it’s absent.

        The tag is non-standard, so most tools drop it. All the photos I tried from your 65 review lack it, but the RAWs from the dpreview gallery (1) have it.

        The most reliable way I know to check for this is with exiftool (2): exiftool -FocusDistance2 [PHOTO.ARW]

        Lenses without a distance encoder either report infinity at all times, or lack such info.

        But without straight out of camera images, it’s not easy information to come by (that’s why I was nudging you guys to include it in reviews, if it’s not too much of a bother).

        From what I could gather:
        – neither of my Loxias (50, 85) have this;
        – apparently none of the Loxias do;
        – the Voigtlander 65 does.

        And going through Cosina’s website (3), information is absent from Voigtlander’s website:
        – the Wide Heliar don’t have this;
        – all their other FE-mount lenses do.

        The main advantage is 5-Axis stabilization on bodies that support it.


      2. Sony does not use standard Subject Distance tag for that. It has a proprietary tag for focus position. Exiftool recognizes it as either FocusPosition or FocusPosition2, and even presents derived (calculated) FocusDistance or FocusDistance2 tags. I don’t think FocusPositions survives the flickr or most Raw processors.

        Alternatively, if camera shows focus distance scale while using manual focus, you can assume lens communicates focus position to the camera.

        1. Thanks for the additional info. My reply must of got stuck because of links.

          It seems all FE Voigtlanders apart from the Wide Heliars support this, none of the Loxias do.

  2. Voigtlander is coming with lots of interesting e-mount options recently… How would you rate the vignetting? Also did you have a chance to try the 50/1.2?

  3. can’t wait for the review! I was actually thinking of preordering this one, since as it was announced you guys were not showing any real interest in it (probably because of the Loxia ? and CV 110mm that was announced at the same time) so now I will wait for the review and if it clicks my boxes this is gonna be bday present to myself… ?

  4. I am excited about this for the same reasons. I have the VM 21/4 and have found it pretty good considering, but some optimization, communication with the body, and slightly wider all for about an ounce of weight sounds like a great upgrade.

  5. Hi Phillip,

    Thanks for all these good news on interesting new products, which have been more or less systematically ignored by most reports focusing on the big brands. And speaking of missing accounts, what ever happened to Voigtländer’s f/2.5 110mm Apo Lanthar? I have seen some accounts of it being demoed in previous shows (, but the absence of mention of it is a bit too loud and disconcerting by now. Especially for those of us who have already pre-ordered it.


  6. Wow, I can’t wait for the review!. If the picture quality is similar to that of Loxia 21, I will probably sell it for this one.. The 21 Lox can get quite heavy sometimes :^)

  7. Hi Phillip,
    when the CV21/3,5 is similar to my Voigtländer Color Skopar 20mm f/3 ,5 SL II for Nikon you will have a nice good and small wide-angle lens.
    I use my lens on a A7r with no problems.
    Good luck Chris

  8. Wonderful review. Thanks. It looks like for non-pixel peepers (me) the reporter mid-zone duo reported on Fred Miranda isn’t a huge deal. FM reported very competitive corner sharpness in the CV. Does your copy hit infinity focus at the hard stop?

    1. thanks… and sorry for the typos in my first (mobile-based) comment: I meant the “reported mid-zone dip” described by Fred Miranda.

      1. Well there is some midzone dip and the Loxia is technically the better lens. To me it comes down to portability and price vs some gain in IQ and speed. I am pretty sure that i will keep the CV and not the Loxia.

  9. Ciao Philip,

    I’m Diego from Italy and I could describe myself as an “advanced hobbyist”.
    I’m following your website since a long time especially because I have the same love for manual lenses (I started 30 years ago and I have sold all my AF lenses when A7 came in the market).
    Actually my preferred lenses were the CV10, the CV65 and LOX21. Recently robbers entered in my house and stole my lenses collection (I had several ZM) and my modern set. By miracle they left the CV65 but they took the Lox21 and CV10. To replace ZM35 and ZM50 I’m buying the CV40 but I am a little uncertain about the LOX21 (the lens you love “after” because I think UX is so so…) or the new CV21 (I think the 5 axis is a plus for travel photography). Which would be your advice? I have read in other forum that at infinity the mid-field is “so so”… but… one opinion more, when extremely qualified, is really accepted.
    Thank you very much in advance for your time and kind attention.

    1. Mid-field isn’t great but it isn’t bad either. I certainly notice a difference in a direct comparison but without I probably wouldn’t have noticed it. Unless you feel that you need the very best IQ or f/2.8 I would probably prefer the CV over the Lox.

      1. Thank you for your feedback. I think I’ll go with the CV21 and, at least at the moment, with some old C/Y (in particular the 2.8/28) because I have always appreciated their organic colors.
        Kind regards.

  10. Your site is an incredible resource — thanks. I use both the Sony a7ii and the a6500 and so prefer lenses that will work well on both. Do you have any thoughts on how well this lens will work with the a6500? I have yet to find a good lightweight wide angle for the a6500 and was hoping this Voigtlander may be the answer. Thanks.

      1. Thanks, Phillip. I bought the lens earlier this week and am enjoying it very much on both the a7ii and the a6500. It seems sharp enough for me on the a6500 and looks and works wonderfully on it.

        I have another question, though. Is there any way to use the Voigtlander without Sony’s focus magnification? The AF/MF switch on the cameras that works so well with automatic lenses doesn’t seem to work with the Voigtlander. Although I love focus magnification, I’d like to be able to switch back to no magnification at times.

  11. And, is it a keeper? ?

    Thanks for the review, my only remaining issue is, could this be usefull for astro???

    Well I am pretty much set to buy this, as soon as I sell the Irix 15mm 2.4

    Cheers, A.

      1. with light pollution filter, iso6400 and higher, stacking 20-30 images could work even though it’s 3.5, right?

        cheers, A.

        1. See this article to see why stacking is lots of trouble and often does not work properly for lanscape astrophotography.
          Furthermore the “light pollution” filter will take some light away for every bandwith making you end up with an even slower lens.

          1. I am aware of the issues (great article as allways, read it as you posted it?)

            Stacking is pretty easy when using sequator, but the “halos” at borders are still an issue.

            There are a lot of photographers that stack (or use a tracker) on flickr and still have clean sky to foreground transition zones, so there must be some workaround that ( I have one idea that might work, but still have to give it a try to see how well it works)…

            So as I want a small portable sunstar producing uww lens I think the cv21 could really nicely fill this spot (instead of irix 15mm) and if it isn’t to great for astro the cv35 will have to fill that gap.

            Cheers, A.

  12. Would be nice to get Tokina Firin included in the comparison. Particularly helpful since you have experience with both!

  13. do you honestly consider the FD20mm an alternative? i have a lot of trouble with hotspots in the center of the image. Ruined plenty of good shots for me.

    1. I used it for quite some time and while I had one or two images with a hotspot it was not a common issue. It obviously comes with a number of compromises but on the other hand it is dirt cheap.

  14. Very interesting little lens with what appears to be very decent performance. Will definitely be checking back for updates.

    You mention some issues with sensor reflections, which is something I have encountered before in other reviews here, when using the a7 and a7II. Is there any information with regards to a7R cameras in this respect (specifically a7RIII)?

    If you will be looking into comparison points with the Loxia 21mm, I am certainly interested in a distortion comparison, as the Heliars have proven themselves in this aspect. Also in contrast and microcontrast it would be interesting to see some comparisons, but I think the more demanding 42.2mpx sensor might be more revealing for this.


  15. Hello Phillip, Thanks a lot for this great review! I am looking for advice on this lens. I am thinking of buying a pre-owned Skopar 21mm/f4 M mount for my Sony A7 ii with an adapter with close focus function; in total it would cost me around 400 euros. This new Skopar for Sony is tempting too with increase sharpness around the edge compared to previous generations of Skopar. But is it worth paying 330 more euros (the 21/3.5 is sold 730 euros in France for the moment)? Do you think the increase in optical quality is worth the difference in price? Your help would be much appreciated! Thanks in advance.

  16. Phillip, I could use your advice. I am shooting on an A7iii and already have the CV 15, which I love. I am deciding whether to buy the new CV 21 (and stick with the 2 CVs as my ultra wides) or sell the CV 15 and buy the Sony 16-35 f4. I am a pretty experienced amateur who will primarily use the wide angle lenses for travel and hiking. I have the Sony 24-105 as my basic workhorse lense. Do you recommend sticking with the CV 15 and 21 or going with the Sony 16-35? My instinct is to go with the two CVs. I’d appreciate yout thoughts.

    1. I have owned the FE 4/16-35 for a long time and won‘t sell it now that i own the 3.5/21 even tough I think about getting a 4.5/15 in the future. It is just super versatile and a pretty good performer. I prefer it when I am hinking with my GF because zoom and AF make it much faster to use than a set of three primes. When I am on my own with enough time I will always prefer to work with manual primes. Since you have a workhorse zoom in the 24-105 I think the 4/16-35 wouln‘t give you that much.

  17. Hi, just wondering if you have tested Voigtlander 21mm f/1.8 Ultron? It is M-mount and faster than this 21mm f/3.5 Skopar but not sure if Skopar is a better choice over Ultron or not (keeping price factor asides)?

    Thank you.

  18. I am grateful to you, as a passionate photographer, I like to read your pages and I need to advise, I’m aware of the technical benefits of Loxia 21 and similar sites at CV21 plus its benefits in weight and size. With all the plus and minus if the price difference between the new lens of CV21 and Loxia 21 is 300 €, which one would you choose. I would like to know your opinion if the price did not play a role in the selection. Thank you and I wish everything good as well as a hill of great objectives in the next year and articles about them.

  19. Enjoying this little guy but wondering, is there a lens caps for the hood available as the 35mm Ultron has for its hood?

    Cheers, A.

  20. Hi, I have a Minolta MC W Rokkor x NL 21 mm 2.8 which has an excellent review on artaphot websit, but I’m wondering if this Voigtlander is better regarding sharpness. I know this Minolta is hard to find and mine is really Mint and I’m not a collector so, maybe will trade it for this one if it is optically better. If you know of a “Vs” let me know 🙂

    1. I have never used it so I can only give a very general assesment. I wouldn’t expect a very significant advantage for landscape images on 24 Mp. On 42mp I would expect a more significant advantage for the Voigtlander.

      More importabt reasons to change formme would be flare resistance, contrast and size.

  21. Hi Phillip,

    Could you please check how the CV 21/3.5 focus breathe?
    One thing annoys me with my Loxia 21/2.8, that it changes to app. 22mm below 2mtr making difficult to focus stack with it.
    Thanks in advance!

  22. Hey Phillip,

    would you choose 15mm wide heliar over this lens?

    Im tempted to buy 21 (much less distortion). But is it opticaly inferior to 15mm wide heliar?



  23. Can you do a review or comparison with zuiko 21 3.5 please ? It is small light and also sharp. So I’m trying to decide which to get as a travel lens.

    1. None of us has a 3.5/21 Zuiko to compare.
      I would be astonished if the CV wasn’t quite a bit better though, just because of era of design.

      I had the 3.5/21 Zuiko back in film days, and I recall being impressed compared to some other uktrawides of the era, but it had bad CA and was just sharp enough to look OK on film, but nowhere near as sharp as the normal lenses of the day. That also makes me guess that it’ll not play in the same league as the new CV.

  24. Just ordered this lens from Cameraquest (used link on this site)

    Looking forward to using this lens for landscapes

    Thank you all for your work and knowledge on these lens!

  25. Do you know of anyone who has instead tried the M-mount version of this lens, with a Sony E mount close focus adapter (eg: Voigtlander VM-E)? Frankly I would prefer to be able to get extremely close up to the subject for wonderful wide angle effects with a close focus adapter than to have a Sony E mount version with more limited close focus ability despite the built-in camera contact communication. I currently use the Sony close focus adapter with the Voigtlander 28 f/2 Ultron and use the extreme close-up abilities frequently with excellent results and it makes using such a wide angle so much more flexible and enjoyable.

    1. It will have the same issues on Sony cameras as any other Leica-M wide angle lens: mushy corners due to severe field curvature at least up until f/8.0.

  26. Hi Phillip;
    What do you think about Viltrox 20mm f1.8?
    It is manual and it has no connection with camera.
    It cost 400$.

  27. Thanks for reviewing this. I’m going to Austria next summer for a month and I’m waiting the tamron 17-28 but I believe it will be not be on time for me, so I begins to check for alternatives. This one is on the top of the list.
    Need to ask you, do you think/ know if the new 21 f3.5 VM mount will work well?, as well as this one?.
    I have several VM’s, thanks to your reviews actually ( ultron 35 and it cousin nokton 50) and love to ise them with techart.

    1. The tweet says “Pre order will begin soon. 「Nokton 21mm F1.4 Aspherical E-mount」. Retail price would be 159,300yen(8% sales tax included, approx. $1,450). Releasing date will be in June 2019.”

  28. I have this lens and love it. The size makes it a wonderful travel companion, the focal length is versatile, the build quality is solid, the handling is great, and the image quality is outstanding. I especially love the sunstars. It might be favorite lens.

  29. Hi Philip, just wondering how this would compare again the 7artisans 28mm f1.4, I know the focal length and aperture are different but what Interests me is the color rendition and resolution comparison. How do they compare? Which has the better color rendition and sharpness?

    1. Like with any modern lens color differences will be minor enough that they don’t really matter if you shoot raw.
      In regard to sharpness I can only recommend to check the provided samples. Since I never handled the 7A 1.4/28 that is what I would have to do.

      1. Hey Philip, apologies, your right it was bastian that reviewed the 7artisans. Thank you for the reply. I did look at the pictures like you suggested and really hard to tell the difference honestly but than again I’m new to photography and don’t see as much details as a pro when they are looking at a photo

  30. Hiw would you compare this lens with the Voitgtlander 15mm f/4.5 for astrophotography?

    Various reviews say that 15mm is too good for astrophotography even though it is not very fast, 4.5. While, this one (maybe not as wide) yet faster than f/4.5. So wondering how is the performance at f/3.5 for night photography (21mm is acceptable)?

    Thank you.

    1. I used the 15/4.5 for astrophotography for one season. It does the job but even with the a7s I had a hard time gathering enough light with quite some noise as a result. If astrophotography is important to you don’t get this one 😉

    2. I am using cv21mm 3.5 albeit with a Omegon tracker, plus stacking multiple exposures and I think it does a great job, only downside is it takes more time in the field as well as with postprocessing…

      Cheers, A.

  31. Another point that I missed to add; there is a M-Mount Voigtlander lens (21mm f/1.8) though requires a mount for Sony A7.

    The one reviewied by you and M-mount are equally wide while the latter is much faster (equal to Batis f/1.8).

    Have you try using these M-mount lenses on Sony body and assessed their performance?

    Thank you.

  32. I just decided for the Voigtländer, against the Zeiss Loxia. ONe reason is the money I have to give for and I bought the voigtländer as an occasion.
    When I first saw it in real i thought – ups, and you tiny little thing can make great pic?
    I use it at a sony A7 mark I and it fits p e r f e c t l y to the size that i like so much.
    The build quality is fu…good and it feels very nice when using it.
    First pic are realy as I expected, means very good and sharp, at 8.0 even at the last corner and with a nice look. The total composure of the pic does have an own style (difficult for me to explain in english): I mean a 20mm Sigma Art might be significantly sharper – but more ‚perfect‘, means loosing a bit the soul.
    But what I like most from the first pic I made is the handling! You move the focus ring a mm and immediatly the focus magnifying glass apears. Very easy then to get the last mm for a sharp pic.
    In addition to the focus lupe you can easily adjust the focus range in the same view directly by the jog. That is extremely helpful when focussing out of the middle.

    So all together and from my first impressions I absolutely happy with my decision.

    But now I‘m again in fromt of: what 35 mm I want to buy? The superb Loxia? The Voigtländer 1.7?

  33. do I understand this correctly,
    the VC21/3.5 shows the annoying distance scale
    in the middle of the EVF – while the Loxia 21 offers a clean EVF
    image ?

  34. Thank you for this detailed review and links to relevant resources likewise., Phillip I’ve been looking to add a wide-angle lens to my 40/1.2 and 85/1.8 set for light traveling.

    It’s been tough trying to decide on Lox21 vs. CV21 since I do plan on taking lots of night-time cityscape shots. Some of the samples over at Fred Miranda’s thread for this lens got me a little worried about its mid-zone dip becoming more apparent in that particular scenario, where sunstars become less pronounced and mushed up.

    As much as I am comfortable with the size and price tag that comes with Lox21, I’m still finding it hard to resist the slight tradeoff in IQ for a much compact size and affordable price from CV21.

    I would greatly appreciate any further input on how it performs at distanced cityscapes at night. Would it do a good job wide open, or should I resort to carrying a tripod and work with F8.0 + slower shutters?

      1. Thank you for the feedback, Phillips. In the meantime, I’ve dug up the review for Voightlander 21/1.4 where you considered it more or less an equal to the Lox in performance.

        Provided the best deals I have access for Lox21 used and CV 21/1.4 are at the same price (140k yen), I am planning to proceed with the CV 21/1.4 for the added two stop versatility, eliminating the need of a tripod for some night time shots. I also take lots of street shots so those two stops will come in handy.

        Thank you again for all the work you and your team have been doing. Take care and enjoy shooting!

  35. Hi
    I’m very interesting by this lens, but I have also an hesitation with the new Samyang 18mm 2.8 (focal and speed are closed). Do you plan to review this lens ?

  36. Hi there!
    I wonder if it still a good option in 2022 for a Sony A7RIII. I love the landscape photos samples, but I also wonder if it’s a good choice for architectural photograhy (cathedrals and the like).

    Thanks a lot!

  37. 2023, and this review still doing good work. I picked one up used for $350 and I absolutely love it. It’s a core lens in my street kit now, along with the Voigtlander 40/1.2. I pretty much only use this site for reviews and I would have likely never discovered the lens otherwise. Just dropping by for a big thanks 🙌

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *