Cosina announces Voigtlander 21mm F3.5 lens for Sony E-mount systems

@AlexisH the example with the rare Voigtländer macro lenses is really an exception. You can perhaps count the Nikon S mount rangefinder lenses too as rare Voigtländers but they haven't become more expensive than their launch prices like the APO macro Lanthar's. Most of the Voigtländer lenses are after a few years at least 30% cheaper than the launch prices. The Nokton's for Micro 4/3's for example. I'd say that these new E mount Voigt's can be better compared with the Leica-M and Micro 4/3 lenses. I'm sure that the price drop will be at around the same range.

Sure anything you say. They are struggling to meet E Mount demand. I had to want months for a V lens.

JSalk53
"For someone that travels as much as I, size and weight matters." m4/3 is for you.

BobT3218, you are right.
I tried out the m4/3 and loved it.
Unfortunately made a decision to optimize on the Canon L lenses that I already purchased sometime ago.
I really like what Olympus and Panasonic are doing with the system. They are incredibly capable and weatherproof cameras and lenses.
Unfortunately, I was reluctant to leave the 35 mm sensor size that I was used to, with my 5D and 5D III.
If I had to do it again, I would go m4/3 no question.
I think the m4/3 more than meets the maximum print size I would ever need as I am not a professional.

'Most are already leaving small diameter EF-M mount.'

Fixed it for you.

@BobT3218 "m4/3 is for you."
In theory yes, but currently it depends on the focal length you shoot at. At larger focal length for sure.
Most current MFT bodies with EVF are heavier than the Sony A6000, making a short focal length system with the Sony actually lighter. It's time they release more camera's like the GM5 that fully exploit the weight/size/volume advatange of the MFT system

Most are already leaving small diameter E mount.

You really are a colossal loser. COming on here and posting this nonsense day after day. How about actually going out and taking some pictures instead of your asinine, pathetic spam?

yeah, sure. Sony declared the E-mount ”open” so that more lens manufacturers can ”access” the camera (AF, exposure, etc.). Not the same can be said about the Nikon Z (not S) and Canon R (EF-R?, EOS is the camera lineup not the mount!) ;)
More, maybe after the same amount of time (3-5 years?) Nikon and Canon will aquire the same experience Sony has today, but again, where will Sony (or Fujifilm or Panasonic, Olympus or Leica) be in 3-4 years.

Stop trolling.

@unbelievable: The GX85, GX9, and E-M10 II/III are all as light or lighter than the a6000... The GX850 is way lighter and smaller and carries on the spirit of the GM1 (I sidegraded from the latter to the former FWIW, no regrets, still gotta sell that GM1)... There's no current tiny body with an EVF a la GM5 which is unfortunate, but those other ones aren't any less portable than an a6xxx.

The upper midrange of the lineup is what's in a sort of weird lull (I guess the GX9 is part of that), since Pana wasn't as aggressive with their latest releases as with the []8# series and Oly hasn't updated the E-M5 II or PEN-F...

@impulses
All camera's with EVF you mention are heavier than the a6000, which was my point. ( The a6000 comes in at 344g (body / battery / sd). GX80 426g, Pen F 373g, E-M10 II 390g, III 410g, GX9 407g.) The GX850 is lighter (239g) but has no EVF. However, the discontinued GM5 which had an EVF and is just 211g!!. that is the way to go, but maybe they launched it too early or at the wrong price point
Look at the Olympus Pen D-2 (film camera with ovf) a gorgeous little gem. That is the size Olympus should have made the Pen-F but with lighter modern materials (for the price they could have made if of titanium anyway). At the Olympus advertorial video on Luminous Landscape you can see a side-by-side comparison ( https://youtu.be/TJs9cx21-Rk?t=494 ).
The only reason to choose MFT over a larger sensor system is if you can benefit from it advantages, which are weight and size

Comparing bodies in isolation without comparing the size and weight of lenses (let alone how capable they are) while making an argument against a system's portability advantage is also a little misleading...

One shouldn't get too excited over weight. If you're getting on in years like me, yes, lighter gear is desirable but back in the day, heavier gear was a sign of quality and reduced camera shake.

Calaverasgrande- X-Pro2 is not a rangefinder. Fine camera indeed, but not a rangefinder.

You can think it all you want, the XPRO2 is digital, its not a rangefinder.

I heard a rumor, years ago, that the only reason Cosina had never made a digital rangefinder was that the president was a huge Leica admirer and he didn't want to drive the last nail in their coffin. Of course now that Leica is doing well financially maybe they could reassess that position. I think they were the OEM manufacturer for the Epson RD-1 after all.

I'm thinking it's a digital rangefinder.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epson_R-D1

the Epson rd1 was a true digital rangefinder it even retained a cocking mechanism, rewind lever to power the shutter

the chassis of an Epson film rf was the modified basis for this groundbreaking bit of camera history , made by ....who else ? cosina

RD2 full frame, same layout please. 100% viewfinder, lovely beast.

Xpro2 has digital and optical rangefinder views.
Take a look at the product pic on B&H
https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1210892-REG/fujifilm_16488618_x_pro2_mirrorless_digital_camera.html
You will see that it has the requisite rangefinder windows, but lacks the frameline window since it generates the frameline digitally. Have you ever picked one up?

Calaverasgrande- You have so much to learn.

It's a digital camera. Not a rangefinder. Fuji did a great "simulation" of a rangefinder, but a simulation is not a true rangefinder. Go read up on all of it, its a great lesson in photography history.

And, I also have website dedicated to reviewing cameras, so yes, I've used every Fujifilm camera made except medium format.

it is a rangefinder in spirit almost down to manual focusing and use of m mount lens which I often use... while i like to think of my xpro2 as a rangefinder in spirit ,strictly speaking , a mechanical rangefinder uses 2 windows and a gearing system to overlay an image patch to confirm correct distance to the subject .
the electronic system used in modern fujis, while admirable, are not mechanical in nature.

Ok, I will read the entire internet (except blogspot LOL) then get back to you.
To my understanding, rangefinder is an optical thing with triangulation. It can have a mechanical component. But I see no reason why it is a requirement.
Your repeated assertions to 'go read up' are simple ad hominem attacks. A fellow photographer would offer information when they see someone lacking. A person who casts aspersions on the knowledge of someone else, and offers nothing in return is not a fellow. There are more colorful terms.

for the record , i did my best to describe the differences between an xpro2 rangefinder style machine and a traditional rangefinder ... its not from a leica press release or brochure , but from my well worn keyboard

its almost a pointless debate .... there are many fine qualities to the xpro 2 and spiritually it feels and works very much like a rangefinder however the small window on the face of the camera is, in fact, a light emittting diode used for af assist in poor light
it may be that a type of digitally created rangefinder using
the sensor or pairs of af points on the sensor might be a digital rf... im not sure .. but that window is an LED
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0bZZGxSxvpU

The tri elmar 16-18-21mm works nicely on a Sony. However, nowadays you can get that performance on a Sony for a cheaper price.

The outside looks like a Miranda/Soligor lens.

Long live the Miranda Sensorex ;-)

21mm is a great focal length for certain kinds of work. A 28mm can't really do the same thing.

21mm vs. 28mm ... that's a BIG difference.

Field of view changes dramatically with every mm for wide angles. Between 28 and 24mm, the difference is huge and the wider you go the bigger it gets. In contrast, you would see barely any difference between 85 and 90mm.

A 21mm prime is something I'd really like. 28mm is nice but not very flexible IMO, which is why these days most kit zooms start at 24mm.

It's a small UWA to always have in your bag as a second lens. You don't need AF at this focal length, it is super easy to manual focus this wide.

I think he is talking about the UWA adapter from Sony that makes the 28 a 21mm lens (even with EXIF and everything).

A long forgotten piece of tech because results are not fantastic

Thanks all. I didn't realize 28mm to 21mm is such a huge difference. I did say I wasn't an expert! Now I know

Contemporary architecture is a pretty awful IMHO (with a few exceptions).

I will tell you how many times i have wished the adapted M mount Color Skopar 21/4 would work on my mirrorless cameras (Fuji X and now A7iii). I am glad they engineered a solution, but I really wanted the even more retro and more classic design to work, and I am not willing to have my sensor stripped of its AA filter film to get it. In the meantime I am loving Tokina 20/2 MF

cosinaphile - Yes I agree that many of Sony's own lenses, and monster-glass from Sigma etc are very front-heavy and oversized for use on compact bodies.

But Sony are making some headway, e.g. their 100-400mm is significantly lighter than the Canon equivalent.

I use manual vintage lenses on my A7III (that look similar to the Skopar) and they look just fine thanks!

indeed.....i have noticed sony getting its lens act together in a big way, both in design and in arsenal variety ....canikon has some catching up ![ mirrorlessly speaking ; ) ]

sony used to get a lot of flak for their impoverished lens lineup , not so much now....

something to notice

https://cameraquest.com/jpg/voigt_sl_ii_n_58_c.jpg
here is the nikon f mount cosina voigtlander 58mm 1.4, the
latest version with the scalloped all metal focus ring...its on the left
, actually is the design often borrowed in the latest designs almost across the board ... the one on the left is the type used an virtually all modern cosinas designs mirrorless and slr
on the right is the older cosina design.... the first cosmetic design ....the one on the right with the finely ribbed rubber focus ring , which is , the one i own
[ 1600 made worldwide ]

i thing the 90mm is the only one with the fine ribbing left

this looks so much more attractive than the 24GM also announced today.

Really? I mean, really?

Sorry. I think I did not understand you. When you learn English on pirated video games, some things remain unclear.

At the risk of being branded anti-Sony, it would seem a bit pointless to have weather sealing on the lens when the weather-sealing on Sony cameras is notoriously poor.

@ entoman: Look at Sony sealing maps and tear-down of recent Sony cameras. There is even a video where an A7III takes the rain, and a Canon 5D IV stop working.

Dima: That's a sarcasm tag - when you're being sarcastic on the internet, it's common to put an /s tag at the end of the sentence or paragraph.

entoman: The sealing isn't 'notoriously poor', it's just that the bottom plate on the current A7's isn't sealed (while the rest of the cameras are). The A6500 doesn't have this flaw, for example, but people apparently prefer to bash the brand.

Magnar & Kharan - Given the huge amount of negative publicity generated by the Imaging Resource weather-sealing test, in which a standard test was applied to Sony, Canon, Nikon and Olympus cameras, I think it's reasonable to describe the weather-sealing of the Sony a7Riii as notoriously poor.

Hopefully the later a7iii and future Sony's will be better, as it's only the weather sealing and not-so-good ergonomics that keep me from getting a Sony a7Riii myself.

The youtube incident with the 5DMkiv was not a controlled comparison test.

My recollection is that the reviewer didn't say that the camera had stopped functioning, just that the rear monitor failed to show an image.

It would be interesting to get feedback from the reviewer about this. It struck me when I watched it, that the most simple explanation is that he had accidentally switched off the screen with the Info button.

I'm not of course saying that Canons don't fail occasionally, but it's extremely rare.

entoman: The IR test was hugely influential, yes, and way more than it should've been (with barely one camera, one model, no repeated testing, no control camera, etc.).
Roger Cicala from LensRentals tore an A7RM3 down, and found that, besides the bottom plate, everything else was sealed to a level comparable with Canon and Nikon professional cameras. It was a stupid oversight on Sony's part, absolutely, but nowhere near as bad as trolls on the internet make it seem to be.

IamJF - I spend most of my life photographing wildlife in tropical rainforests, so I'm extremely wary of cameras with a bad reputation for weather-sealing.

I've been using Canon cameras for 8 years. I had a 50D fail when that had a bad drenching. I had two 6D bodies, both of which suffered from temporary electrical malfunctions in high humidity.

After that I only bought pro bodies. I had a Canon 7D for 2 years, a 7DMkii for 3 years, I've taken over 100,000 shots in tropical rainforests and cloudforests on my current Canon 5DS which I've owned for 3 years, and I've taken about 30,000 shots in similar conditions on my 5DMkiv which I've owned for one year.

I'm certain that any pro Nikon or Pentax body would survive under similar conditions, and I have total faith in Canon's professional bodies. My gut feeling is that no Sony body would withstand this treatment. It's a gamble I wouldn't take.

Magnar - Yes, testing several samples of each camera under laboratory conditions would be better. But no manufacturer will donate multiple cameras for weatherproofing tests! IR were the first people to undertake such a test and I commend them for doing so.

Nikons and Canons are renowned for their weather-proofing and durability - it's one of the many reasons why sports, wildlife, documentary and war photographers use them.

Sony, rightly or wrongly, has not got that reputation behind it. They are renowned instead for their technical prowess. Good luck to them.

At the end of the day it comes down to trust. I trust Canon pro cameras absolutely. I'd trust Nikon or Pentax equally, but I just happen to prefer Canon ergonomics.

If you and others are content to use Sony cameras, and to accept what I personally consider to be too much of a risk, I truly hope you don't have any problems with your cameras. I'm not here to laugh, troll or be smug, or to condemn your choices.

Magnar - We make our choices and we take our chances. I'm happy with my choices and you're happy with yours, so let's hope that in both cases our faith in our respective brands is rewarded by reliabilty and durability :)

Incidentally, your 5 year warranty will *not* cover damage caused by ingress of water. No manufacturer supplies such a warranty. Not even Canon or Nikon.