• site home
  • blog home
  • galleries
  • contact
  • underwater
  • the bleeding edge

the last word

Photography meets digital computer technology. Photography wins -- most of the time.

You are here: Home / The Last Word / Voigtlander 65/2 Apo Lanthar LoCA & focus shift

Voigtlander 65/2 Apo Lanthar LoCA & focus shift

September 21, 2017 JimK 9 Comments

This is the first in a series of tests of the new Voigtlander macro lens. To see all the tests, scroll to the bottom of this pace — below the comments — and click on the ping-back links whose titles interest you.

I received my Voigtlander 65 mm f/2 Apo-Lanthar yesterday and tested it off-axis to make sure it was a good copy.

https://blog.kasson.com/lens-screening-testing/examples/good-60-mm-ff-lens/

It is.

The lens is metal and solid. Focus throw is about 300 degrees, which is about as good as you can do without a really expensive helicoid like Leica uses sometimes. That makes distance focus wide open a little twitchy. The lens comes with a circular screw-on hood that doesn’t look like it would help much. I was initially put off by that but soon determined that the lens cap would also fit on the end of the hood. I’ve decided to just leave the hood on. The fact that it’s only a little over half an inch long, which I at first considered a drawback, is now a plus for compactness if you’re going to leave it attached.

Today I tested the lens for longitudinal chromatic aberration (LoCA) and focus shift. I made a series of exposures at each whole f-stop from f/2 through f/11, at a reproduction ratio of 1:10 using a motorized rail and this protocol:

  • Sony a7RII
  • Double-edged razor blad backlit with Wescott LED panels aimed at white diffuser
  • ISO 100
  • Manual exposure
  • Manual focus, set at one position
  • Cognisys computer-driven focusing rail
  • 100 exposures 100 um  apart
  • Lens distance  set at 1:10 magnification mark
  • Document mode decoding with DCRAW
  • MTF50s for all the raw color planes calculated using MTF Mapper
  • Graphing in Excel

Here’s a picture of the test setup:

The camera and rail are on the left. The Cognisys controller and battery are below them, slung among the tripod legs. The razor blade is mounted on the tripod in front of the camera. The two Wescott lights are on the light stands. The white diffuser is taped to the door.

Here are the results at f/2 (I apologize for getting the captions wrong here. It’s a 65 mm lens, not a 60 mm one):

Distance in cm is plotted as the horizontal axis, with the left-hand size having the subject further from the camera than the right-hand side (The camera moves closer to the subject by 100 um after each exposure). The vertical axis is MTF50 in cycles per picture height (cy/ph), which is a good proxy for sharpness.

The first thing to notice is how sharp this lens is wide open. The lowest peak is about 2000 cy/ph, which is very sharp indeed.

The next thing is that there is little LoCA, which presents as the difference measured horizontally in the peaks of the three color channels. 

At f/2.8:

Now the lens is even sharper. I don’t think I’ve seen this level of on-axis sharpness on the a7RII before. The blue channel peak has moved over so that it’s nearer the green channel, and the red channel has stayed about as far apart as it was wide open. 

To give you an idea what a spectacular performance this is, compare it to the very sharp Soony 90 mm f/2.8 macro at the same f-stop and reproduction ratio:

The horizontal axis as scaled differently, so the peaks appear wider in the case of the Sony lens. Notice that the green channel peak with the 90 is about 1700 cy/ph, and compare that to the  2300 cy/ph peak of the Apo-Lanthar. 

At f/4:

Not quite as sharp as at f/2.8, but still very sharp indeed.

Let’s compare that to the Sony 90:

The Apo Lanthar is somewhat sharper, though probably not enough to make any real-world difference. It has less LoCA than the already-exemplary Sony, but again, that’s probably something you’d only notice in the lab.

Let’s compare the Apo Lanthar to the macro LoCA champ, the Coastal Optical 60 mm f/4, also at 1:10:

OK, the super-expensive CO lens is better for LoCA. But it’s not as sharp. How about that!

At f/5.6:

 

Now the depth of field completely covers up the small amount of LoCA.

At f/8:

And finally, at f/11:

Now let’s plot the green channel curves for all the above apertures on one graph so we can get an idea of the amount of focus shift as you stop down:

There is very little focus shift that won’t be covered up by increasing DOF as you stop down. You can be confident focusing this lens wide open.

I am seriously impressed.

The Last Word

← Detectability of visual signals below the noise 65/2 Apo-Lanthar, 60/2.8 AF Micro Nikkor →

Comments

  1. AndrewZ says

    September 22, 2017 at 5:01 am

    Very impressive. I’ve been contemplating this lens myself but have been worried about how It handles as its the biggest lens under 85mm I’ve ever seen so imagine the balance is not that great. Also love these LoCa graphs as I’ve said before (ever thought of doing the 180 telyt?). Why do the MTF’s start to wobble/ring as the lens stops down?

    Reply
  2. FredD says

    September 23, 2017 at 6:50 pm

    Thanks for these tests, very informative and very much appreciated, but I do hope that before too long you’ll follow up with tests of this lens at 1:2 reproduction ratio, as you previously did with the Sony, Zeiss, Nikkor, & Leitz macros!
    Also, do you have either any tests or theory-based recommendations for the best way to get a 1:2 macro down to 1:1? (By “best”, I mean in terms of the standard performance metrics such as resolution, sharpness, distortion, flatness of field, etc. . As far as “way”, that would be tubes, teleconverters, achromatic doublets, individually or in some combination.)
    Thanks in advance!

    Reply
    • Chris says

      September 25, 2017 at 3:33 am

      It’s the same at 1:2. I tested that first, was quite perplexed to get best results at f/3.2 (center, on the A7R2), and thought “I’ll surely be worse at portrait distance”. Not so. A very nice lens. Wish it had a smaller filter size, but that’s about it.

      Reply

Trackbacks

  1. 65/2 Apo-Lanthar, 60/2.8 AF Micro Nikkor says:
    September 24, 2017 at 11:18 am

    […] The is the second in a series of posts about the Voigtlander 65 mm f/2 Apo-Lanthar macro lens. The series starts here.  […]

    Reply
  2. 65/2 Apo-Lanthar OOF PSFs says:
    September 25, 2017 at 9:57 am

    […] The is the second in a series of posts about the Voigtlander 65 mm f/2 Apo-Lanthar macro lens. The series starts here.  […]

    Reply
  3. 65/2 Apo-Lanthar, 55/1.8 Zony says:
    September 26, 2017 at 11:02 am

    […] The is the fourth in a series of posts about the Voigtlander 65 mm f/2 Apo-Lanthar macro lens. The series starts here.  […]

    Reply
  4. Voigtlander 65mm FE test by Kasson: "spectacular performance" - sonyalpharumors sonyalpharumors says:
    September 27, 2017 at 6:49 am

    […] Kasson posted a three part review of the new Voigtlander 65mm f/2.0 macro FE […]

    Reply
  5. 65/2 Apo-Lanthar, 55/1.4 Otus says:
    September 30, 2017 at 12:15 pm

    […] in a series of posts about the Voigtlander 65 mm f/2 Apo-Lanthar macro lens. The series starts here. I screwed up the last landscape comparison that I tried to do between the Apo-Lanthar and the […]

    Reply
  6. Voigtlander 65mm FE macro lens for $999 ($60 off) - sonyalpharumors sonyalpharumors says:
    October 21, 2017 at 11:26 am

    […] Jim Kasson recently said that this lens shows a “spectacular performance”. And Voigtlander did just slash the price by $60. You get it now for $999 on Amazon and BHphoto. […]

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

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

May 2025
S M T W T F S
 123
45678910
11121314151617
18192021222324
25262728293031
« Apr    

Articles

  • About
    • Patents and papers about color
    • Who am I?
  • How to…
    • Backing up photographic images
    • How to change email providers
    • How to shoot slanted edge images for me
  • Lens screening testing
    • Equipment and Software
    • Examples
      • Bad and OK 200-600 at 600
      • Excellent 180-400 zoom
      • Fair 14-30mm zoom
      • Good 100-200 mm MF zoom
      • Good 100-400 zoom
      • Good 100mm lens on P1 P45+
      • Good 120mm MF lens
      • Good 18mm FF lens
      • Good 24-105 mm FF lens
      • Good 24-70 FF zoom
      • Good 35 mm FF lens
      • Good 35-70 MF lens
      • Good 60 mm lens on IQ3-100
      • Good 63 mm MF lens
      • Good 65 mm FF lens
      • Good 85 mm FF lens
      • Good and bad 25mm FF lenses
      • Good zoom at 24 mm
      • Marginal 18mm lens
      • Marginal 35mm FF lens
      • Mildly problematic 55 mm FF lens
      • OK 16-35mm zoom
      • OK 60mm lens on P1 P45+
      • OK Sony 600mm f/4
      • Pretty good 16-35 FF zoom
      • Pretty good 90mm FF lens
      • Problematic 400 mm FF lens
      • Tilted 20 mm f/1.8 FF lens
      • Tilted 30 mm MF lens
      • Tilted 50 mm FF lens
      • Two 15mm FF lenses
    • Found a problem – now what?
    • Goals for this test
    • Minimum target distances
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Printable Siemens Star targets
    • Target size on sensor
      • MFT
      • APS-C
      • Full frame
      • Small medium format
    • Test instructions — postproduction
    • Test instructions — reading the images
    • Test instructions – capture
    • Theory of the test
    • What’s wrong with conventional lens screening?
  • Previsualization heresy
  • Privacy Policy
  • Recommended photographic web sites
  • Using in-camera histograms for ETTR
    • Acknowledgments
    • Why ETTR?
    • Normal in-camera histograms
    • Image processing for in-camera histograms
    • Making the in-camera histogram closely represent the raw histogram
    • Shortcuts to UniWB
    • Preparing for monitor-based UniWB
    • A one-step UniWB procedure
    • The math behind the one-step method
    • Iteration using Newton’s Method

Category List

Recent Comments

  • bob lozano on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • DC Wedding Photographer on Goldilocks and the three flashes
  • Wedding Photographer in DC on The 16-Bit Fallacy: Why More Isn’t Always Better in Medium Format Cameras
  • JimK on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • Renjie Zhu on Fujifilm GFX 100S II precision
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • Ivo de Man on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF
  • JimK on Fuji 20-35/4 landscape field curvature at 23mm vs 23/4 GF

Archives

Copyright © 2025 · Daily Dish Pro On Genesis Framework · WordPress · Log in

Unless otherwise noted, all images copyright Jim Kasson.