Review of a rare bird: the Voigtlander 180/4 APO-Lanthar

According to multiple sources, total production of this optic is somewhere between 700 and 1000 units in Nikon AI-S (unchipped F) mount; there were a few more made in Pentax K, and M42. The lens came out of the Cosina Voigtlander factory in the early 2000s, on the heels of the now-legendary 125/2.5 APO-Lanthar and more common 90/3.5 APO-Lanthar. All of these lenses had very short production runs, probably because it was right about the time the CV factory was switching over to produce the modern Zeiss lenses. This is a shame, because they’re relevant lenses more than ever. During my last trip to Tokyo in December, I found not one – but two of the very rare 180mm lenses. Bellamy at Japan Camera Hunter says this is the first time he’s seen one for sale – let alone two. Naturally, it followed me home. The other lens found a home with one of the site regulars…

Samples were shot on a Nikon D750 and D810.

Shown with its even smaller 90/3.5 sibling.

Whilst the Zeiss Otuses and other ZF.2s deliver ultimate image quality across a very wide shooting envelope, we’re somewhat limited on two fronts: there’s nothing above 135mm, and the weight of all of these lenses is a serious factor to consider. Especially when you’re also packing a 6kg tripod/head combination, two bodies, and your aim is to hike to make landscape images – something which I’m doing with increasing frequency because I find it find the environment, process and results satisfying and relaxing. My landscape kit comprises a Nikon D810, the 24PCE, something in the midrange, a short tele and a long tele – plus a set of NDs and polarizers for all of these lenses. The 24PCE is not to correct verticals or extend depth of field; it’s because if I need something wider I can shift-stitch for an effective 19mm or so.

The middle choice alternates between a 45PCE, 45P, or 55 Otus depending on a) whether I anticipate needing movements; b) plan on walking a very long distance, or c) need to work with maximum depth of field flexibility and/or aren’t carrying anything heavier or longer respectively. The short telephoto choice is either the 85 Otus (my preference, because it’s possibly the best lens I’ve ever used across the board) or the 90 APO-Lanthar, again depending on weight. If you’re at f8 on a tripod for sufficient depth of field anyway, those extra stops and kilograms aren’t really justifiable. The final choice is a tricky one: it used to be the 2/135 APO or the 70-200/4 AFS; though as outstanding as the 2/135 is (probably the closest of the regular ZF.2s to ‘Otus level’) it isn’t really that much longer than the 85 in practice, and I may well leave the 85 behind and pair it with the 55. The 70-200/4 is large and heavy, though not as bad as the 80-400 AFS, which I really like for its flexibility and ability to provide a lot of frames for high resolution stitching – but the weight and size are a killer.

Two times

Thus, the rationale for something long, light and good; there aren’t really that many choices. Especially not if weight is a consideration. My research lead me to the least common of the three APO-Lanthars: the 180mm. More than a year of hunting turned up either nothing or some suspect eBay listings which I didn’t feel confident enough with to put down a not immaterial sum of money; for a lens that retailed for about $350 when new, it’s now well over the $1,000 mark. Not a bad ROI for an eight or so year investment.

Omotesando on a Sunday

Despite the ‘Lanthar’ part of the name, the lens is not radioactive – which is a good thing. It does have lanthanum glass, whose dispersion properties are part of the apochromatic part of the optical formula. It is a 9/7 design, with 9 aperture blades and hole that is a rather irregular circle. There are no aspherical elements as far as I can tell, which is good news for bokeh. First impressions are of solidity and density: this is not a big lens, perhaps the length of the Nikon AFS 60/2.8 Macro and with a skinny 49mm filter thread (you’ll want a pinch cap to replace the beautiful but very impractical metal screw-in cap, too). Around the business end is a chrome bayonet for the hood, reminiscent of the current ZF.2 line; it’s pretty but can result in reflections if you’re shooting something near. You’ll also need a lot of luck to find the matching square hood; it wasn’t sold with the lens, and it appears that there were fewer hoods than lenses made. My own hunt continues.

Upward mobility

The lens is so small it pretty much disappears on a D810 and balances much like the AIS 105/2.5. But it’s all-metal, which can be unpleasant in very cold environments and if you accidentally drop it on your foot. It is a manual focus lens, like all of the Nikon-mount Voigtlanders, which undoubtedly contributes to keeping the internals compact. The focus throw is long because it has an unusually close 1.2m near limit, and can get a bit twitchy towards infinity – you really have to have a subject more than a kilometer away to be able to use the hard infinity stop with any confidence, especially at f4. Fortunately, the focusing ring has quite a stiff action and no backlash, which makes adjustments of small increments easy.

Dark flows

I would say it is a difficult lens to use handheld for several reasons: lack of a stabilizer or any meaningful weight making precise framing and stability while focusing critically difficult; the relatively long focal length and slow aperture requiring a lot of shutter speed to avoid shake on high resolution bodies; and finally, difficulty in acquiring critical focus wide open. It is not something I’d use for street photography or documentary work. However, all of these handling attributes are quite well suited to architecture and landscape – if you’re working off a tripod with live view, it’s capable of some really excellent results.

Crossing

Resolving power and acuity seem to vary with distance. Maximum aperture of f4 at infinity is less than ideal; you really need f5.6 or preferably f8. Beyond f11 diffraction sets in, so you’ve really only got two usable stops at infinity. At middle distances, say up to about 300-400m, things move up a stop: f4 becomes acceptable, f5.6 is excellent. And at middle-close distances – between say 20-100m – all apertures are usable, and f4 is pretty darned good, even towards the edges on a D810. At no point does the microcontrast threaten an Otus; it’s a fairly low contrast lens that has high resolving power but moderate contrast at best. Perhaps the best relative analogy is sandpaper: if a sharp Nikkor or Canon lens is 120 or 220 grit (excellent global contrast, somewhat hard/ crunchy microcontrast), a normal Zeiss is 400 grit, an Otus is 600-800 grit (a good balance between overall contrast and very fine microcontrast) – then the APO-Lanthars are ultra fine grit: not much high level bite, but the grit is there.

The hive

The 180 flares in a dramatic and contrast reducing way, but can be tamed to a large extent by shading the front element (and I really wish I could find a long hood to fit it). It does not, however, exhibit any longitudinal or lateral CA that I could find – and no purple fringing, either. This is truly an apochromatic lens. Color transmission is best described as a bit ‘thin’: it reminds me of the way the Foveon files look; accurate, but somewhat desaturated. It doesn’t have the transparency and clarity of the Otuses, but it doesn’t have the price tag or weight, either. What it does produce is an easily worked file with plenty of tonal information.

Autumn

I personally like what it does with out of focus areas, which is a good thing because at anything except for very long distances, you’re going to have some out of focus areas somewhere in the frame. In that sense, it has the same ‘abrupt’ transition between in and out of focus areas I’ve come to associate with well-corrected apochromatic lenses; the plane of focus is sharp, then it isn’t. The intermediate transition zone isn’t nervous or double-edged, even with busy subjects such as branches. It simply goes soft, which is quite pleasant. I suspect this lens would be very good for portraiture, given its rendering characteristics – enough bite to define hair and features, not so much global contrast as to be unflattering, and a nice out of focus area in both fore and background. Focusing may be a challenge, though.

Texture

Of the three APO-Lanthars, the only one I’ve not had a chance to use is the 125/2.5 Macro; reputedly the best of the lot. The 90 is very similar to the 180, but with somewhat lower overall contrast and a flatter rendering. I personally think the two lighter lenses – the 90 and 180 – are very worthy of consideration for landscape photographers simply because of their unique combination of weight and image quality. Fortunately, the 90 is fairly easily obtainable – there were a few versions made, and in my mind the preferred version is the one without the chrome bayonet – simply because it isn’t distracting or reflective. The 180 should be snapped up in whatever version you can find that fits. It earns a permanent place in my bag, because there is simply no other option if you need a high quality lightweight telephoto. MT

__________________

Take your photography to the next level: 2015 Masterclasses now open for booking in Prague (9-14 Mar 2015) and Lucerne (17-22 Mar 2015)

__________________

Limited edition Ultraprints of these images and others are available from mingthein.gallery

__________________

Visit the Teaching Store to up your photographic game – including workshop and Photoshop Workflow videos and the customized Email School of Photography; or go mobile with the Photography Compendium for iPad. You can also get your gear from B&H and Amazon. Prices are the same as normal, however a small portion of your purchase value is referred back to me. Thanks!

Don’t forget to like us on Facebook and join the reader Flickr group!

Images and content copyright Ming Thein | mingthein.com 2012 onwards. All rights reserved