kdrk888 wrote:
I wonder how the Loxia 35 performs compared to the CV 40 for landscape? I may pick up a small prime in this range, mostly for landscape.
Douglas -- I've seen some very nice and crisp renditions from the CV 40/1.2 stopped down to landscape apertures, and it has amazing wide-open characteristics. I've never used the 40, but for me, it can't compete with the Loxia 35 in the mid-range apertures of f/2.8-11.0 for color and contrast in landscape and cityscape/architecture. Plus, I appreciate the extra 5mm of wide angle (and wish I had a 31mm instead!). I consider the Loxia 35 as my "storytelling lens" for its immersive quality.
I don't see how you can go wrong with either of these two lenses -- it all depends on your taste and how you approach your subject matter.
I was on the fence but you make me miss the Lox 35. Anyone want to swap a VM 40/1.2 for a Lox 35?
I was thinking about it yesterday too. The Lox has a smoothness to it that’s just compelling. Good as the 40 is...
Gunzorro wrote:
Douglas -- I've seen some very nice and crisp renditions from the CV 40/1.2 stopped down to landscape apertures, and it has amazing wide-open characteristics. I've never used the 40, but for me, it can't compete with the Loxia 35 in the mid-range apertures of f/2.8-11.0 for color and contrast in landscape and cityscape/architecture. Plus, I appreciate the extra 5mm of wide angle (and wish I had a 31mm instead!). I consider the Loxia 35 as my "storytelling lens" for its immersive quality.
I don't see how you can go wrong with either of these two lenses -- it all depends on your taste and how you approach your subject matter. ...Show more →
kdrk888 wrote:
I wonder how the Loxia 35 performs compared to the CV 40 for landscape? I may pick up a small prime in this range, mostly for landscape.
The CV 40/1.2 is already outstanding at f/5.6 (really f/4). The Loxia 35/2 needs f/10 or smaller for best corners.
The Loxia 35/2 can render some ugly ghosting against the light so I'm not sure if it's a good choice for landscapes even though sunstars look great. I prefer the Loxia 35 as a walk-around lens but don't own it anymore. It's has great contrast starting at f/2.8-f/3.2 and yeilds nice separation between subject and background. Wide open it shows noticeable SA but it has a great look stopped down a bit.
kdrk888 wrote:
I wonder how the Loxia 35 performs compared to the CV 40 for landscape? I may pick up a small prime in this range, mostly for landscape.
Fully stopped down I marginally prefer the Loxia. Something brilliant about the contrast. But it needs f9 for the corners. F8 is OK. But f6.3, which is not that much wider, has very strong field curvature at infinity which for most landscapes requires two exposures (one centrally focused, one corner) and stacking.
The CV 40 is relatively flat field at infinity from f4.5.
