It is, without a doubt, a fine lens. Being a 65mm lens, and a macro lens that only does 2:1 does make it a bit of an oddball. Regardless, I have wanted this lens from the beginning. The problem is I aquired the Loxia 85/2.4 waiting for it. I can put two small extension tubes on the Loxia and get 2:1 macro. And I get more working distance. I might like the bokeh from the 85 w/wo the tubes better than the 65.
For me it's perfect I have the FE 35 1.4 and a FE 85 1.8 that's a great lens but not really a landscape, product type lens. So this fits perfect I can go 35,65 and my Batis 135 and my 12-24. 4 lenses for landscape from 12-135
pdmphoto wrote:
It is, without a doubt, a fine lens. Being a 65mm lens, and a macro lens that only does 2:1 does make it a bit of an oddball. Regardless, I have wanted this lens from the beginning. The problem is I aquired the Loxia 85/2.4 waiting for it. I can put two small extension tubes on the Loxia and get 2:1 macro. And I get more working distance. I might like the bokeh from the 85 w/wo the tubes better than the 65.
Sure, but putting the tubes on the Voigtlander gets you to close to 1:1 I would think. Having said that, the Loxia 85 is a great lens and if the focal length works for you, what is the problem? For me, I like having both, but that means carrying more weight and spending more money and everyone has different tolerances for both.
This is a proper well focused aperture series without any auto-correction.
I see two amazing lenses with different strengths. The apochromatic qualities of the CV65 become especially visible in the corner crops. At f/2, the FE 1.4/50 has the edge in the center.
Jannik Peters wrote:
Okay folks... Let's judge some facts.
This is a proper well focused aperture series without any auto-correction.
I see two amazing lenses with different strengths. The apochromatic qualities of the CV65 become especially visible in the corner crops. At f/2, the FE 1.4/50 has the edge in the center.
What's your opinion?
Tough to completely evaluate on the off center crops due to different subjects, but it seems like the 50/1.4 is better on center until F2.8 after which they are similar but that CV seems better off center at all apertures. By the way, the second and third sets of images are labeled mid frame. I am guessing that the last set is corner?
Luvwine wrote:
Tough to completely evaluate on the off center crops due to different subjects, but it seems like the 50/1.4 is better on center until F2.8 after which they are similar but that CV seems better off center at all apertures. By the way, the second and third sets of images are labeled mid frame. I am guessing that the last set is corner?
Thank you, I've fixed it.
The subject and the image height is exactely the same but the content of the crop is slightly different because of the different focal length. There has to be a tradeoff when comparing lenses with different focal lengths.
Jannik Peters wrote:
Okay folks... Let's judge some facts.
This is a proper well focused aperture series without any auto-correction.
I see two amazing lenses with different strengths. The apochromatic qualities of the CV65 become especially visible in the corner crops. At f/2, the FE 1.4/50 has the edge in the center.
What's your opinion?
I noticed that the CV 65 has lower contrast than most other modern lenses. If you really look at the crops, I can't spot any details that the FE can resolve that the CV can't. Using deconvolution sharpening, the CV 65 really shows its true potential.
My issue has always has been that most folks don't process in C1 but LR so I have to guess how what it will look like in C1. There is so much you can do after the fact that when testing you keep that out of the equation. I do nothing but a base sharpening and adjust exposure only because I don't want to mislead any viewers but the bottom line anything is possible
hiepphotog wrote:
I noticed that the CV 65 has lower contrast than most other modern lenses. If you really look at the crops, I can't spot any details that the FE can resolve that the CV can't. Using deconvolution sharpening, the CV 65 really shows its true potential.
My crops were just imported (LR6 default settings). We want to give the largest part of the users an idea what they are going to expect when they open the file in Lightroom.
So yes, huge potential to apply the right sharpening
Agree most of us that test here do it correctly and do very little to the files. As it should be. Sometimes I show my test images than clearly point out which ones I'm cooking.
Jannik Peters wrote:
My crops were just imported (LR6 default settings). We want to give the largest part of the users an idea what they are going to expect when they open the file in Lightroom.
So yes, huge potential to apply the right sharpening
Jannik Peters wrote:
My crops were just imported (LR6 default settings). We want to give the largest part of the users an idea what they are going to expect when they open the file in Lightroom.
So yes, huge potential to apply the right sharpening
Would be interested in your sharpening settings for this lens.
GMPhotography wrote:
My issue has always has been that most folks don't process in C1 but LR so I have to guess how what it will look like in C1. There is so much you can do after the fact that when testing you keep that out of the equation. I do nothing but a base sharpening and adjust exposure only because I don't want to mislead any viewers but the bottom line anything is possible
FWIW, the three pictures I put up were processed in C1, but they are just fun pictures, not a test or measurement of the lens.
Luvwine wrote:
Sure, but putting the tubes on the Voigtlander gets you to close to 1:1 I would think. Having said that, the Loxia 85 is a great lens and if the focal length works for you, what is the problem? For me, I like having both, but that means carrying more weight and spending more money and everyone has different tolerances for both.
The FC's fairly horrendous on the CV 65 on tubes. The FLE giveth, the FLE taketh away.
freaklikeme wrote:
The FC's fairly horrendous on the CV 65 on tubes. The FLE giveth, the FLE taketh away.
I shot some flower pics with tubes and did not notice a problem, of course, the subjects were not Edge to edge. I am not saying you are incorrect, just that it did not cause me difficulties i noticed in my limited use.
GMPhotography wrote:
I already decided to go for it. Looks really good to me
If it helps (or hurts) any, it out-resolves the Rodenstock 60 HR center-to-corner with a two + stop advantage, and the Leica APO-Elmarit 100 mid-frame to corner with a stop + advantage on a stock a7rII at any distance. The APO-Summicron 75 varies a lot by distance, but generally the mid-frame lags behind regardless of aperture. It's also better corrected for spherochromatism at wide apertures than any of these lenses. The only lens I own that bests it across the frame is the APO-Elmarit 180, but only from f/4 on and it doesn't have anywhere near the close-focus capabilities.
