Steve Spencer wrote:
I am in much the same boat. I really like the Loxia 50 and 85, but I think I would prefer the Voigtlander 65 to either. I will probably just add the Voigtlander. I would use this some on video. Does it have a de-clickable aperture ring?
When I compare RAW files of both the Voigtlander 65 and Loxia 50 I just see a little more "presence" in the Loxia files. At least on the A7RII. I felt the same way when comparing the FE55 with the Loxia or Canon L lenses with the Zeiss ZE/ZF lenses a few years ago.
It has nothing to do with LR vs C1 (have both). I always make my own profiles, because I think the standard profiles for Sony are horrible.
Still, this Voigtlander clearly has great qualities and I'm certainly interested in it. It seems to be much more useful to me than the 50 Loxia, because of the close focusing, nicer bokeh and almost no CA.
Jochenb wrote:
When I compare RAW files of both the Voigtlander 65 and Loxia 50 I just see a little more "presence" in the Loxia files. At least on the A7RII. I felt the same way when comparing the FE55 with the Loxia or Canon L lenses with the Zeiss ZE/ZF lenses a few years ago.
It has nothing to do with LR vs C1 (have both). I always make my own profiles, because I think the standard profiles for Sony are horrible.
Still, this Voigtlander clearly has great qualities and I'm certainly interested in it. It seems to be much more useful to me than the 50 Loxia, because of the close focusing, nicer bokeh and almost no CA.
Okay folks.. I have made a small but interesting comparison between my Loxia 85 and my CV65.
- Lenses were electronically decoupled.. So it is just the glass that you see here
- CV is cropped to the size of the Loxia
- both lenses wide open
- same position
- same time
- same light
- the brightness level of the toy is exactely the same (CV -0,25 exposure, Loxia +-0)
- no sharpening applied
- White balance sliders exactely the same
I realized I have not posted to this topic some sample pics. Some of you may have seen these from my other topic and so I hope it is not too redundant to post them here. I do so in the hope it will help someone.
First, here are two of the landscape shots I posted above but with some quick post processing I did to them Loxia First:
Jannik Peters wrote:
Okay folks.. I have made a small but interesting comparison between my Loxia 85 and my CV65.
- Lenses were electronically decoupled.. So it is just the glass that you see here
- CV is cropped to the size of the Loxia
- both lenses wide open
- same position
- same time
- same light
- the brightness level of the toy is exactely the same (CV -0,25 exposure, Loxia +-0)
- no sharpening applied
- White balance sliders exactely the same
So which one is which?
I can't say for sure which one is which, but I definitely prefer the bottom one. It has better contrast and appears to have more pop for lack of a better term and bokeh looks similar in the two shots. If I had to guess I would say the top one is the CV because it has just a smidgen more DOF unless and the CV 65 f/2 cropped to an 85mm framing should have just a bit more depth of field than an 85 f/2.4. The crop may be hurting performance in this case as their looks like a lot of DR and crop does reduce the DR noticeably if you are close the limit of the sensor.
Folks,
this comparison is just ridiculous. On my system here (EIZO EV2736W, Mac OS Sierra, Safari, (what system do you use ?) the top image has much better contrast and way better colors than the bottom one. This is why I believe the top is the Loxia, from what I've seen one or two pages back with Luvwine's direct comparisons.
PEKA62 wrote:
Folks,
this comparison is just ridiculous. On my system here (EIZO EV2736W, Mac OS Sierra, Safari, (what system do you use ?) the top image has much better contrast and way better colors than the bottom one. This is why I believe the top is the Loxia, from what I've seen one or two pages back with Luvwine's direct comparisons.
Perhaps we have different meanings of contrast. I was referring here to contrast of the whole image often called macro contrast and I do think the bottom image has more on my system (iMac Retina 5K with Mac OS El Capitan and Safari) I can check on my other machine where I also have an EIZO monitor and Mac OS Sierra, but I doubt that would make any difference. The experience of color and "pop" are both pretty subjective, so we could easily disagree there, but we should be able to agree about macro contrast.
Bottom image definitely has more macro-contrast. Almost seems like it's slightly more exposed. Top image seems to have more mid-range (or is slightly less neutral towards warm). I prefer the look of the bottom image if I had to choose with no further editing.
To my eye Jannik's bottom image has a flatter rendering, the top one shows more depth. So I'm going to say that the top image is the Loxia, the bottom one the CV.
