Jeffrey Behr wrote:
Well, maybe I'm the idiot. CQ replied courteously to my e-mail, cancelled my order, and alerted me that that info is indeed on the product page. Maybe it was when I ordered it, but if it was, I sure didn't see it.
Nope, their system is like that. Nowhere in the cart, nor during the checkout process is a backorder status shown. It's only on the product page.
Chainring wrote:
Nope, their system is like that. Nowhere in the cart, nor during the checkout process is a backorder status shown. It's only on the product page.
OK, thx. Called The Photo Village, NYC, 212-989-1252... https://photovillage.com/home.php
...found them in stock for $1059 + $20 shipping, and ordered it. Tracking info tomorrow.
Just a word of warning. I've got a small sunburn just below my sensor of Fuji X-T2. Haven't used any other lenses than Nokton for a while and I'm pretty sure it has happened with it. Haven't been shooting towards the sun intentionally and haven't kept camera aimed like that on purpose. And I haven't swapped the lens when outdoors even once. So no idea when this has happened. Luckily sensor was not damaged and camera operates just fine. Apparently this is something that has happened to quite a few people using Fuji cameras and adapted manual glass. Haven't heard this happening on Sony cameras (tried to google but couldn't find anything really other than some night club laser damage).
PS. Even without this incident, I'm about to switch to Sony A7III.
OK, so I've decided that this lens is for me. For good. Love 40mm. Love the rendering of this lens. Also decided to also go with the E-mount version (sold the VM version for what I paid for it). Now I just have to save up again for it.
In the meantime, I've picked up the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. I've noticed that some here have both of these lenses, and was wondering if someone could please do a couple of comparison shots between them with the Tamron at 40mm. Very different lenses, but I'm wondering what some of the tangible differences are, and what I could perhaps use in the processing of the Tamron shots to emulate some of the characteristics of the Voigtlander (thinking colour mainly). The 40mm will be the bulk of my photos from this point on, I'd just like to get the Tamron shots to have a similar processing for consistency going forward.
I know this sounds dumb. Or even "who cares", sounds silly and really why would anyone care which lens anyone else uses. It's deeper than that though. This lens, and other 40mm lenses that i have used, show the world as I see it. There's just something that is different for me with a 40. The photos I've made with them are the ones that I finally see me in them. They come out the way I envisioned when I was taking the photo - or at least closer than any other lens I've ever used.
So it's not actually "this lens is for me" it's actually "I am for this lens". Is that too pretentious or artsy? Not sure, just needed to put it out there. Sometimes it's not about covering all focal lengths and having a super-flexible kit, it's about a particular tool that just hits the spot with what you are trying to say with your photos.
And if you aren't trying to say something with your photos, what are you taking them for?
Jun 09, 2018 at 08:56 AM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Does the VM have the clickless aperture option? Still contemplating swapping. Doing more video, so weight and size are more a consideration than ever. Anyone?
I make no promises, but I have both (VM) and can see. What kind of comparison shots though? Close and wide open, landscape, etc. What do you normally shoot. I won't get to all of them...
zaphodm wrote:
OK, so I've decided that this lens is for me. For good. Love 40mm. Love the rendering of this lens. Also decided to also go with the E-mount version (sold the VM version for what I paid for it). Now I just have to save up again for it.
In the meantime, I've picked up the Tamron 28-75 f/2.8. I've noticed that some here have both of these lenses, and was wondering if someone could please do a couple of comparison shots between them with the Tamron at 40mm. Very different lenses, but I'm wondering what some of the tangible differences are, and what I could perhaps use in the processing of the Tamron shots to emulate some of the characteristics of the Voigtlander (thinking colour mainly). The 40mm will be the bulk of my photos from this point on, I'd just like to get the Tamron shots to have a similar processing for consistency going forward....Show more →
---------------------------------------------
No clickless aperture I can find. I love the VM though, but it does benefit from a thinner sensor stack, not the end of the world though, just keep compositions centered, or stop down to f/2-f2.8.
imagesfromobjects wrote:
Does the VM have the clickless aperture option? Still contemplating swapping. Doing more video, so weight and size are more a consideration than ever. Anyone?
---------------------------------------------
A few shots around the yard yesterday evening.
Jun 09, 2018 at 01:12 PM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
I've been using the Color-Skopar 25/4 a bunch for video. Also for stills, but even by my standards - which aren't so stringent - the corners kinda suck. Cropping @ 16:9, it's almost a non-issue, so I feel like for my purposes the VM 40 would be dandy. Maybe I'll post a WTT some time.
Mathieu18 wrote:
I make no promises, but I have both (VM) and can see. What kind of comparison shots though? Close and wide open, landscape, etc. What do you normally shoot. I won't get to all of them...
---------------------------------------------
No clickless aperture I can find. I love the VM though, but it does benefit from a thinner sensor stack, not the end of the world though, just keep compositions centered, or stop down to f/2-f2.8.
---------------------------------------------
A few shots around the yard yesterday evening.
Mathieu18 wrote:
I make no promises, but I have both (VM) and can see. What kind of comparison shots though? Close and wide open, landscape, etc. What do you normally shoot. I won't get to all of them...
Thank you. Just thinking a couple of different colourful scenes at f/4.0. Near or far doesn't really matter, you can't change how the lens renders. The colours just seem so different between these two lenses, and I thought with a couple of shots of the same scene it would be possible to isolate some of where and how they are different. Thanks again if you get a chance.
Got one locally in Toronto from Downtown Camera. I am literally only going to shoot this thing at 1.2 --- the sony makes it incredibly easy to do so with focus peaking, so why not.
i was playing with my son under very bright light. Under contrasty lighting and at mid-distance I see lots of 3d/pop with this lens. Do you guys agree?
Here is a sample...Sorry bad posing and bad lighting.
I have the VM version of the lens and I'm thinking about the benefits of maybe switching to native version. Image quality seems good enough for me already with VM, but not sure if the other benefits would justify the switch. Does the camera apply any automatic corrections to internal files (jpgs etc) so if you for example transfer files to smartphone does it have any vignetting corrections etc? Sure I can do such things manually, but I wouldn't mind some extra automation.
Edit: Apparently not. At least based on some reviews. Oh well. Nevermind. I'm loving the size and look of the VM version, so might just stick to that.
So how does this lens compare to the Nikon 50mm f/1.2? I’m guessing the Voightlander has a chip in it to relay aperture and lens data? How would they compare in image quality? I know it’s an E mount lens, I just bought a Sony a7R III but I don’t have any Sony lenses yet. I just use my Zeiss Milvus lenses on it via a Metabones dumb adapter. I also have the Nikon D850 and that is why I have the adapter for my lenses.
Todd wrote:
So how does this lens compare to the Nikon 50mm f/1.2? I’m guessing the Voightlander has a chip in it to relay aperture and lens data? How would they compare in image quality? I know it’s an E mount lens, I just bought a Sony a7R III but I don’t have any Sony lenses yet. I just use my Zeiss Milvus lenses on it via a Metabones dumb adapter. I also have the Nikon D850 and that is why I have the adapter for my lenses.
The Nikon is an old lens with all the disadvantages that implies. It gives "chaotic" bokeh wide open but is very nice at f/2. The bokeh improves when stopping down, which isn't really the case with the Voigtländer. I'd say the Nikon is preferable at f/2 but inferior wide open, both regarding sharpness and overall "look".
That said, I wouldn't even consider the Nikon as a replacement for the Voigtländer. Too different to compare.
Thank you for the reply. I guess I will skip the Nikon 50 mm since I already have the Zeiss Milvus 1.4/50, which is way sharper anyway. I eventually want to get the Sony G master 85mm 1.4 for my Sony camera and mainly use that for a Portrait work along with my other Zeiss lenses.
Makten wrote:
The Nikon is an old lens with all the disadvantages that implies. It gives "chaotic" bokeh wide open but is very nice at f/2. The bokeh improves when stopping down, which isn't really the case with the Voigtländer. I'd say the Nikon is preferable at f/2 but inferior wide open, both regarding sharpness and overall "look".
That said, I wouldn't even consider the Nikon as a replacement for the Voigtländer. Too different to compare.
I'm going to try to take my 40/1.2 with me next week to Switzerland, Italy, and France, but we'll have to see if it will make the weight/volume capacity that I'm trying to fit all my gear into.
So far the gear list is:
RX1R-III
16/3.5 AI FE
21/2.8 Lox
40/1.2 CV
85/1.8 Sony or 85/4 ZM
180/4 CV or 135/3.4 Telyt
Since I have the RX1R-II the 35mm-ish prime is optional. I might even not take anything longer than 85mm, though our time in Zermatt will certainly want something in the short tele range.
