Makten wrote:
Thanks! I've applied a custom curve (different for every shot) where contrast is high in the midtones, but low in shadows and highlights. Looks a lot more like film than if you just boost overall contrast.
sebbe wrote:
Sometimes AF would be nice. It's the reason why I often think about buying a VM version on top. But I hate to add the "same lens" just for AF.
Now the 50/1.2 VM is close to release. Is someone else also thinking about buying it? I expect it will perform quite similar to the 40/1.2 VM.
Will post something. I’m not one for doing scientific corner sharpness tests etc though, as long as it’s acceptably sharp in the middle wide open. But once that arrives it will complete my 1.2 trio of 35, 40, 50 for comparison 😁
Steve Spencer wrote:
On the issue of kids and MF, I have a five year old and he is the most common subject for my shooting and I shoot almost 100% MF. He is a very active kid too. I actually much prefer MF for shooting shots of him. The way I shoot is that I focus to where I expect him to be and then time the shot when he goes there. Often times this is actually a lot easier than you would think. I don't think I am especially skilled at MF or anything. I have found this method of shooting very enjoyable, and I actually hate trying to follow him in the viewfinder to maintain AF. Just annoys me to no end and sucks the joy out of shooting to try to keep up with him and I never feel like can do it. So, yes we all shoot differently and that is fine and I am glad we have options. If you want to see wonderful examples of kids shots with MF, check out some of Derek's (seboh's) shots. His have always been an inspiration to me and I think like me he pretty much shoots exclusively MF....Show more →
Sorry for picking this out from this huge thread. I'm working my way through it and it's taking forever because it's growing almost as fast as I can get around to reading it !
Your DoF at f1.2 (one of the reasons people buy this lens - as can be seen from the many examples) @ 5m is around 5 inches, @3m it's less than 1 inch. Whilst I'm not doubting your MF abilities for one second I know the other 99% of people on this forum (never mind the wider market for this lens) can't hit that even using zone focusing. For me it's VM on TAP or another lens.
I'm still stuck on whether to buy the VM or FE version, and I've read all the pros/cons/opinions in the 84 pages of this thread I've read so far. FC is an issue, I'm not too bothered about it shooting at f1.2, I can always blur out areas in PP if really required even if there is a slight difference to the surrounding area it won't be as noticeable as a sharp fence far left, however I'm more worried about FC at f4 or F5.6 for landscapes.
I want this lens to do dual duty, specialist environmental portrait & travel lens and landscapes but that's pointless to me if I then have to pack another landscape lens. I've got to say the FC in my CV 35/1.7 is hardly noticeable even without a front filter (and I can fix it in PP where it is) but all the talk of the strong FC in this lens (VM) is worrying. Is it more or less than the 35mm ?
Sep 08, 2018 at 08:24 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Frogfish wrote:
Sorry for picking this out from this huge thread. I'm working my way through it and it's taking forever because it's growing almost as fast as I can get around to reading it !
Your DoF at f1.2 (one of the reasons people buy this lens - as can be seen from the many examples) @ 5m is around 5 inches, @3m it's less than 1 inch. Whilst I'm not doubting your MF abilities for one second I know the other 99% of people on this forum (never mind the wider market for this lens) can't hit that even using zone focusing. For me it's VM on TAP or another lens.
I'm still stuck on whether to buy the VM or FE version, and I've read all the pros/cons/opinions in the 84 pages of this thread I've read so far. FC is an issue, I'm not too bothered about it shooting at f1.2, I can always blur out areas in PP if really required even if there is a slight difference to the surrounding area it won't be as noticeable as a sharp fence far left, however I'm more worried about FC at f4 or F5.6 for landscapes.
I want this lens to do dual duty, specialist environmental portrait & travel lens and landscapes but that's pointless to me if I then have to pack another landscape lens. I've got to say the FC in my CV 35/1.7 is hardly noticeable even without a front filter (and I can fix it in PP where it is) but all the talk of the strong FC in this lens (VM) is worrying. Is it more or less than the 35mm ?...Show more →
Part of the answer I think lies in my use of the lens. I use it three very different ways. First, for most portraiture I use it at f/2 where it is much better behaved (less CA, handles flare way better, very nice contrast). Second, I used it for stopped down landscapes where it is very nice too. Third, I use it for the special rendering at f/1.2 which sometimes I like, but I don't use it that way all the time. So part of what you need to decide, IMO, is whether you want to shoot it primarily at f/1.2 (where it is messy but interesting) or primarily at f/2 as I do (where it is well behaved and has a lot more depth of field). It is much easier to use it as a manual focus lens if you primarily use it at f/2.
Just picked up the E 40 1.2 after a couple of month back and forth, so far centre resolution at 1.2 seems nice. its a keeper but it seems bokeh is nicer on the Zony 35 1.4
frezeiss wrote:
Just picked up the E 40 1.2 after a couple of month back and forth, so far centre resolution at 1.2 seems nice. its a keeper but it seems bokeh is nicer on the Zony 35 1.4
The 35/1.4 ZA's OOF rendering is definitely smoother, especially the transition zone. However, you definitely get more blur with the Voigtlander.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The 35/1.4 ZA's OOF rendering is definitely smoother, especially the transition zone. However, you definitely get more blur with the Voigtlander.
Yes, Fred! By the way, It was you and several other people in this thread that pushed me over the edge on this one
I noticed a very nice 3D rendering when shooting in bright afternoon sun. Anyways, just also picked up the Zony 50 1.4 so interesting times ahead..
I took my 40/1.2, in place of my much loved Samyang 35/50 combo, for landscape shots on a short hike this weekend. The lens is sharp enough stopped down, once you learn to focus it correctly. I find it has a blue/yellow tint that doesn't do well with PNW greens. I can get some decent colors after PP, but I much prefer the more neutral Samyang 35/1.4 or even the warm 50/1.4 colors to it.
Here is a good example of the greens. It took some work to make them look decent. I also think the Samyang [email protected] would have more bokeh blur (and a better overall look). This is the [email protected]
The lens does very well stopped down, although there is significant vignetting even stopped down past f/5.6 (these all corrected in post). The blues always look nice:
So far I have only made it to 50th page and I'm already longing for this lens. Having recently sold my Samyang 35/1.4 and not using 55/1.8 much, I hope that this one will get more usage. I have never used or owned a 40mm but in theory a fast 40mm prime seems to be a perfect balance because I find 35mm to be wider than I like and 55mm to be a tad longer as a one prime solution.
Sony 24-105 F4 + 40/1.2 could be a great light travel solution?
Couple recent images with this lens. One is a reworking of one similar to one I posted here previously this is a single image, the other an HDR), the second is just a grab shot playing with sun stars...
ajamils wrote:
So far I have only made it to 50th page and I'm already longing for this lens. Having recently sold my Samyang 35/1.4 and not using 55/1.8 much, I hope that this one will get more usage. I have never used or owned a 40mm but in theory a fast 40mm prime seems to be a perfect balance because I find 35mm to be wider than I like and 55mm to be a tad longer as a one prime solution.
Sony 24-105 F4 + 40/1.2 could be a great light travel solution?
Wow, 50 pages? It only took me a few pages to start 'longing for the lens' ...so I bought it.
I don't use it as much as I probably should (given the price) but it sure is nice to have a 1.2 lens always in my bag. And my MF skills need to get better - there are some crazy talented people posting on this site and my images don't look like these .
ylimehajile wrote:
Wow, 50 pages? It only took me a few pages to start 'longing for the lens' ...so I bought it.
I don't use it as much as I probably should (given the price) but it sure is nice to have a 1.2 lens always in my bag. And my MF skills need to get better - there are some crazy talented people posting on this site and my images don't look like these .
I was sold on the lens in the first few pages but thanks to the unavailability of the lens and the price I kept convincing myself that I do not need the lens.
Like you I need to significantly improve my MF skills and in the past I always end up selling MF lenses due to no usage but since I recently picked up Rokinon 135/2 that I am really enjoying, I am hoping that this one will get enough usage to justify the cost.
Sheesh. You'd think no one else on these boards is as fickle as Guy. Or are you all throwing these friendly little jabs in the hopes that no one pays attention to your own buying and selling habits?
