Having gone through every page of this thread and the one for the 35GM, I am still torn on which to pick as a 'be all end all lens'.
The size and character of the CV40 is appealing (as is the price), but the autofocus and
overall higher quality of the 35GM's optics sway me that side.
Anyone who has had both, and has traveled with them, can you weigh in with your opinions?
NeerajnMenon wrote:
Anyone who has had both, and has traveled with them, can you weigh in with your opinions?
Welcome to the forum Neeraj! Nice to see you on here too.
I don't personally have the 35GM, but I do have the Zeiss Batis 40. For me it's mostly about speed/environment/weather sealing. The CV40 is my spring/summer lens and the Batis is my autumn/winter lens; unless circumstances are favorable. Rendering is going to be different too; in my example the Zeiss has very punchy contrast and the CV40 tends to have better colors.
It's also about the kind of look you want. I do like the CV40 for artistic expression, the 35GM won't have that as much.
Alan Parker wrote:
Welcome to the forum Neeraj! Nice to see you on here too.
I don't personally have the 35GM, but I do have the Zeiss Batis 40. For me it's mostly about speed/environment/weather sealing. The CV40 is my spring/summer lens and the Batis is my autumn/winter lens; unless circumstances are favorable. Rendering is going to be different too; in my example the Zeiss has very punchy contrast and the CV40 tends to have better colors.
It's also about the kind of look you want. I do like the CV40 for artistic expression, the 35GM won't have that as much.
Hi Alan! It's great to be here. A lot of knowledge and experience being shared here. And your lovely played quite a big role in my confusion over the cv40. It does seem to render beautifully even wide open.
NeerajnMenon wrote:
Having gone through every page of this thread and the one for the 35GM, I am still torn on which to pick as a 'be all end all lens'.
The size and character of the CV40 is appealing (as is the price), but the autofocus and
overall higher quality of the 35GM's optics sway me that side.
Anyone who has had both, and has traveled with them, can you weigh in with your opinions?
Welcome to FM. 👍
If you want one lens to do it all and you’re choosing between the CV 40 and 35GM, the 35GM is the winner by a large margin. I used to own the CV 40 and no question it’s a great lens. It takes wonderful images.
Now I own the 35GM. The 35GM is sharper, has beautiful bokeh, and most importantly for a “be all, end all” lens - it has autofocus! Which means for portraits you have eye autofocus which is the best thing since sliced bread. 🙂. Taking portraits with an f1.2 manual focus lens is possible, but a pain in the butt for your subject and you. Any slight movement of you or your subject and it’s out of focus. Even stopped down it’s difficult and slow. In contrast, eye autofocus with the 35GM is instant and accurate even at f1.4. ALWAYS.
The CV 40 is a fun lens, but not the one to pick if it’s between it and the 35GM. The 35GM is a beauty. Get it first and then add a used CV 40 later if you want to.
If you want one lens to do it all and you’re choosing between the CV 40 and 35GM, the 35GM is the winner by a large margin. I used to own the CV 40 and no question it’s a great lens. It takes wonderful images.
Now I own the 35GM. The 35GM is sharper, has beautiful bokeh, and most importantly for a “be all, end all” lens - it has autofocus! Which means for portraits you have eye autofocus which is the best thing since sliced bread. 🙂. Taking portraits with an f1.2 manual focus lens ispossible, but a pain in the butt for your subject and you. Any slight movement of you or your subject and it’s out of focus. Even stopped down it’s difficult and slow. In contrast, eye autofocus with the 35GM is instant and accurate even at f1.4. ALWAYS.
The CV 40 is a fun lens, but not the one to pick if it’s between it and the 35GM. The 35GM is a beauty. Get it first and then add a used CV 40 later if you want to.
Thank you for the detailed response!
Autofocus is indeed a big thing to consider, and I wouldn't want to miss any shots, even though I enjoy manual focus.
Did you find a lot of difference in size/weight between the two in day to day use?
I have both the CV 40 and 35 GM. They are among my most recent lenses. In terms of size and weight, the 40 with its hood is much smaller than the 35 with its hood. The 40 takes less room in a bag or case. For me, it is a choice of manual focus or autofocus. I am new to autofocus (an old-timer) so I have used the 35 more than the 40 recently for learning purposes. They are both great tools.
I have had the CV40 for several years now, and only recently picked up the 35GM. I am an old school nearly-always manual focus kind of photographer. Some of my favorite pictures I took were with the CV40; it is amazing and has tons of what people like to call "character" in a lens.
But after having picked up the 35GM as an experiment of sorts, to see what the "other side" is like, I have had to rethink some of my preferences. The images look different, but have plenty of detail and I am pleased with what I see in the colors, contrast, etc. of the 35GM. And the autofocus never misses, whereas I have on occasion had regrettable misses on the CV40 despite having decent manual focus skills (or so I like to think) and using the camera's aids like peaking and assist.
The CV40 is great. It is likely the last manual focus lens I would sell. But if it was one or the other, for most people the 35GM really is the better choice. As suggested, get the 35GM now and maybe some day later you can pick up the CV40. I think your future self will look back as that being the right choice.
Thank you! You make perfect sense, I'm wary of missing important shots as well using manual focus. And I might not always have to time to take manually focused shots when traveling with others.
NeerajnMenon wrote:
Having gone through every page of this thread and the one for the 35GM, I am still torn on which to pick as a 'be all end all lens'.
The size and character of the CV40 is appealing (as is the price), but the autofocus and
overall higher quality of the 35GM's optics sway me that side.
Anyone who has had both, and has traveled with them, can you weigh in with your opinions?
I own both now, but if I was going to sell one it’d be the 35GM. I like the size, focal length, f-stop, and character of the CV40 more than I need the fast AF and weather sealing of the 35GM. I did an A/B comparison and it’s obvious to me. For personal use, I’d rather give up a missed shot here and there for the keepers to be that much better.
For years I used the e-mount version of the 40/1.2 and had many keepers with just manual focus. I now have the VM CV40 to use with AF on the latest Techart adapter, and it has eye-AF which is great, though it is slower and loses tracking towards the edges of the frame.
