Ripolini wrote:
Hi Luka,
nice pictures of a beautiful location.
Do you prefer the 40/1.2 to the Z 35/1.8 S for landscapes?
Hi Riccardo,
Thank you. It is a tough question. As far as sharpness goes, it feels like they are pretty close. In terms of rendering, 35/1.8S is more neutral, and sometimes easier for PP especially if handling with secular highlights. On the other hand, 40/1.2 renders the deep saturated images really well, and for a scene like this, I probably prefer 40/1.2. I really like the way how 40/1.2 rendered the wet leaves in dim light. For bright daylight, and for big vista with strong highlights, shooting close to infinity and stopped down, 35/1.8 S, However, even in that situation, if I were trying to capture shallow depth detail focused environmental landscape, 40/1.2S gives me far more interesting results partially due to the wider aperture, but mainly due to the difference in the rendering. It feels to me Voigtlander renders with higher contrast, saturated look for such scene as long as I don’t blow out any highlights.
The reality is more banal. I can’t always predict what sort of scene I will encounter, so decision of which to bring tends to fall based on other factors such as, if I were hiking with family, 35/1.8S for AF= speed, if just by myself, I just think about which one I have been using more often, then pick the one I have not recently used as much. Or, sometimes the room left in the camera bag, etc.
More than any other lens, the 40mm gives me a sense of actually being there amidst the photo. The colors and the textures and the perspective seem so real.
