rsrsrs wrote:
the zf plus the 40 1.2 could be very dangerous for my fujy xe4 / 27 2.0 Voigtländer / viltrox 27 1.2
difficult.....
The 27/2 and 27/1.2 seem like a great combo. I had the CV 40 and the Batis 40 on my A7iv (now A7Cii) overlapping for a bit, similar field of view and functionality - one AF and one MF.
Did you know the Zf with the CV 40 Z Mount can do subject detection with manual focus? So the focus box will turn green when you manually focus to the eye. That, plus the huge difference in image quality between the 27/2 APSC and 40/1.2 FF lens would be enough for me to jump ship. Plus, you can get the Nikon 40 f2 with it to replace the AF Viltrox. I used the Nikon 40 f2 Z lens for a bit, and really liked the balanced image quality for a near pancake lens.
akashyap wrote:
The 27/2 and 27/1.2 seem like a great combo. I had the CV 40 and the Batis 40 on my A7iv (now A7Cii) overlapping for a bit, similar field of view and functionality - one AF and one MF.
Did you know the Zf with the CV 40 Z Mount can do subject detection with manual focus? So the focus box will turn green when you manually focus to the eye. That, plus the huge difference in image quality between the 27/2 APSC and 40/1.2 FF lens would be enough for me to jump ship. Plus, you can get the Nikon 40 f2 with it to replace the AF Viltrox. I used the Nikon 40 f2 Z lens for a bit, and really liked the balanced image quality for a near pancake lens....Show more →
I'm a big fan of the 40mm focal length, especially when using it on cameras other than Leica M (because is lacks that specific frameline for this focal length). I really enjoy using the Voigtländer 27mm f/2 Ultron on the X-Pro3. However, the Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 Nokton creates a very distinctive look. It's one of the most popular lenses made by Cosina.
I do think the CV 40/1.2 Z can take advantage of Nikon's focus confirmation for subject detection.
Apr 11, 2024 at 10:49 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Is the resolution wide-open quite dependent on distance? I took a few test shots with one copy I recently received. Some pictures look quite sharp wide open, but some are quite hazy.
Is there any appreciable difference between the E/M/Z mount of this lens? I know tech they should all be about the same, but has anyone done a comparison?
rsway wrote:
Is there any appreciable difference between the E/M/Z mount of this lens? I know tech they should all be about the same, but has anyone done a comparison?
There is chatter that M doesn't adapt well to Z due to sensor thickness differences. E seems to have extra data sent to the camera vs Z.
IMO Z seems the worst of the 3 based on what I've read.
Optically, they should all perform about the same if you buy the native version.
Thank you for the reply. What extra data gets sent to Sony mounts? I'm looking to get this for my ZF so i'm leaning towards the Z mount version, but since it's a manual lens, I guess I could also use an adapter, or would that be a fools errand?
rsway wrote:
Thank you for the reply. What extra data gets sent to Sony mounts? I'm looking to get this for my ZF so i'm leaning towards the Z mount version, but since it's a manual lens, I guess I could also use an adapter, or would that be a fools errand?
Sony lens on Sony mount gets 5 axis IBIS. Any of them on Z only gets 3 axis, including native Z lens.
I'd just stick with native on Z because then you can use the aperture ring. Someone would have to confirm if you can adapt E and still use it, sometimes with adapting lenses you must set the lens at the biggest F stop and adjust aperture with a command wheel.
May 15, 2024 at 10:44 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
RoamingScott wrote:
Sony lens on Sony mount gets 5 axis IBIS. Any of them on Z only gets 3 axis, including native Z lens.
I'd just stick with native on Z because then you can use the aperture ring. Someone would have to confirm if you can adapt E and still use it, sometimes with adapting lenses you must set the lens at the biggest F stop and adjust aperture with a command wheel.
You can adapt Sony E mount lenses to Z mount and still use the aperture ring if it has one with the ETZ21 adapter.
Just got a copy of the SE version off eBay and am totally loving it. It's definitely got some quirks in terms of image quality but all in all it's a great breath of fresh air for me when compared to the comparative optical perfection of Sony's recent lenses. I also love the colors it puts out.
Here's a funny little crop (at f/2.8) that makes me appreciate this lens for what it is. I've only had it for 24 hours and I am looking forward to understanding it better as the years go by.
rsway wrote:
Is there any appreciable difference between the E/M/Z mount of this lens? I know tech they should all be about the same, but has anyone done a comparison?
I have not tried the Z-mount version, but the M-mount and E-mount versions have slight tweaks to account for differences in sensor stack thickness.
Still my favourite "do-it-all" lens. And the one lens that makes me keep my Sony.
As I'm getting rid of some of my Sony lenses to make room for more Fuji, I think I'm gonna
aim for a CV21/3.5, CV40/1.2 and CV75/1.5 trio of lenses once the 75mm will be available.
Don't think I will ever need anything else for Sony.
