The M 35/1.4 ASPH pre-FLE is a kind of favourite lens - but as it can't produce a sharp image (border to border) at any f-stop I quickly sold it. When it works and you got the focus right the images are indeed beautiful. The best. I could live with the focus shift but the midzone dip was too much.
The Leica lens will give you cleaner images with less CA, and of course better bokeh as well (but that is subjective). Sharp... not particularly except for in the center or those times when all distances over the frame match up...
The CV 40/1.2 E-mount will be is easier to handle and more trustworthy - despite its quirks.
wolfloid wrote:
Thanks Makten and Rsrsrs. I was hoping the 40/2 would be better than you portray it since it woul make such a small package
Never mind, I do have an alternative - the M 35/1.4 asph pre FLE. How does the rendition of this lens compare to the 40/1.2? I know the thicker cover glass on the A7rIII is not optimised for the Lux and that this will definitely affect the corners wide open (not at all important for my photography) but what about the mid frame dip? Is this made even worse by the Sony sensor or is it less of a problem when using the live view to specifically focus mid frame?
How will the central rendition vary between the two lenses at a range of apertures? Sharpness is very important, but so is SA and bokeh - I almost always convert to B&W - hence such a string of questions, since I’m also thinking of a Monochrome - though love the idea of AF and zoom on the Sony.
Maybe you should check out the traditional Voigtländer 40/1.4 Nokton. It's a lot better than some might have you believe. The only real weakness is a pronounced midzone dip, but it's actually pretty sharp wide open. Stopped down to ~f/5.6 it and the Leica 40/2 is pretty damn good. The Nokton has lesser field curvature though (which is kind of strange).
Also, the Ultron 40/2 is a nice and small lens at a good price, even though it will of course be larger when mounted with and adapter. It's a bit more "bland" than the other lenses, but has predictive performance and is alright wide open. Let's say "modern" rendering.
If you don't need the speed, the Hexanon 40/1,8 is absolutely amazing stopped down, and you can probably find it for $20 or so. In my opinion it rivals many Zeiss 50 mm lenses at f/5.6. No kidding. But, corners are horrible wide open because of strong field curvature.
-----------
And here's one from the Nokton 40/1.2, at f/1.2 of course. Daylight white balance at sunset gives interesting results.
I can vouch for the Hex 40/1.8. I've had 3 at various times. Depending on the copy, they can be amazing. Prone to flaring, but I'm one of those people who likes flares when used a certain way.
Ordered the Nokton 40, Mr Gandy happened to have a used "like new" copy, so looking forward to taking it for a spin as soon as USPS gets it together (supposed to have been here today arggghhh)
I'm curious to hear folks' opinions about the Color Skopar 28.3,5. as well...
wolfloid wrote:
Thanks Makten and Rsrsrs. I was hoping the 40/2 would be better than you portray it since it woul make such a small package
Never mind, I do have an alternative - the M 35/1.4 asph pre FLE. How does the rendition of this lens compare to the 40/1.2? I know the thicker cover glass on the A7rIII is not optimised for the Lux and that this will definitely affect the corners wide open (not at all important for my photography) but what about the mid frame dip? Is this made even worse by the Sony sensor or is it less of a problem when using the live view to specifically focus mid frame?
How will the central rendition vary between the two lenses at a range of apertures? Sharpness is very important, but so is SA and bokeh - I almost always convert to B&W - hence such a string of questions, since I’m also thinking of a Monochrome - though love the idea of AF and zoom on the Sony.
Makten wrote:
Maybe you should check out the traditional Voigtländer 40/1.4 Nokton. It's a lot better than some might have you believe. The only real weakness is a pronounced midzone dip, but it's actually pretty sharp wide open. Stopped down to ~f/5.6 it and the Leica 40/2 is pretty damn good. The Nokton has lesser field curvature though (which is kind of strange).
The 40/1.4 is one of the few rangefinder lenses I've come across that actually benefits from the thick stock Sony sensor stack. It minimizes the lens's extremely strong field curvature seen on digital Leicas... Another one is the Voigtlander 35/1.2, in respect to performing as good if not slightly better on Sony than digital Leica.
That's why I declared the picture as "(processed)". In the original the material and color is identical to the rest of the statue. But I wanted to give the statue some life and strength that fits to the rather dark processing. That's why I added contrast to the eyes and pushed the kelvin slider to warm it up.
Here's a crop of the unprocessed picture.
Damien Hirst - Treasures from the Wreck of the Unbelievable
smpetty wrote:
I've never seen such detail in metal sculpture, she looks alive! The processing was a very nice touch.
Thank you.
If you have the chance to see the excebition somewhere it's worth the trip. We had so much fun and the quality, size and amount of pieces and story behind is very impressive.
If you have the chance to see the excebition somewhere it's worth the trip. We had so much fun and the quality, size and amount of pieces and story behind is very impressive.
Very nice!
Is this exhibition still in Venice? I wanted to visit and see the 18 meter high workpiece.
Also, is there any way to disable the digital distance scale in the viewfinder? It's not very useful to me, and I can't seem to locate a setting. The auto-magnify was cool for about five seconds, so I got rid of that that, and turned off whatever corrections were set to apply digitally. The shot above has vignetting *added* to it, btw.
Jan 14, 2018 at 02:01 AM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Less than 24 hours in, and I have ZERO complaints about this lens. The only other lens I have experience with in this league is the Fujnon XF 35/1.4, and this lens feels very similar to me. Renders in a way which is both modern and classic at the same time, razor sharp wide open. I'm not seeing any issues with softness at close range, except in the cases where I'm missing focus - easy to do at 1.2, which is where this one seems to be stuck at. At least until the weather gets a little warmer and I venture outside.
and also for the wrong lens. But even with a 21 it was difficult to catch him. 
