imagesfromobjects wrote:
Info and samples are still pretty sparse, but if you scroll back through this thread there is at least one person using the M version with a TAP. I'm interested too, because my FE mount absolutely smokes anything I've ever used at maximum aperture, so it would be worth looking into an M mount for the future.
There's also currently a difference of AU$400 (~US320) between the two (at least at one Australian retailer), so that comes into play for me too.
zaphodm wrote:
Thank you, Jonas! This thread, though I have read much of the 61 pages, is a tricky one to keep straight in your head at times (or remember exactly where things are).
Oh, you are welcome. I happened to remember the comparisons SharpContrast made as I found them interesting.
If you can get used to focus manually I strongly recommend the FE-mount version. If you plan to buy a Leica camera at some point it's another thing but with a Sony you'll get sharper and better looking images with the FE version of the lens.
Jonas B wrote:
Oh, you are welcome. I happened to remember the comparisons SharpContrast made as I found them interesting.
If you can get used to focus manually I strongly recommend the FE-mount version.
Most of the time I'm happy to manual focus (started on a K1000, so it's not foreign to me). Sometimes I just need to be able to point and shoot (kids/action/etc), and it's nice to be able to give the camera to someone else and have them just be able to click and get the shot. Manual lenses on the TAP seem to hit my sweet spot.
but with a Sony you'll get sharper and better looking images with the FE version of the lens.
Yep, 100%. It's just whether they are betterer *enough* to justify losing AF ability and an extra $400 (price difference specific to this date and market, it'll be different in different places). Or worserer enough to look elsewhere.
Jan 20, 2018 at 10:57 AM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
zaphodm wrote:
Most of the time I'm happy to manual focus (started on a K1000, so it's not foreign to me). Sometimes I just need to be able to point and shoot (kids/action/etc), and it's nice to be able to give the camera to someone else and have them just be able to click and get the shot. Manual lenses on the TAP seem to hit my sweet spot.
Yep, 100%. It's just whether they are betterer *enough* to justify losing AF ability and an extra $400 (price difference specific to this date and market, it'll be different in different places). Or worserer enough to look elsewhere....Show more →
I've used a couple lenses which are sharp wide open, specifically a Fuji XF35 f/1.4. This Voigtlander is easily as sharp - at least in the center, where it counts - if not sharper than the Fuji. It could take a minor hit by using the "un-optimized" M version and still be fantastic, which is why I'm curious. The dog shot above is wide open, for instance. I can't speak to charts, but for my usage, it could be just fine. YMMV of course.
Thanks for a lot of nice images from everyone. I'm considering to replace my Loxia 35 and Loxia 50 with this one. Is it as good as those stopped down to f5.6 - f8? I'm trying to slim down my bag a little:-)
A question to owners of this lens and the Sony Zeiss Planar 50mm 1.4. The images of both candidates look quite comparable concerning contrast, color, sharpness and Pop. Can somebody confirm my feeling? Thanks in advance!
Mirror wrote:
A question to owners of this lens and the Sony Zeiss Planar 50mm 1.4. The images of both candidates look quite comparable concerning contrast, color, sharpness and Pop. Can somebody confirm my feeling? Thanks in advance!
To me it feels like the Sony FE 50/1.4 ZA has more punch/pop and sharpness, I actually prefer the rendering, BUT it is way too big and heavy to walk around with IMO. The lenses have different design briefs/purposes IMO. The Voigtlander is faster, lighter and wider, and makes a much better one-lens only travel package on a A7.
I loved the 50 1.4 for all its optical qualities. Really maybe there most balanced lenses you can buy for your Sony. It’s technically perfect. But I’m not a 50mm shooter so this 40 1.2 is better for me and if you stop it down to F2/2.8 it’s really nice. Even stopped down it’s a great landscape lens. This is a keeper lens for me and it’s my lens cap lens and everything is built up around it. Ideally 15,25,40,65,135 is a killer prime kit.
I ended up sending the 40mm 1.2 back. My 40mm f2 Ultron gets me most of the way to it's image with far less weight. Couldn't justify the cost of keeping both so I kept the f2. Will hopefully buy the 1.2 in the future when I have the extra cash.
My non-scientific, 2nd-day testing reveals:
No extra issues with this lens as compared to the examples from the FE version here. At all.
My standards may be different to yours, but … Edges stopped down are great. Resolution is great. Can't see any colour cast issues (currently using the built-in LR profile 'Voigtlander NOKTON 40mm f/1.2 Aspherical', which I think is the FE version).
Works beautifully on the Techart Pro, which also reduces the minimum focus distance to around 40cm.
Seems built like a tank, ergonomics feel just right, if very-slightly front heavy balance-wise. For under $1K, I couldn't be happier.
For my purposes...walk-around and photojournalism...the VM is great. The weight/size/AF (on TAP) was the reason I purchased the m-mount.
I haven't used the lens other than at 1.2, so I can't give edge-to-edge sharpness details. But at 1.2, the lens is far sharper than any of the Canon EF lenses I have and the colors are also preferred.
With my A7R3, I've carried around this combo more in the last week than I did with my Canon 5D and 35/1.4 combo in the past 2 years because of its size and function.
Id love to see more samples from people using the M mount on Sony. Whenever I win the lottery I'm buying a 35mm Leica, so it would be nice to have a cross-system option. I like the size.
Don't get me wrong, I'm 10,000% in love with this lens, just considering swapping it out for an M in the future.
