Also, the lens already focuses closer in the E version than the M. And it focuses close enough that performance at MFD is noticeably worse. If you create more extension with a close focus adapter or tubes performance won’t be good. If you really need to get closer than the E MFD a strong achromatic diopter would work a bit better.
I agree, it's not optimum. The issue with the VM version on the Sony body will be induced field curvature and that's never a good thing. Here is a comparison posted on this thread: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1512530/39#14265772
Honestly I would not consider the M version for any reason at all unless I had a Leica body and a Sony body which I don’t so the E version is it. Besides that the E version is just too good on the Sony bodies.
I registered to FM because of this very intriguing lens.
I'm having hard time deciding between a Sony A7RII + Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 or a Sony RX1RII. Both cameras can now be found at a good price these days, at least in used condition. I want to complement both my Nikon D600 that I primarily use for studio work and my Ricoh GRII that I use for my B&W street photography. I want something that I can use for cases when I need better subject isolation.
The RX1RII sensor+lens combo seems fantastic both on size and quality although the lens is not super fast and the lack of IBIS might be limiting its use under low light, although the RX1RII seems to handle high ISO quite nicely. On the other hand the A7RII offers tons of options for the lens and provides many features that makes it more future proof. I initially considered the Sony 55mm f1.8 but have since settled on the the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 which seems very appealing for its size and aperture, and thus even if its only manual. There are not a lot of reviews and pictures for this manual lens but this thread really has some nice shots.
So overall I love the portability and quality of the RX1RII but on the other hand I love the creative options brought by the A7RII+40mm 1.2.
What are your thoughts?
alphazo wrote:
I registered to FM because of this very intriguing lens.
I'm having hard time deciding between a Sony A7RII + Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 or a Sony RX1RII. Both cameras can now be found at a good price these days, at least in used condition. I want to complement both my Nikon D600 that I primarily use for studio work and my Ricoh GRII that I use for my B&W street photography. I want something that I can use for cases when I need better subject isolation.
The RX1RII sensor+lens combo seems fantastic both on size and quality although the lens is not super fast and the lack of IBIS might be limiting its use under low light, although the RX1RII seems to handle high ISO quite nicely. On the other hand the A7RII offers tons of options for the lens and provides many features that makes it more future proof. I initially considered the Sony 55mm f1.8 but have since settled on the the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 which seems very appealing for its size and aperture, and thus even if its only manual. There are not a lot of reviews and pictures for this manual lens but this thread really has some nice shots.
So overall I love the portability and quality of the RX1RII but on the other hand I love the creative options brought by the A7RII+40mm 1.2.
What are your thoughts?...Show more →
The A7RII plus 40/1.2 will give you more subject isolation than the slower 35mm will, I suspect. However, the main advantage of this combo to me is the flexibility to try more lenses over time. Unless you want to be married to one lens, I would get the A7RII.
Luvwine wrote:
The A7RII plus 40/1.2 will give you more subject isolation than the slower 35mm will, I suspect. However, the main advantage of this combo to me is the flexibility to try more lenses over time. Unless you want to be married to one lens, I would get the A7RII.
Thanks for your comments. Besides the pure out of focus rendering, what about the famous 3D pop that both lenses seem to exhibit?
alphazo wrote:
I registered to FM because of this very intriguing lens.
I'm having hard time deciding between a Sony A7RII + Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 or a Sony RX1RII. Both cameras can now be found at a good price these days, at least in used condition. I want to complement both my Nikon D600 that I primarily use for studio work and my Ricoh GRII that I use for my B&W street photography. I want something that I can use for cases when I need better subject isolation.
The RX1RII sensor+lens combo seems fantastic both on size and quality although the lens is not super fast and the lack of IBIS might be limiting its use under low light, although the RX1RII seems to handle high ISO quite nicely. On the other hand the A7RII offers tons of options for the lens and provides many features that makes it more future proof. I initially considered the Sony 55mm f1.8 but have since settled on the the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 which seems very appealing for its size and aperture, and thus even if its only manual. There are not a lot of reviews and pictures for this manual lens but this thread really has some nice shots.
So overall I love the portability and quality of the RX1RII but on the other hand I love the creative options brought by the A7RII+40mm 1.2.
What are your thoughts?...Show more →
It really depends whether you are absolutely sure you don’t want to experiment with other Sony mount lenses.
In your shoes I’d be very tempted to do that - I’d suspect that one day my studio work might go mirrorless.
But if you really are sure it’s all about whether the speed of the cv is worth the extra bulk of the system. I love the cv, but if I was sure I wanted only one lens I’d likely get the RX1RII. It renders very beautifully at f2 and it’s form factor is so small for what it is, and clearly you are someone comfortable with small form factors since you use the grii
DavidBM wrote:
It really depends whether you are absolutely sure you don’t want to experiment with other Sony mount lenses.
In your shoes I’d be very tempted to do that - I’d suspect that one day my studio work might go mirrorless.
The risk is that I get rid of my Nikon gear and go Sony for studio as well.
DavidBM wrote:
But if you really are sure it’s all about whether the speed of the cv is worth the extra bulk of the system. I love the cv, but if I was sure I wanted only one lens I’d likely get the RX1RII. It renders very beautifully at f2 and it’s form factor is so small for what it is, and clearly you are someone comfortable with small form factors since you use the grii
You nailed it down! I'm scared that its bulkiness makes its looks like too close to a DSLR so in the end it stays on the shelf more than expected.
Sorry to the readers for hijacking the thread regarding those two cameras. I'm just trying to find arguments to help in my decision process. My feeling is that this CV 40mm 1.2 has a unique positioning since it can isolate subjects similar to what a longer lens would provide but with a relatively wider 40mm FoV.
saxguy wrote:
If you didn't have a lens in the 35-40 range, assuming size wasn't an issue, would you choose the 40 1.2 or the Distagon 35 1.4 ZA?
I have the A7r iii and I'm torn between the two.
I have the a7r2 with the Distagon 35 1.4 ZA and love this lens. I am buying the CV 40/1.2. I love shooting manually and the size / weight difference makes the 40/1.2 a very interesting everyday lens. I'm also very intrigued by other members discussing the 40mm Focal length covering 35mm and 50mm.
I figure it the problem. The Sony app was set to download only a 2 megapixel version. Of these files. So they are very small files. In capture one they are relatively sharp.
nampramos wrote:
Andrew, aren't 3 of those 4 images out of focus?
AndrewNYC wrote:
I figure it the problem. The Sony app was set to download only a 2 megapixel version. Of these files. So they are very small files. In capture one they are relatively sharp.
I don't think that is the problem. We see much less than 2mp and it is already unsharp. More pixels won't help here.
antst wrote:
Comparing them is like comparing apples and oranges. They belong, IMHO, to a different categories, despite of their close focal length and speed.
antst wrote:
Can somebody comment on center sharpness of CV 40/1.2 vs CV 40/1.4 at f/1.4 ?
It was I long time ago, but IIRC the 40/1.4 is pretty sharp in the middle wide open. But, it has quite a lot of spherical aberration that lowers contrast and acutance. Also, don't forget that the new Nokton is a tad soft at close range. They are very different lenses.
The worst thing with the 40/1.4 is wavy field curvature, that makes a hell of a "midzone dip". And it doesn't go away even at f/5.6-8. The bokeh is nice from f/2 but nervous wide open. Not worse than similar classic lenses though.
BastianK wrote:
I don't think that is the problem. We see much less than 2mp and it is already unsharp. More pixels won't help here.
Then I don't know what it is. They are perfectly sharp in raw format in both C1 and LR. I think that the way the play mobile app processes them screwed them up. They look even worse here than they do in the app. Trying to post another from C1
Took the 40/1.2 for its first workout this morning. I went into it hoping it'd either replace the Loxia 35/50 like it has for others, or it would be good but not compelling enough to dump the Loxia lineup. My take away is that I really want both... To me the Loxia have a better smoothness to their rendering. The CV is much more harsh. That's not a criticism, I felt the same way about the 35/1.2, 40/1.4 and 35/1.7, and I like it a lot, but it's different enough that I see a place for both. My budget might not, but my eye does.
Anyway, f/1.2 being pretty good at distances opens up some different looks and 40mm is a nice focal length. Certainly going to be exploring this lens more...
AndrewNYC wrote:
Then I don't know what it is. They are perfectly sharp in raw format in both C1 and LR. I think that the way the play mobile app processes them screwed them up. They look even worse here than they do in the app. Trying to post another from C1
As I wrote it earlier in this thread: If you shoot RAW only (not RAW + JPG) the JPGs you'll get over the playmemories app are very small AND of bad quality. File size will be 1616x1080 and your posted shots have the same size. Therefore the issue is not the transfer size but the image quality settings in your camera.
Solution: Just shoot RAW+JPG if you want to use higher res over playmemories app.
Took the 40/1.2 for its first workout this morning. I went into it hoping it'd either replace the Loxia 35/50 like it has for others, or it would be good but not compelling enough to dump the Loxia lineup. My take away is that I really want both... To me the Loxia have a better smoothness to their rendering. The CV is much more harsh. That's not a criticism, I felt the same way about the 35/1.2, 40/1.4 and 35/1.7, and I like it a lot, but it's different enough that I see a place for both. My budget might not, but my eye does.
Anyway, f/1.2 being pretty good at distances opens up some different looks and 40mm is a nice focal length. Certainly going to be exploring this lens more......Show more →
Did you sharpen a lot you photos in post-processing?
Used my normal web process which does include some sharpening, but to my eye I need to dial it back a bit, but it's a pain to re-record the action so I've been lazy. That said, this lens has plenty of default sharpness in the center. Unsharpened crops below.
Edit: realized I slightly backfocused the owl, look to the outsides of his eyes and you can better see the sharpness.
antst wrote:
Did you sharpen a lot you photos in post-processing?
