Ditto guys! It's a great walk around lens, wonderful focal length that makes me feel like I have 35 and 50mm covered. And the lens is an awesome walk around night lens!
Thanks guys the detail coming off it is amazing. I only stopped down to F10 for DOF reason trying to get the whole thing sharp as there is maybe 2 ft between his face and the simulator and F10 seemed to get both in quite well. I love this lens at F2 as well for those shots. Love to see them update the CV 28 Ultron now to FE mount and work on the FC. Love to see that
For those who have owned both Loxia 35 or CV 40, now you have had time to re-evaluate after the CV40 honeymoon period, do you see anything the CV 40 do that the L35 just cannot? Or are they very similar as a general purpose walkaround lens? Any of you would go back to L35?
I'm constantly debating between the 2. The CV40 is on backorder which give me more time to ponder.
BTW I have 16-35 GM, so 35 is kind of covered but obviously the GM is not a walkaround lens.
gordec wrote:
For those who have owned both Loxia 35 or CV 40, now you have had time to re-evaluate after the CV40 honeymoon period, do you see anything the CV 40 do that the L35 just cannot? Or are they very similar as a general purpose walkaround lens? Any of you would go back to L35?
I'm constantly debating between the 2. The CV40 is on backorder which give me more time to ponder.
BTW I have 16-35 GM, so 35 is kind of covered but obviously the GM is not a walkaround lens.
The CV 40 has 1.2; which gives you the same separation as a 50mm f1.4 but at a wider angle. It's about the separation of a 35mm f1.0, so that's certainly a big benefit of the CV40.
The CV 40 has nicer bokeh than the L35 at f2, and is a little sharper as well at f2.
On the other hand, I marginally prefer the contrast and 'zing' of L35 stopped right down (despite the annoying aperture reflection that the CV doesn't have in extreme conditions.)
I somewhat indulgently have both. If I had to chose I'd probably go the CV, so long as I had some way for getting 35 in either a prime or a quality zoom. But in the end it comes down to what you want. If it's a manual focus environmental portrait kind of lens you want, the L35 really is not a good choice, and the CV is an excellent one (though of course it has various oddities due to it's small for f1.2 design - this is no Otus) If it's a landscape lens you want, it's a much harder choice, and I might go L35. But the CV can do both, and the Loxia struggles on the other side of things.
Anyone know how this 40/1.2 compares with the CV 35/1.2 II VM? I've been browsing through the "F/1.2 or faster", shots, and am impressed every time it shows up. I know it isn't in FE mount yet, but the way Cosina are adding these, maybe it, (and the 50/1.1?), may show up in the not too distant future.
I'm happy with both my MC 58/1.2 and OM Z 50/1.2, so the 40/1.2 is a bit close fl, (though I agree, its bokeh is lovely and smooth.)
I own a A7rII and a M typ 240, so still on the fence as to which mount to buy, but here is Steve’s latest comparisons between the 2mounts Incase people haven’t seen it yet...
I was going to order the LE version today and now I'm in a quandry :-(
Personally, I'm not too worried about EXIF data. The auto focus magnify is not an issue as I have assigned a button on my a772 to focus magnify and it works great on all my other classic lenses.
Apart fro the fact that i probably need therapy, can anyone shed light on this for me?
I was going to order the LE version today and now I'm in a quandry :-(
Personally, I'm not too worried about EXIF data. The auto focus magnify is not an issue as I have assigned a button on my a772 to focus magnify and it works great on all my other classic lenses.
Apart fro the fact that i probably need therapy, can anyone shed light on this for me?
Thanks
For the Sony body, the native E-mount will be better since it's optimized for the correct sensor stack thickness.
VM version sharper on Sony...doubt it. On the contrary, it will be softer towards the corners due to induced field curvature.
Better colors...doubt it (same optical design and coating)
Lighter / smaller...yes for the Leica body. Once you start adding the adapter, the difference is very small.
If the reviewer believes this is the case, I'm pretty sure it's due to copy variation than anything else.
Fred Miranda wrote:
For the Sony body, the native E-mount will be better since it's optimized for the correct sensor stack thickness.
VM version sharper on Sony...doubt it. On the contrary, it will be softer towards the corners due to induced field curvature.
Better colors...doubt it (same optical design and coating)
Lighter / smaller...yes for the Leica body. Once you start adding the adapter, the difference is very small.
If the reviewer believes this is the case, I'm pretty sure it's due to copy variation than anything else.
I looked at Huff’s samples, and there is something weird going on.
he says the bokeh is better on the M mount version (on M) and it does appear to have less backwards FC, reducing the tendency for the background to get sharper at the periphery.
But the difference is very large, which I simply don’t believe, so something funny is going on.
Also his colour differences are about LoCA: the Sony version has green fringing. The M version has a great desaturated halo of the kind that is a giveaway for over correction in software. I doubt if the M does LoCA correction by default or at all, so........
Just pulled the trigger on the VM Mount so will know for myself soon enough.
Agree with Fred’s assessment above that the performance moving toward the edges will more than likely suffer. I’m personally willing to sacrifice some performance in this regard in exchange for TAP-ability. Time will tell how much loss.
DavidBM wrote:
I looked at Huff’s samples, and there is something weird going on.
he says the bokeh is better on the M mount version (on M) and it does appear to have less backwards FC, reducing the tendency for the background to get sharper at the periphery.
But the difference is very large, which I simply don’t believe, so something funny is going on.
Also his colour differences are about LoCA: the Sony version has green fringing. The M version has a great desaturated halo of the kind that is a giveaway for over correction in software. I doubt if the M does LoCA correction by default or at all, so...........Show more →
I hope no one gets offended now, but Huff is a dork. He has no idea of what he's talking about.
