sorry to ask, but maybe not understanding your fully. so you prefer lox closed 5.6 and CV open? because your photograps closed down they look very similar reagrds
Luvwine wrote:
Here are the crops at F6.3. Loxia is much stronger at F5.6 and smaller than at F2.8 or larger....
hanay78 wrote:
sorry to ask, but maybe not understanding your fully. so you prefer lox closed 5.6 and CV open? because your photograps closed down they look very similar reagrds
To me, CV 50 is better than Loxia 50 at large apertures. When closed down to F5.6 and smaller, they are really too close to matter. They are both fine lenses for landscape. Sorry for being unclear. What I meant was that Loxia’s performance is much stronger F5.6 and smaller compared to larger apertures. The CV is much faster at getting good at infinity—useable at F2.8 and strong at F4.
hanay78 wrote:
I show the blue hour photograph that you posted in the other thread. it was very nice.
What is your opinion about colors and contrast for the cv. better worser... than loxia?
Regards
Well, I need more time, but I think that both are high contrast. Not sure if one is greater than the other but if so, not significantly. I usually prefer the CV colors But shooting raw, there is not much to this and for some scenes the slightly magenta Loxia is preferable. To me, the CV is somewhat more neutral, but again there is not much to it. Pros for the CV include better ergonomics (easier mounting/dismounting and better aperture ring location), speed, and performance/bokeh at wide apertures. Pros for the Loxia include size and price. Other differences include 10 pointed sun stars for Loxia, 12 for CV and that CV is slightly wider, Loxia slightly longer. Both are fine lenses....Show more →
Neurad1 wrote:
How does this lens compare to the 55 1.8? Anyone have any experience with that comparison?
I have both the 55/1.8 and the CV40/1.2 which is very much in line with the output of the 50mm. Completely different rendering, the CV at 1.2-1.4 is a dreamy lens and when stopped down it exhibits amazing landscape performance corner to corner. It has plenty of character and splendid colour. The 55 is a good lens but not special. CV has like zeiss the ingredients for the wow factor.
Bottom line that image above the cow with the fence . You can’t get that look with the 55. The Cv 40 or 50 you can get that all day long. Different design goals.
Of course you can get that with any fast lens, leave alone 55. Its not even a color shot where intangibles come into play. If you are talking about separation, its a close shot and you will get that with even 50/1.8.
Sweeping blankets statements help no one, unless they are delivered with a nice smiley at the end.
nandadevieast wrote:
Of course you can get that with any fast lens, leave alone 55. Its not even a color shot where intangibles come into play. If you are talking about separation, its a close shot and you will get that with even 50/1.8.
Sweeping blankets statements help no one, unless they are delivered with a nice smiley at the end.
There is 27 pages showing how this lens will render and perform. The Sony 50 1.8, the Sony 55 and this CV 50 1.2 have completely different design goals with respect towards separation, bokeh at different subject to camera differences , color , contrast, resolution. Onion rings and bokeh shape . All these things are different. I don’t need to put a smiley on anything after I say it. I test these lenses and there are differences between them. If I can’t make a blanket statement on this testing that is made than honestly do it yourself. I find your comment offensive and disrespectful to all the people that go through all the effort to help people by taking there time and effort and sharing there findings. Seriously your comment is not fair to them and wrong.
nandadevieast wrote:
Of course you can get that with any fast lens, leave alone 55. Its not even a color shot where intangibles come into play. If you are talking about separation, its a close shot and you will get that with even 50/1.8.
Sweeping blankets statements help no one, unless they are delivered with a nice smiley at the end.
Love the irony in your comment. Since your the one making a "sweeping blankets statement"
I get it that they have different design goals. And 55/50 etc can not create the look that this CV can create. But that’s not what i said. Please read again.
I was talking about the picture you referred to. How are Onion rings, bokeh balls etc even relevant when there are none in the picture? Its a b&w shot and of course it can be replicated with any fast lens. I am not offending anyone. Its you who are talking on everyone else’s behalf.
Again, I didn’t say “any” shot can be replicated by “any” lens.
Your sweeping statement was, “that cow shot can’t be replicated by 55”.
Just because you test lenses doesn’t mean you have to be right.
GMPhotography wrote:
There is 27 pages showing how this lens will render and perform. The Sony 50 1.8, the Sony 55 and this CV 50 1.2 have completely different design goals with respect towards separation, bokeh at different subject to camera differences , color , contrast, resolution. Onion rings and bokeh shape . All these things are different. I don’t need to put a smiley on anything after I say it. I test these lenses and there are differences between them. If I can’t make a blanket statement on this testing that is made than honestly do it yourself. I find your comment offensive and disrespectful to all the people that go through all the effort to help people by taking there time and effort and sharing there findings. Seriously your comment is not fair to them and wrong.
GMPhotography wrote:
Bottom line that image above the cow with the fence . You can’t get that look with the 55. The Cv 40 or 50 you can get that all day long. Different design goals.
Above the cow ^^^
And I am always right So challenge me if you don’t think I am . Seriously I’m rarely wrong . I’ve been shooting for decades if there is one thing I know better than anything is the look of a lens
nandadevieast wrote:
I get it that they have different design goals. And 55/50 etc can not create the look that this CV can create. But that’s not what i said. Please read again.
I was talking about the picture you referred to. How are Onion rings, bokeh balls etc even relevant when there are none in the picture? Its a b&w shot and of course it can be replicated with any fast lens. I am not offending anyone. Its you who are talking on everyone else’s behalf.
Again, I didn’t say “any” shot can be replicated by “any” lens.
Your sweeping statement was, “that cow shot can’t be replicated by 55”.
Just because you test lenses doesn’t mean you have to be right.
But Guy is right that the shot that focussed on the barb in the barbed wire fence with the super shallow depth of field and very nice bokeh cannot be replicated by the f/1.8 Sony lenses. You need to read what he wrote. He was not talking about the cow shots.
Exactly you will never get that look with a 55. It would swirl out in the background you would get cats eye bokeh.
No shit I test these lenses I know exactly what they will do and don’t do. Or I would never stick my neck out to be wrong.
I know I’m joking sort of about never being wrong but it is kind of true. I will never give out bad data. It’s a real pet peeve of mine. Yea you may hate me that’s fine but you can always trust what I put my name on.
Of course I will make mistakes. I’m human too but I have no agenda. I can be here or not
reagrds
