robsonj wrote:
0 degrees f. Does that mean nothing is cooking on the egg!!
Man I wish. Thing is amazing no question about it. Seriously I can go to the best steakhouse here in town and spend 65 bucks for a steak and I will kill it on this thing
GMPhotography wrote:
Man I wish. Thing is amazing no question about it. Seriously I can go to the best steakhouse here in town and spend 65 bucks for a steak and I will kill it on this thing
Yea, they're great. We've had ours for about 10 years now, can even cook out in the dead of winter here in IL and it'll maintain a constant temperature for hours, and they last forever with some very basic maint.
Lets go back to the Green egg shots with Bokeh Balls. Im seeing at the 1.2 settings in the balls themselves a slight CA type look but at F2 I dont. Is this the cause of CA itself even inside the bokeh balls
GMPhotography wrote:
Lets go back to the Green egg shots with Bokeh Balls. Im seeing at the 1.2 settings in the balls themselves a slight CA type look but at F2 I dont. Is this the cause of CA itself even inside the bokeh balls
The green outline on the specular highlights look like classic Longitudinal CA to me.
I actually like this better over the 40mm. I have yet to prove any of this and it seems to me the 40mm is a bit funkier at 1.2 than what Im seeing here in regards to bokeh at different distances. Not sure, maybe my imagination or memory which is always in question.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The green outline on the specular highlights look like classic Longitudinal CA to me.
Okay thanks Fred you see it as well. Quite interesting effect it has
Obviously up against the Loxia its not the prime candidate for landscape type work and for me not why I bought it but more people type lens but have to say outside the corners this is looking very nice indeed. Im working on buying a Loxia 35 for landscape/travel right now, so than I would have CV 15 and 3 count them 3 Loxia lenses for that 25,35,85
GMPhotography wrote:
Okay thanks Fred you see it as well. Quite interesting effect it has
Obviously up against the Loxia its not the prime candidate for landscape type work and for me not why I bought it but more people type lens but have to say outside the corners this is looking very nice indeed. Im working on buying a Loxia 35 for landscape/travel right now, so than I would have CV 15 and 3 count them 3 Loxia lenses for that 25,35,85
I can see a lot of folks using the CV 50/1.2 for landscapes as it's actually amazing at f/8. (Even the very corners are great and similar to what we get with the 40/1.2 E-mount)
Did you see that contrast in the crops? Yes, the Loxia is better at the very edges but this usually is not noticeable in real world images.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I can see a lot of folks using the CV 50/1.2 for landscapes as it's actually amazing at f/8. (Even the very corners are great and similar to what we get with the 40/1.2 E-mount)
Did you see that contrast in the crops? Yes, the Loxia is better at the very edges but this usually is not noticeable in real world images.
I know half the time you either get dirt in the corners or sky. Sometimes corners mean very little. Yes we test like crazy for it and we are both OCD about it but the reality is sometimes it just dont matter.
Well more images need to be taken from me for sure. I promise to catch up. Fred fine job here my friend
The really good news for me is I sold my precious 40mm and it really worried me a great deal doing this one pretty much sight unseen. I just guessed well and Fred is proving it
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Just got mine in this morning and took a little stroll before brunch--lovely lens, just like my sold 40 VM, but a hair bigger and a better FL
Now they just needs to make a fast compact 28...
edit: for those curious, I find the 50 VM slightly more finicky to focus than the 40 VM, but still very doable without magnification.
They do offer a pretty compact and sharp f2 28mm Ultron. I haven't used it on my Sony's, but its excellent on the Leica, very reasonably priced also.
robsonj wrote:
They do offer a pretty compact and sharp f2 28mm Ultron. I haven't used it on my Sony's, but its excellent on the Leica, very reasonably priced also.
I have one While a great little lens, it’s a wide and pretty crippled by the Sony sensory stack. It also does not have the gorgeous rendering of the CV 40 and 50 1.2’s. Below are some 28 f2 photos.
Sep 14, 2018 at 08:05 PM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Had that lens, regret letting it go. Hoping that in the future, we'll see the E Mount Optimized version. Btw, I never thought the corners were *terrible*, and really loved the rendering. Natural, but rich tones. Let it go because 28 was too close to 40 to keep both.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I have one While a great little lens, it’s a wide and pretty crippled by the Sony sensory stack. It also does not have the gorgeous rendering of the CV 40 and 50 1.2’s. Below are some 28 f2 photos.
imagesfromobjects wrote:
Had that lens, regret letting it go. Hoping that in the future, we'll see the E Mount Optimized version. Btw, I never thought the corners were *terrible*, and really loved the rendering. Natural, but rich tones. Let it go because 28 was too close to 40 to keep both.
That’s a nice photo—subtle rendering is right. It does have a lovely draw. I let go of the 40 but kept the 28.
Interesting that they have a 12 blade aperture in both the 35 and 50, but 10 in the 40. I just noticed the 12 blade in the 35 from some shots this morning...
imagesfromobjects wrote:
Had that lens, regret letting it go. Hoping that in the future, we'll see the E Mount Optimized version. Btw, I never thought the corners were *terrible*, and really loved the rendering. Natural, but rich tones. Let it go because 28 was too close to 40 to keep both.
A pretty excellent photo, though I generally like your perspective and processing anyway, but if that was on the Sony, it looks pretty good as a candid photo lens. Might have to try it on my Sony.
Very interesting comparison the CV 1.2 40 versus the CV 1.2 50. Thanks Fred!!!
Based on your comparison Fred it seems to me that the CV 1.2 40 has a significantly higher resolving power than the CV 1.2 50 because the CV 1.2 40 shows the same details as the CV 1.2 50 - in the corners even more details... As the CV 1.2 40 has a wider field of view the CV 1.2 40 should show less details than the CV 1.2 50!!!
Would be interesting to see a comparison of the two lenses showing the same frame, meaning going closer to the target with the CV 1.2 40 than with the CV 1.2 50 till the frame matches. Something like a bronco test. My speculation is, the CV 40 would do better also having more Megapixels for each picture at each aperture.
!
While a great little lens, it’s a wide and pretty crippled by the Sony sensory stack. It also does not have the gorgeous rendering of the CV 40 and 50 1.2’s. Below are some 28 f2 photos.
