Software: Lightroom with FM Default Landscape Sharpening. All other settings set to default
PS: Vignetting and distortion were NOT corrected
Center Infinity Resolution/contrast comparison between CV 50mm f/1.2 SE vs CV 50mm f/2 APO
Center at f/2: Here the CV 50/2 APO is wide open. Both lenses are similar but the CV 50/1.2 SE is slightly sharper
Center at f/2.8: Perhaps optimal for both lenses at center. It's incredible tha the CV 50/2 APO does not improve much at f/2.8. The CV 50/1.2 SE still slightly ahead in resolution/contrast
Center at f/4: Not much changes and the CV 50/1.2 SE is still slightly ahead
Center at f/5.6: Not much changes from f/4
Center at f/8: Both lenses lose some bite. Diffraction starts to become more noticeable. Still great performance for both lenses though
Mid-Field Infinity Resolution/contrast comparison between CV 50mm f/1.2 SE vs CV 50mm f/2 APO
Mid-field at f/2: The CV 50/1.2 SE is soft compared to the CV 50/2 APO, which appears to be as good as center from wide open
Mid-field at f/2.8: Noticeable improvement for the CV 50/1.2 SE. The 50/2 APO improves very slightly (f/2.8 is it's optimal aperture for the mid-field)
Mid-field at f/4: Another big jump for the CV 50/1.2 SE at f/4 (optimal aperture for the mid-field). It's almost as good as the APO
Mid-field at f/5.6: Nothing changes much. Both lenses were already optimal at smaller apertures
Extreme Corner Infinity Resolution/contrast comparison between CV 50mm f/1.2 SE vs CV 50mm f/2 APO
Extreme corner at f/2: Outstanding performance for the CV 50/2 APO which is not much different from center and mid-field. There is some astigmatism and lateral CA for the CV 50/1.2 SE but it's still a good performance.
Extreme corner at f/2.8: Nice jump for the CV 50/1.2 SE. The CV 50/2 APO improves very slightly. It's amazing how consistent the CV 50/2 APO is across the field at all apertures!
Extreme corner at f/4: Slight improvement for the CV 50/1.2 SE where it's optimal at the extreme corners
Extreme corner at f/5.6: Not much changes for both lenses at f/5.6
My summary for the CV 50/1.2 SE vs CV 50/2 APO comparison:
They are both superb lenses with unique design goals. In one hand we have a super fast and compact 50mm f/1.2, optimized for mid/long distance, performing great across the entire image field at f/4. ( f/2.8 not far behind). Because of its speed and compactness, spherical and color aberrations are not as well corrected as the APO.
On the other hand we have the Voigtlander 50mm f/2 APO, which I consider one of the best 50mm in the market. It's incredibly consistent across the field at all apertures. You can see from the crops that nothing much changes in terms of resolution and contrast as we inspect 1:1 crops from center to corners at any aperture!
It's worth noting that the CV 50/1.2 SE surprisingly performs slightly better at center compared to the 50/2 APO. This is only true for the dead center area though. As we move a tiny bit off-axis, the CV 50/2 APO gets progressively better and the CV 50/1.2 SE never quite catches up to it.
Perhaps we should consider them lenses optimized for different applications. The CV 50/2 APO is pretty much aberration free with no focus shift, very low field curvature and extremely high resolution across the field. Perfect lens for landscapes/architecture.
The CV 50/1.2 SE does not perform as well at close distances (<1.5m) since it lacks a floating element group, has a high level of axial CA wide open and some field curvature + focus shift but it is capable of butter smooth rendering and incredible subject isolation. Great for portraits (environment or close-ups), street or as a general normal lens for any type of lighting. Starting at f/4, I would not hesitate using it as a landscape lenses as well.
This won't be a full review since the Voigtlander 50/1.2 "SE" shares the same optical design as the previous heavier CV 50/1.2 Nokton.
The "SE" version stands for Still Edition and lacks the de-clicking mechanism. Personally I do not care for the new focusing ring style but I do appreciate the weight savings. It's a 50mm f/1.2, slightly shorter than the CV 50/2 APO while weighting only an extra 20 grams. They are practically the same weight and size and great options for those seeking a 50mm for their Sony E-mount.
Fred Miranda wrote: Extreme Corner Infinity Resolution/contrast comparison between CV 50mm f/1.2 SE vs CV 50mm f/3.5 Heliar
Huh! So very roughly speaking, ignoring tiny differences, the same centrally, Nokton noticeably better midfield, Heliar significantly better in the extreme corner.
You'd need to really care about compactness, and not about speed, to take the Heliar if you could only have one, since performance is swings and roundabouts.
DavidBM wrote:
Huh! So very roughly speaking, ignoring tiny differences, the same centrally, Nokton noticeably better midfield, Heliar significantly better in the extreme corner.
You'd need to really care about compactness, and not about speed, to take the Heliar if you could only have one, since performance is swings and roundabouts.
I think the CV 50/1.2 Nokton pretty much wins everywhere in the field at f/4. Perhaps it lags slightly at the very corners but basically similar performance there too. It was never a fair comparison to begin with since the Heliar is pretty much wide open at f/4 while the Nokton is stopped down considerably. F/4 is also the optimal aperture off-axis for the 50/1.2.
The Heliar is definitely more compact but with adapter, it's not much shorter than the 50/1.2 SE Nokton. I think only ~5mm shorter and about 100g lighter. At the end of the day, I think the CV 50/1.2 is way more versatile and I'm actually loving the images it produces. I find its rendering the best of the Voigtlander f/1.2 Nokton lenses with a smoother transition zone and better bokeh imo.
Curiously, the infinity hard stop gives me precise infinity on this copy. It's also the best copy of the 50/1.2 I've tested so far with perfect asymmetry and outstanding sharpness at long distance. There is a very small focus shift from f/1.2 to f/2 which is even visible at infinity at center but it's nothing to worry about.
I should get my CV 50/1.2 VM copy in a couple days and I will compare it to this E-mount version on the Sony. If they perform similarly I may keep the VM and use it on both Sony and Leica.
The question is: Should one get the CV 50/2 APO or CV 50/1.2 SE Nokton? They are both outstanding for what they were designed for and pretty much the same size and weight. I think the differential may be CA correction vs speed.
I do really love my nokton 50mm, but with the enthousiasm around the apo, I often asked to myself, would I get sharper or crispier results with it at around f4? Even if I am always happy with the lens I have!
But now I have the answer, I will probably keep my nokton as long as I have a sony camera! really happy so see how well it compares to the apo
Recently I made a sharpness comparison between my nokton and the Sigma 40mm art. Even at 5.6 the sigma looked significantly sharper on the borders. Plus the Sigma looks even better corrected than the apo, it would be fun to compare them, even if there is a difference in FL and in weight!!
Lenstip, a polish testing site has CV 50/1.2 as hitting the highest resolution that they ever tested. Higher than APO 65. At F4. This is what they say:
“The resolution test (resolution meaning MTF50 function value) of the Voigtlander 50 mm f/1.2 Aspherical was based on RAW files from the Sony A7R II. In the case of that mirrorless camera the decency level we set about 39-41 lpmm and some of the best fixed-focal lenses have been able to exceed 70 lpmm; so far the Samyang AF 85 mm f/1.4 FE (76.5 lpmm) and the Voigtlander Apo-Lanthar 65 mm f/2 Aspherical 1:2 Macro (78.5 lpmm) have fared the best in our tests....
I haven't seen such an interesting graph for a very long time. In the frame centre, by f/1.2 and f/1.4, it would be difficult to call images useful because they are fuzzy. Near f/1.6 the situation becomes quite sensible, by f/2.0 it is already good, by f/2.8 it is excellent and by f/4.0 it can be called outstanding – so outstanding that the Nokton 1.2/50, with a result of 78.6 lpmm is our new record-breaker. Now the situation is such that two best results (and almost identical to boot) on the full frame sensor of the Sony A7RII belog to two Voigtlander lenses.”
What’s the weight difference between older and the newer SE?
I had 40 but sold that to buy 50 because i like 50 more than 40 for portraits...they are quite a bit different in background blur but you can achieve the same framing with a 50 also.
hesb wrote:
Actually, I don't know why there is about 2xx pages on the 40 1.2 thread and only 2 on the 50mm 1.2... I've had both and much prefer the 50mm!
Fred Miranda wrote:
The question is: Should one get the CV 50/2 APO or CV 50/1.2 SE Nokton? They are both outstanding for what they were designed for and pretty much the same size and weight. I think the differential may be CA correction vs speed.
I thought that Philip Reeve's review of the CV 50/2 APO was very helpful, particularly his conclusion that:
"So the Voigtlander 2/50 APO is an outstanding lens but should you buy it? In my experience buying a lens just because it is a great performer is usually bad advice.
If you are in the lucky position that spending a little over $1k on a 2/50 won’t cause you any financial stress go for it: You will enjoy handling it. You will also enjoy the images you take with it and you can be certain that there is no better for some applications applications. For example for landscape photography where speed isn’t important but sharpness, contrast, flare resistance and sunstars clearly make the AL 2/50 best in class and the images you take with it on a high resolution camera will hold up to gigantic enlargement.
But if you are in the more typical situation that this amount of money is a big investment to you I can only advise to not be blinded by the Voigtlander’s technical perfection. Other lenses give in my eyes nicer images for a wider range of uses. Take for example Voigtlander’s own 1.2/50 which is close in price and size but offers 1.5 stops more and also nicer bokeh. Sure the 2/50 AL is a lot better corrected but at the typical enlargements I find aberrations to be hardly ever an issue while speed and bokeh are easily visible in most images."
nandadevieast wrote:
Lenstip, a polish testing site has CV 50/1.2 as hitting the highest resolution that they ever tested. Higher than APO 65. At F4. This is what they say:
“The resolution test (resolution meaning MTF50 function value) of the Voigtlander 50 mm f/1.2 Aspherical was based on RAW files from the Sony A7R II. In the case of that mirrorless camera the decency level we set about 39-41 lpmm and some of the best fixed-focal lenses have been able to exceed 70 lpmm; so far the Samyang AF 85 mm f/1.4 FE (76.5 lpmm) and the Voigtlander Apo-Lanthar 65 mm f/2 Aspherical 1:2 Macro (78.5 lpmm) have fared the best in our tests....
I haven't seen such an interesting graph for a very long time. In the frame centre, by f/1.2 and f/1.4, it would be difficult to call images useful because they are fuzzy. Near f/1.6 the situation becomes quite sensible, by f/2.0 it is already good, by f/2.8 it is excellent and by f/4.0 it can be called outstanding – so outstanding that the Nokton 1.2/50, with a result of 78.6 lpmm is our new record-breaker. Now the situation is such that two best results (and almost identical to boot) on the full frame sensor of the Sony A7RII belog to two Voigtlander lenses.”...Show more →
My testing copy of the Voigtlander 50/1.2 SE is just superb. From my previous tests, the 50mm resolution king at center has been the FE 50/1.4 ZA but the CV 50/1.2 SE performs similarly when both are set to f/2. It's a great performer.
What’s the weight difference between older and the newer SE?
Both models should perform the same. Exactly same design but as you know these fast lenses have some variation. I've tested the 50/1.2 E-mount (classic version) and it did not perform like this one even though it was centered. I'm getting the CV 50/1.2 VM version and will test it on the Sony (via adapter) and Leica.
Two pictures taken with the nokton at f5.6. I love the contrast and micro contrast this lens brings, which helps a lot in post. Not so much to ajust when everything is already here!
Mid-Field Infinity Resolution/contrast comparison between CV 50mm f/1.2 SE vs CV 50mm f/1.2 VM + adapter on Sony
Mid-field at f/2: At mid-field we can see the effect of the thicker sensor stack for the Sony and how it affect field curvature. The SE version is definitely tweaked for the Sony sensor.
Mid-field at f/2.8: Both lenses improve while the 'induced field curvature' for the VM version diminishes as DOF gets broader
Mid-field at f/4: As we posted before f/4 is the optimal aperture for the SE's mid-field. The VM version is still about 1 stop behind.
Mid-field at f/5.6: At f/5.6, both lenses perform similarly
Mid-field at f/8: Same as f/5.6 but diffraction sets in for both lenses
really happy so see how well it compares to the apo
