I think the flare is inherent in the lens design rather than the silver ring. The ZM50/2 has the same silver ring and I don't recall getting that kind of flare with it, but can instead provoke veiling flare. FWIW, I dislike that silver ring found on some Voigtlander and all of the Zeiss ZM lenses; it causes reflection problems if you need to shoot through glass, such as a window. Guy is correct that a simple fix is to screw in a black step ring or empty filter ring.
GMPhotography wrote:
Just a reminder since we are dealing with a F1.2 lens and doing a lot of testing there we need to be making sure we have EFSC off. Myself I just shoot all this in electronic mode instead of mechnical. My worry is some of this CA we are seeing could also be affected by EFSC given the effect that does wide open
robsonj wrote:
I’ve been shooting on an M, definitely CA wide open, to be expected though I’d say at 1.2 on a $899 lens
This is also a 'problem' with their 50/1.5 based on my experience with one years ago. The 50 Lux ASPH is significantly better in this respect, but at a considerably higher price. As for $899.... seems the early birds got lucky seeing as how it's gone up nearly 20% overnight. I really dislike it when distributors do this and have lost some interest in the lens as a result. Sure, it's still a great performer, etc., etc... maybe that's why the price went up - the sudden demand?
I'd like to see Voigtlander continue the trend seen in the 40 and 50/1.2s with an 85/2 with similar rendering and sharpness characteristics. In VM mount of course, in addition to FE mount and Canon RF, Nikon Z... It would probably quell my lust for the ZM85/2.
EXIF says this one was at f/5.6. How about a 100% edge crop from the plane of focus on either end of the frame? Would be good enough of a landscape test image shot on a Leica for my needs. This would be a typical application for me - fairly distant subject at f/5.6 or f/8...
I think that is what I have seen with my 40 1.2 in FE mount but it is more subtle, showing up as ghosting (lack of contrast, most noticeable in the shadows) than flare. I have seen it happen when the sun is just outside of the frame.
Leica exif for aperture is not accurate. It is an estimate, there is no coupling between the body and lens that would communicate aperture.
rscheffler wrote:
EXIF says this one was at f/5.6. How about a 100% edge crop from the plane of focus on either end of the frame? Would be good enough of a landscape test image shot on a Leica for my needs. This would be a typical application for me - fairly distant subject at f/5.6 or f/8...
I compared these photographs with the voigtländer with the other ones you have in your flickr. I like more the lux 35mm! colors with that objective are gorgeous!
I do not know how is your opinion, as I am undecides between Cron 50 and Vm 50...
Regards
robsonj wrote:
Didn't get chance to do infinity test shots today, light was horrible outside. A couple more from the M240 along the back roads of Illinois... (not SooC)
For me, there are too many flaws with the CV50/1.2 on a Sony. With the well-performing CV 40/1.2 FE already in my bag, I would only use the CV 50/1.2 VM for situations where AF is needed (over TAP). But here is the Zony 55/1.8 the better allrounder and companion to the 40. It is a stop slower but if I'm really about f1.2 I can take the 40. It's a AF/MF-aperture-bias here but not enough big to buy the 50/1.2 on top.
You’re right, but it is often pretty close. I’ll post links to the raw files later today when I get home.
thrice wrote:
Leica exif for aperture is not accurate. It is an estimate, there is no coupling between the body and lens that would communicate aperture.
The Summiiux is just the in camera lens profile I used on the M, this recorded in the exif, that was a CV 35 1.2 II if you are referring to a photo on my stream. No Leica lenses in my stable, all CV (and Sony) save one Leica 90mm f2.8.
hanay78 wrote:
Hi,
I compared these photographs with the voigtländer with the other ones you have in your flickr. I like more the lux 35mm! colors with that objective are gorgeous!
I do not know how is your opinion, as I am undecides between Cron 50 and Vm 50...
robsonj wrote:
The Summiiux is just the in camera lens profile I used on the M, this recorded in the exif, that was a CV 35 1.2 II if you are referring to a photo on my stream. No Leica lenses in my stable, all CV (and Sony) save one Leica 90mm f2.8.
Sep 17, 2018 at 07:01 AM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
rscheffler wrote:
I'd like to see Voigtlander continue the trend seen in the 40 and 50/1.2s with an 85/2 with similar rendering and sharpness characteristics.
YES, PLEASE.
In E Mount as well, and around the same size as the 40/50.
Thanks in advance, Cosina...
Sep 17, 2018 at 08:40 AM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
I've seen it on the 40/1.2 E Mount also, but rarely. Usually shooting into the sun, with the sun just outside the frame.
Without scientific testing, I'd wager it's a reflection between the glass or internals and sensor.
FWIW I like it for creative effect and wish I could nail down how to do it intentionally, but I can't. The 40/1.2 handles shooting directly into the sun like it's nothing. I could see it being an issue if it happened a lot, or were uncontrollable, though.
To determine if it's really the chrome ring, maybe someone who has the lens can mask the chrome with a retaining ring and try to reproduce the effect with and without.
pdmphoto wrote:
I think that is what I have seen with my 40 1.2 in FE mount but it is more subtle, showing up as ghosting (lack of contrast, most noticeable in the shadows) than flare. I have seen it happen when the sun is just outside of the frame.
Just went out to test a little did Big Bronco than shot a few right into the sun. Looks normal on LCD but I’ll get it on computer. I think this lens is sharper wide open than the 40 myself. I’m not seeing any thing resolution wise bad on center. Get this up later got a full day off stuff going on. I did Big Bronco tests on my Rokinon 35 2.8 and Batis 85. I’m really behind on testing. Actually both those lenses I have not shot but a few frames.
Sep 17, 2018 at 09:45 AM
imagesfromobjects Offline • • • • Upload & Sell: Off
Im very impressed wide open on center the resolution but at F2 this lens jumps to another level of sharp. Look at those Raws. I honestly think at F1.2 there is coma in this lens or some type of veiling flare . When you look at The raws from Big Bronco look at the lights in the upper left the speculair highlights the shape changes from 1.2 to 2.8 or somewhere in there. Im not sure what is causing that shape change. I think its in the 40 also
