I have only used the 40mm for couple of days so can't say whether I like the FL or not (yet) but what I am learning is that either I need a lot of practice to get sharp pics at wide apertures or an AF lens . Though loosing EXIF info would be a real bummer. Also, TAP adds an extra expense.
Oh well, will use 40mm some more before making the decision.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Honestly I prefer manual focusing it but I'm very impressed by the performance of TAP's FW 6.0. It fixed the hunting and "AF pumping" with the A7R3 and A9 and I'm getting great accuracy even in low light. Most of the latest images I posted were using TAP and they are tack sharp.
It also works with Eye AF in AF-S and AF-C modes and that's something many will value.
Selling your CV 40 for the 50 is just a matter of FL preference. If you prefer 50mm over 40mm, the decision is easy.
Color Aberration correction (Purple Fringing, Lateral and Longitudinal)
As mentioned earlier, the CV 50/1.2's optical design is very similar to the CV 40/1.2's and therefore their level of color correction is similar.
Wide open, purple fringing (color aberration on the plane of focus) is very noticeable at f/1.2 but just like Longitudinal CA, improves as the lens is stopped down. By f/4 I don't see any purple fringing on my images even with high contrast lighting.
Lateral CA (LaCA) correction is also similar to what I see on CV 40/1.2 images and never goes away even at smaller apertures.
Longitudinal CA (LoCA) is well controlled starting at f/2.8 and by f/4 is completely gone.
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...
Thanks.
Here are the left, center and right crops along with the original OOC dng...
CCoppola82 wrote:
I have a CV 50 1.5 and I知 wondering if the 50 1.2 might be worth upgrading to. Anyone have both and care to compare?
the 40/1.2 is definitely better for landscape stopped down the than the 50/1.5, so i would expect the 50/1.2 to be better in that regard as well. the f/1.2 lenses are a bit glowier at short distance wide open than the f/1.5.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Something else to report is that I'm seeing a ring flare with the CV 50/1.2 when shooting against the light. I have never seen this on the 40/1.2 E-mount.
Here is an example:
Fred, are these being shot with the $129 lens hood on, or even a $9 for that matter ? I wonder if that would make a difference.
I love the rendering of this, matches well with the 40/1.2. If I didn't have the Planar 50/1.4 (which you'll pry out of my cold, dead hands) this and the Voigtlander 50mm/3.5 would be on my list (the 50/3.5 still is).
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...
Thanks.
robsonj wrote:
Here are the left, center and right crops along with the original OOC dng...
Thanks. I'd have to do a side-by-side with the Lux ASPH to see if there is any real difference. On its own, in this image, the Voigtlander would certainly be good enough for me and landscape type applications. Didn't notice any obvious sharpness falloff at the edges and the areas of the scene within depth of field look good.
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.
I've been thinking about getting that Voigtl舅der 28mm f/2 Ultron a long time. I had the VM 40mm f/1.2 for the summer and sold it so that I could buy the FE version. And I also sold the FE28/2 as I found it a bit too "dull" and too close to 40mm. But before I could buy the Nokton 40mm FE, I noticed a guy selling a pristine chrome/brass version Nokton 50mm f/1.5 for about half the price I could get it from store (and used ones are really rare). So I couldn't resist ("oh it's so shiny") and bought it. Oh man it's pretty - and feels awesome. Now waiting for the new L/M-NEX adapter (sold the earlier one with my Nokton 40mm). D'uh. Can't wait to shoot with it. And because of this turn of events, the 28mm ultron is tempting me again, as it would pair up nicely with 50mm... And I like it's rendering from what I've seen. I'm not that of a pixel peeper, so I think the IQ would be good enough for me.
PS. Not sure if I'll upgrade to this new 50mm f/1.2 anytime soon, even if it seems pretty stellar. I think I'll settle for the f/1.5 for a while, as I just got it. But keep the images coming...
Folks this is Big Broncos test Raw files. Hope your downloading and taking a look. I知 heading out for two days so hopefully I値l have some more images to post.
I was not going to do it but I ordered the TAP. I had a nice reward from Adorama for about 48 dollars so decided to use that up. I may sell the Voightlander VM close focus adapter I just bought from a member. Interested let me know. I知 going to list a garage sale later this week. I got a lot of stuff I知 just not using that I can put towards a Loxia 35 which im after to buy.
GMPhotography wrote:
Folks this is Big Broncos test Raw files. Hope your downloading and taking a look. I知 heading out for two days so hopefully I値l have some more images to post.
I was not going to do it but I ordered the TAP. I had a nice reward from Adorama for about 48 dollars so decided to use that up. I may sell the Voightlander VM close focus adapter I just bought from a member. Interested let me know. I知 going to list a garage sale later this week. I got a lot of stuff I知 just not using that I can put towards a Loxia 35 which im after to buy....Show more →
I have the TAP and the CV adapter. I find the CV better for manual focusing (and much better with L brackets) than the TAP and of course the TAP is better for autofocus . So just suggesting not to be to hasty in selling the CV adapter.
I know I may just keep it or get a cheap adapter. I知 not always going to be using the TAP. I was thinking about it and this could be my AF 50 I don稚 already have for that kit too. The Fotasy I have is going in the garbage it wobbles . I would not sell it to anybody. Lol
Fred seemed to like the TAP with the new Firmware. I致e had this awhile ago but was not so great back than. Figured I gotta try it. I got 60 days to return it at Adorama if I hate it.
On L brackets I have to go back to mine. My half case I bought won稚 work with my pano head on the BH 40 as the arca plate is a little too small so I値l be selling that for sure. I think it痴 a Limm, not sure of the name. Have to look
TAP is great when it works! Otherwise there are a few inconsistencies I've run into. However, the way I look at it better to have the option to have AF in your bag if and when needed. Couple of operational issues I've encountered using TAP and latest TAP firmware w/ A9 and A7rIII and mostly Leica Summilux primes and Voigt 35 F1.2 II:
-Strong backlighting usually kills AF
-Sometimes causes my camera to freeze up and I have to either take the adapter off then reattach and/or turn camera off then on again to regain operations
Note: I've not encountered any wobble issues so far and I have been using TAP since it first came out. My suspicion using longer lenses w/ TAP may be one of the causes to the infamous wobble that some are experiencing.
I really do hope the TAP adapter continues to evolve with the Sony firmware updates and new camera models because when it works, it's a small miracle. But the company seems to have gone dark when it comes to responding via email or social media. Not sure what's going on there.
. Though loosing EXIF info would be a real bummer. Also, TAP adds an extra expense. 
? I wonder if that would make a difference.
. So just suggesting not to be to hasty in selling the CV adapter.