p.41 #2 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
Jman13 wrote:
I sold mine today too, as I switched from my Tamron 17-28, CV 12 and CV21 to the Sigma 14-24 and CV15....I too fear I may end up in that category, as I really like this little lens, but I can't keep everything.
I have a similar setup 16-35 GM, CV12 and CV21/3.5, the latter just replaced with Sony 20 1.8 G. Too early to have a holistic opinion on the Sony.
I am too scared to go towards that 150mm filter system that a switch to the Sigma 14-24 would imply...and also I don't want a one lens do/beat all as it undermines in some way the joy of primes and an interchangeable lens system.
p.41 #3 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
fplstudio wrote:
I have a similar setup 16-35 GM, CV12 and CV21/3.5, the latter just replaced with Sony 20 1.8 G. Too early to have a holistic opinion on the Sony.
I am too scared to go towards that 150mm filter system that a switch to the Sigma 14-24 would imply...and also I don't want a one lens do/beat all as it undermines in some way the joy of primes and an interchangeable lens system.
You already have the 16-35mm GM. While I have seen that the Sigma is a little better, it isn't worlds better than that lens, so I don't see a need for that switch unless you really want the 14mm.
I do have to say that I thought the filter situation would be a royal pain, but it really hasn't been. Not that it isn't a little less convenient than a screw-in filter, but with caps on the S5, I just pull it out of my bag, attach it, remove the cap and I'm good to go. It takes no more time than getting out a screw-in filter and attaching it. the only inconvenience is when you want to switch lenses a lot, as you need to take the filter off each time unless you have a very large space for it in your bag to be placed in there while mounted. Also, the quality of the Landscape C-Pol is outstanding from NiSi. My other polarizers, which I have generally liked, I'm now potentially looking to replace, as the color and contrast from the Sigma/Nisi combo is just outstanding.
p.41 #4 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
Jman13 wrote:
You already have the 16-35mm GM. While I have seen that the Sigma is a little better, it isn't worlds better than that lens, so I don't see a need for that switch unless you really want the 14mm.
When I tried the GM zoom I really wanted it to be as good as my WA primes, but in the end had to admit it just wasn't. With the Sigma, I am instead finding that I really want smaller primes to be as good as the zoom, but especially at the wide end, they aren't. In relation to this particualr thread, the CV 3.5/21 seems noticeably poorer away from the center judging from Fred's recently posted tests in the Sigma thread.
I do agree that the Nisi S5 system is as easy to use as screw on filters, and any objections to the Sigma on that basis are overrated imo.
p.41 #5 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
When photographers buy a lens a second time, their deeper instincts may be coming to the fore - the ones that value picture impact over technical prowess. You often get 'lucky shots' with the 21/3.5, but luck is the residue of design.
'bonkers?' No, it's a matter of vision. I actually use this effect as a feature (like others use sunstars, say), as the rare highlight handling can actually be relied upon - more 3D. An 18mm version of this one would be very welcome, for a 450-500g pair.
p.41 #6 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
I saw the 150mm system in action on the 12-24 G and it’s massive and cumbersome to transport/ fit in the backpack . I am also not sure you can use a 150mm on small lenses. That was one of the reasons I went CV12 + 16-35GM. BTW I use 100mm Nisi system and not much screw in.
p.41 #7 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
After flip flopping back and forth between an EVF and rangefinder camera for a couple of weeks using the VM version of this lens, I'm really glad the latter still exists. It's a shame nothing like the R4M/A is still in production--film or not.
p.41 #14 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
Some more. These are from a couple of day trips south/southwest of Trondheim in late May.
The Lom stave church still has its original medieval crest with dragon heads and dates from the 12th century. The dragon heads are an architectural and cultural remnant from the pagan Viking era.
p.41 #15 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
Lovely work as always, Helena.
This is a lens I just can’t ever imagine selling unless I get out of the Sony system entirely– it’s not perfect but it offers so much value in such a compact size. It’s easy to carry, fun to use, and quite competent at landscape apertures. I have the Tamron 17-28 also for some more versatility, particularly for AF when I’m with my kids. And while I sometimes covet lenses like the Sigma 14-24, I’ve always found 21mm really natural for my eye and tend to grab this lens instead of the zoom. I probably will pair it with a CV15 eventually, though I’m still holding out hope for some more options in the <20mm prime category.
p.41 #16 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
Thank you!
Earlier I had the CV 21/1.8 VM and really liked it, but I rarely use wide angles and it was too big and heavy to carry "just in case", so I definitely don't regret replacing it with this one. Hard to understand how something so small can be so good.
p.41 #18 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
ftllens wrote:
Hmm, looking at Helena's pictures, I'm almost tempted to sell the Loxia and replace it with this lol, especially since I shoot F8/11 anyway.
Then I could justify keeping the 35 1.2 SE. Are the copy variances pretty good on this model?
I recently thought about replacing my Loxia 21 with the CV 3.5/21 to save some bag space, and shot good copies of both lenses side by side. But on the more demading sensor of the A7R4, the CV falls well short of the Loxia in terms of IQ both in the mid-zone and corners, even at F8. But if you shoot on a more forgiving sensor or don't print very large, the CV is in most other aspects just as nice as the Loxia.
p.41 #19 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
rvh23 wrote:
I recently thought about replacing my Loxia 21 with the CV 3.5/21 to save some bag space, and shot good copies of both lenses side by side. But on the more demading sensor of the A7R4, the CV falls well short of the Loxia in terms of IQ both in the mid-zone and corners, even at F8. But if you shoot on a more forgiving sensor or don't print very large, the CV is in most other aspects just as nice as the Loxia.
Ah thanks, I knew about the mid zone and corners thing, but I guess I'll put up with the extra 160g of the loxia lol
I've been using the R2 since I'm back to sony, but will re-upgrade to the R4 eventually.
p.41 #20 · Voigtlander 21mm f/3.5 Color Skopar Review
I tried two CV 3.5/21. One was pretty badly decentered, the other appeared to be centered, but it was not nearly as good as the Loxia I had — on an A7RIII. I’ve since moved onto the Sony 20mm f1.8, of which my copy is absolutely stellar (on an A7RIV) in all respects, but it lacks the sun stars of the Loxia and CV. I don’t value sun stars that much and if I’m not mistaken (not recalling now), I can get sun stars with the Sony if I stop down enough (probably f9.5-f11, I’m guessing).
