Home · Register · Join Upload & Sell

Moderated by: Fred Miranda
Username  

  New fredmiranda.com Mobile Site
  New Feature: SMS Notification alert
  New Feature: Buy & Sell Watchlist
  

FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5              8       9       end
  

Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2

  
 
DannyBurkPhoto
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #1 · p.4 #1 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


Typically for me, I like your sunflowers with the wide open Voigt 35/1.4 best


Oct 22, 2018 at 07:31 PM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #2 · p.4 #2 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


Yes and in the case of the 40/1.2 you trade cat-eye to decagon specular highlights @f/2.


Oct 22, 2018 at 07:33 PM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #3 · p.4 #3 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


DannyBurkPhoto wrote:
Typically for me, I like your sunflowers with the wide open Voigt 35/1.4 best


That's also my favorite of the bunch. The composition just look better balanced in comparison to 40/1.2 wide open imo.
Just to show how this is very subjective.



Oct 22, 2018 at 07:34 PM
rvh23
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #4 · p.4 #4 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


Fred Miranda wrote:
If f/5.6 across the entire frame, including the extreme corners is a must, the CV 35/1.4 may be out for you. However most Loxias I've tried are only great at the very edges at f/8 or f/9 as well. This copy was actually an exception.

Do other Loxia 35 owners agree?


My Loxia 35 seems similar to the one you are showing here. When focused for the far corners, those corners are decent already at 2.8 (but certainly not like the 21). They improve to very good at F4, where I would have no hesitation shooting even for large prints. Sharpness is only subtly better at 5.6, and F8 doesn't really improve things any further. I have actually tried two of these 35s and both were like this, which was a pleasant surprise given what I had read before I bought them.



Oct 22, 2018 at 07:37 PM
genji
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #5 · p.4 #5 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


Fred Miranda wrote:
Here are some rendering comparisons at around 0.5m distance.

Which do you prefer?


Thank you, Fred, that comparision is very helpful. Iíd almost written off the Nokton Classic FE 35/1.4 after reading BastianKís review (though Iím baffled by the difference between the extreme corners in his tests and your own). But Dannyís description of the lens as a ďwider Planar ZE 50/1.4Ē piqued my interest since thatís a lens I like very much. On reflection, though, I realize that Dannyís use case (near MFD at f/1.4) and and mine (0.5 to 2m at f/2.8) are very different. Your sunflower pictures and some other examples have convinced me that Iím better off sticking with my Distagon ZE 35/2. The Nokton Classic FE 35/1.4 is significantly smaller and lighter but (much to my astonishment) my frame of reference for size and weight is now the Planar FE 50/1.4 so thatís an advantage Iím prepared to forgo.

Edited on Oct 22, 2018 at 07:57 PM · View previous versions



Oct 22, 2018 at 07:55 PM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #6 · p.4 #6 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


rvh23 wrote:
My Loxia 35 seems similar to the one you are showing here. When focused for the far corners, those corners are decent already at 2.8 (but certainly not like the 21). They improve to very good at F4, where I would have no hesitation shooting even for large prints. Sharpness is only subtly better at 5.6, and F8 doesn't really improve things any further. I have actually tried two of these 35s and both were like this, which was a pleasant surprise given what I had read before I bought them.


I find the Loxia 35 curvature wavy where center and extreme corners are in the same plane while the mid-zone is not, so the best focus at infinity is a bit tricky and always a compromise at wider apertures. One of the reasons I prefer shooting landscapes at f/8 with this lens.

With the CV 35/1.4, I found that focusing at center, gave me the best mid-field and extreme corners. I tried many combinations but this was still the best for all zones.

The CV 40/1.2 is the trickiest of bunch to focus due to focus shift + curvature. I settled with focusing at center @ f/2.8 and stopping the lens down to f/5.6-8. This gave me the best resolution across the field.



Oct 22, 2018 at 07:56 PM
Luvwine
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #7 · p.4 #7 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


Fred Miranda wrote:
I find the Loxia 35 curvature wavy where center and extreme corners are in the same plane while the mid-zone is not, so the best focus at infinity is a bit tricky and always a compromise at wider apertures. One of the reasons I prefer shooting landscapes at f/8 with this lens.

With the CV 35/1.4, I found that focusing at center, gave me the best mid-field and extreme corners. I tried many combinations but this was still the best for all zones.

The CV 40/1.2 is the trickiest of bunch to focus due to focus shift + curvature. I settled
...Show more

But at infinity, the focus on the CV 40 is at the hard stop if stopped down so that makes it really easy and. Godsend in low light.



Oct 22, 2018 at 09:21 PM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #8 · p.4 #8 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


Luvwine wrote:
But at infinity, the focus on the CV 40 is at the hard stop if stopped down so that makes it really easy and. Godsend in low light.


Yes but remember that the hard stop with f/4-5.6 apertures cause that weirdness right outside the center area. The best compromise I found is focusing on center @f/2.8 and than stop down the lens to whatever aperture needed. This translates to moving the focusing right a very slight tad before the hard stop. (Similar to how we focus the Lox 21 and 25)
Try that! It may work similarly with your copy.



Oct 22, 2018 at 09:44 PM
rvh23
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #9 · p.4 #9 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


Fred Miranda wrote:
I find the Loxia 35 curvature wavy where center and extreme corners are in the same plane while the mid-zone is not, so the best focus at infinity is a bit tricky and always a compromise at wider apertures. One of the reasons I prefer shooting landscapes at f/8 with this lens.


Thanks for the heads up on the wavy curvature with the 35, as I've not done a lot of work with it yet.

For the Loxia 21/25 that have curved rather than wavy FC stopping down to F8 is of course equally beneficial to improve infinity sharpness across the frame.

Personally, if needed I prefer to focus-stack two different infinity shots to deal with FC (since I'm always focus stacking anyway), rather than try to find a good compromise which as you say can be tricky.









Oct 22, 2018 at 10:24 PM
fplstudio
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #10 · p.4 #10 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2



GMPhotography wrote:
Iím not a fan of the classic at 1.4 itís just a little too busy but at F2 I like better than the Loxia at F2. Wish you had my CV 50 here but I think the bokeh balls are rounder than the 40 which I like also.

I guess if you really like the Classic wide open bokeh your not going to get that look unless you bought a Noctilux which has that same look. Other than that itís similar to the others. Maybe I like more corrected lenses at the end of the day


I thought it was just me finding the Loxia @f2 harsher than the 35 CV @f2....



Oct 22, 2018 at 10:43 PM
 


Search in Used Dept. 

Makten
Online
• • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #11 · p.4 #11 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, by f/2 or f/2.2, rendering is noticeably smoother....All the fun is gone.


Is this true even at larger distance? As usual, I'm interested in bokeh @ ~2-3 meters, stopped down a bit (f/2.5-4). The 40/1.2 remains smooth at any distance but only in the middle. The corners and borders are super funky and does unfortunately not get any better when stopping down.

I'm one of those few people that love the classic 50/1.4 Planar for that reason. Very chaotic bokeh near MFD and wide open, but absolutely amazing at f/2.5 and a few meters distance. If the 35/1.4 is similar I could actually get it only for that reason, never even using it wide open.

The Loxia 35 has funky corners stopped down but you don't really notice if you don't look for it, since the bokeh contrast is very low. Here at f/3.2. In my opinion, you get more "3D" with this look than with a super blurred out background.


DSC04979 by Martin Hertsius, on Flickr



Oct 23, 2018 at 12:07 AM
Tonzah78
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #12 · p.4 #12 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


Lately I've been thinking a lot about these Voigtlšnders and which ones to get. Currently I'm using CV28/2 and CV50/1.5, both M-mount. Now it's pretty certain I want the upcoming FE mount Nokton 50mm f/1.2 that Cosina teased at the Photokina instead of the CV40/1.2 that I was intending to get before that.

I may need a bit better 28-35 and would like to replace the current CV28/2VM with it. My hunch is that Cosina might actually make the 35mm F/2 Ultron next also for E-mount, as they just teased it for the leica. The leica mount version looked like identical in size as the 21mm f/3.5 color skopar, so E-mount should be the same size as well. Oh man that would be a lovely little lens... (Even smaller than the current 35/1.4)

"Unlike the 35/1.7, top priority is being compact while retaining high optical quality."

Edited on Oct 23, 2018 at 01:23 AM · View previous versions



Oct 23, 2018 at 01:01 AM
Fred Miranda
Offline
Admin
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #13 · p.4 #13 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


Makten wrote:
Is this true even at larger distance? As usual, I'm interested in bokeh @ ~2-3 meters, stopped down a bit (f/2.5-4). The 40/1.2 remains smooth at any distance but only in the middle. The corners and borders are super funky and does unfortunately not get any better when stopping down.

I'm one of those few people that love the classic 50/1.4 Planar for that reason. Very chaotic bokeh near MFD and wide open, but absolutely amazing at f/2.5 and a few meters distance. If the 35/1.4 is similar I could actually get it only for that reason, never even
...Show more

I will post samples at 2-3m @1.4 and narrower apertures tomorrow. I was waiting for you to ask for that!



Oct 23, 2018 at 01:17 AM
Juha Kannisto
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #14 · p.4 #14 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


Tonzah78 wrote:
Lately I've been thinking a lot about these Voigtlšnders and which ones to get. Currently I'm using CV28/2 and CV50/1.5, both M-mount. Now it's pretty certain I want the upcoming FE mount Nokton 50mm f/1.2 that Cosina teased at the Photokina instead of the CV40/1.2 that I was intending to get before that.

I may need a bit better 28-35 and would like to replace the current CV28/2VM with it. My hunch is that Cosina might actually make the 35mm F/2 Ultron next also for E-mount, as they just teased it for the leica. The leica mount version looked like identical
...Show more

I'm also curious whether they will make that 35/2 for E-mount in their next group. I suppose they will announce new lenses (development announcement) at CP+ next year as they did the last couple of years, the exhibition starts from Feb 28th 2019. I think they should release the 110/2.5 before that for sure (still hoping for November/December) and possibly also the 50/1.2. Although there have been no formal announcements about the 50/1.2 in E-mount yet, I suppose it will come at short notice without much lead time from announcement to release.

I'm mostly hoping for a 28/2 in the next group, not as excited about the 35/2 since I think it has quite much overlap with 35/1.4 and 40/1.2 which I already have, though there could be demand for a small lens that behaves quite like the 35/1.7 without the field curvature on E-mount bodies (I still have the 35/1.7 VM as well).



Oct 23, 2018 at 02:05 AM
Tonzah78
Offline
• •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #15 · p.4 #15 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


Juha Kannisto wrote:
I'm mostly hoping for a 28/2 in the next group


Yup. Wouldn't mind an FE native CV28/2. Pairs up very nicely with 50mm and I wouldn't need any other wide angles besides that. Rarely need anything wider than that. With the 35/2 I would definitely need something wider as well. And I love the current 28mm Ultron how it renders, but don't care for the focus tab and the adapter hassle and not having EXIF data.



Oct 23, 2018 at 02:26 AM
genji
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #16 · p.4 #16 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


Makten wrote:
Is this true even at larger distance? As usual, I'm interested in bokeh @ ~2-3 meters, stopped down a bit (f/2.5-4). The 40/1.2 remains smooth at any distance but only in the middle. The corners and borders are super funky and does unfortunately not get any better when stopping down.

I'm one of those few people that love the classic 50/1.4 Planar for that reason. Very chaotic bokeh near MFD and wide open, but absolutely amazing at f/2.5 and a few meters distance. If the 35/1.4 is similar I could actually get it only for that reason, never even
...Show more

That is so true. Your bicycle picture with the Loxia 35 is a perfect example of what I'd call "real 3D" as distinct from the fake 3D created with a blurred background. In the next "What is 3D?" thread -- it's only a matter of time before it occurs -- this can be the reference image.

I now think it's worth my getting a Nokton Classic FE 35/1.4 from the local CV distributor to test whether that effect can be replicated. I might have to retract my previous post.



Oct 23, 2018 at 02:29 AM
Luvwine
Offline
• • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #17 · p.4 #17 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes but remember that the hard stop with f/4-5.6 apertures cause that weirdness right outside the center area. The best compromise I found is focusing on center @f/2.8 and than stop down the lens to whatever aperture needed. This translates to moving the focusing right a very slight tad before the hard stop. (Similar to how we focus the Lox 21 and 25)
Try that! It may work similarly with your copy.


I will. Do you find shooting at F4-5.6 etter than at F6.3-7.1? For some reason I cannot recall, I usually shoot at infinity around F6.3 or 7.1 absent wanting bigger sun stars/slower shutter speeds, or needing more depth of field.



Oct 23, 2018 at 07:28 AM
GMPhotography
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #18 · p.4 #18 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


I might go out and try my Loxia 35 against my CV 50 1.2 M on some closeups. I do have a old Hassy closeup lens (60mm)that I fitted in a filter holder. Might work on both lenses as I just want to see the effect. I kind of like the classic and I kinda donít. Also the CV should act a little different than the 40 since one itís longer and two itís a M lens.

Just for fun reasons. I just donít want to acquire more lenses in this area. Right now I have the Loxia 35, CV 50 1.2 which I like better than the Cv 40 E to be honest, than I have the upcoming Batis 40 maybe if they fix the aperture mechanism ( I think itís a bug) and I still have the Tammy 28-75 which I planned to sell for the Batis 40 and if that fails the acid test, I still love the Sony 50mm 1.4

This is one crowed focal length area and I know for a fact Iím not alone here. Fred could open a store.



Oct 23, 2018 at 07:38 AM
GMPhotography
Online
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
p.4 #19 · p.4 #19 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


BTW I did make a comment how the CV classic wide open reminds me of a Noctilux. I never liked that lens and even had one to use from Leica and turned it down. That look is not for the faint at heart, itís really busy and it certainly is a acquired taste.


Oct 23, 2018 at 07:47 AM
bobek13
Offline
• • •
Upload & Sell: Off
p.4 #20 · p.4 #20 · Comparison: Voigtlander 35/1.4, Loxia 35/2 & Voigtlander 40/1.2


what I would like is for CV to bring us something/anything in the 15-35mm range with f~2 that could be used for astroscapes... I for now occasionaly use the CV VM35mm f1.7 and I am still waiting if something nice will come before I try the 5m pcx filter as the ultron is not perfect for the job, but BastianK says that pcx filter does help here...

Juha Kannisto wrote:
I'm also curious whether they will make that 35/2 for E-mount in their next group. I suppose they will announce new lenses (development announcement) at CP+ next year as they did the last couple of years, the exhibition starts from Feb 28th 2019. I think they should release the 110/2.5 before that for sure (still hoping for November/December) and possibly also the 50/1.2. Although there have been no formal announcements about the 50/1.2 in E-mount yet, I suppose it will come at short notice without much lead time from announcement to release.

I'm mostly hoping for a 28/2 in the
...Show more



Oct 23, 2018 at 01:31 PM
1       2       3              5              8       9       end






FM Forums | Sony Forum | Join Upload & Sell

1       2       3              5              8       9       end
    
 

You are not logged in. Login or Register

Username       Or Reset password



This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.