Finally got out in nature this morning for the first time this fall. Z8 with 14-24mm f/2.8 S, 24-120mm f/4 S, 70-180mm f/2.8 and Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO-Lanthar:
Ripolini wrote:
Lovely set.
How does the 70-180 compare to 14-24/2.8 Z and 35/2 Apo Lanthar?
It's hard to compare a telephoto to wide angles, but the 70-180mm is a very good lens. It doesn't quite compare directly with the 14-24/2.8 and 35/2 APO, but those two lenses are among the very best of their type ever. However, it's predominantly sharp from f/2.8 throughout the focal range (a little softer at 70mm), has generally nice bokeh, and is overall a very solid lens. For me, the compact nature of the 70-180 is worth far more to me than the slightly optical improvements on the 70-200/2.8, which is just huge.
SiMuMe, thanks for your kind words about the images. I have been using the 640px because I am on a small laptop while traveling. I will try the next larger size and see what happens. Again thanks.
Ripolini wrote:
Hi Luka,
another beautiful set of pictures. Thanx for sharing.
How does the 40/1.2 perform in landscape photography?
Hi Ricardo,
I am still learning the optimum way to shoot landscape with 40/1.2. I am not quite there yet. Focus stacking has been a bit frustrating with 40/1.2. . Focus breathing is strong between say 1 meter to 5 meter range. I am a bit lazy and wanting to keep acuity so I tend to use f 5.6 to around f8 to cover most of interest in 3 to 4 shots, which just does not seem to go as good as I want. It is not that forgiving. Stopping down further, say f10 -16 should do the trick, then stumbling on less acuity, which seems more coming from a bad focusing job or vibration caused by water when placing tripod in the stream with longer exposure. Single shot works much better, and the rendering is quite lovely. I love the look, the color, bokeh it provides. Possibly a bit more than my ZF.2 35mm/f1.4. ( old version), which is not an easy task. I do like 35mm/f1.8S, and 40/1.2 and 35/1.8 may be my preferred two lenses for 35-40 range right now. Other aspect I am still learning is the way 40/1.2 renders highlights on leaves. They tend to blow out quickly, so need to keep an eye on it far more than 35/1.8S.
Having said all of that, I am really enjoying the lens and I highly recommend to anyone who likes the look the lens provides. It is not biting sharp. I feel 35/1.8S has more acuity than 40/1.2, and for sure 35 Apo will be sharper than both. I just don’t think adding one more 35 mm helps my photography experience, and I like the 40/1.2 so much that I don’t want to swap with 35/f2 Apo, at least, not yet.
