Only minor complaint about the TZE-01. I use Setting Effect On / Live View On or whatever it is called for Nikon. That means the body will reflect actual aperture till f/5.6. If you're shooting at f/11, it will stop down to f/5.6 for focus, then stop down to f/11 when shooting. So... since these manual lenses don't respond to camera bodies you have to dial in comp if you want to use apertures smaller than f/5.6.
Hardcore wrote:
On the exif for the second shot Mathieu, is the metering having issues or why the -3.0 exposure comp.
matt-to wrote:
Rookie question but would 1.4 make a huge difference for milky way shots against a 2.8 lens?
I'm trying to decide between the Loxia 21 and the Nokton. Image quality wise, I doubt I will see the difference at my level. However I like milky way pictures that are "crowded with stars", really the more the better for me! Would the 1.4 help me in this regard? (without tracker)
Yes, 1.4 vs 2.8 is a huge difference for milky way. But as shown earlier in this thread, the Nokton should be used at f2.2 to f2.5 for astrophotography to reduce corner aberrations. The loxia doesn't require stopping down. So the difference in that case is not as meaningful (1/3-2/3 stop). If your focus is on astrophotography, the 24GM can be used wide open at f1.4.
So I haven't had time to go through this whole thread yet. In general when comparing to the Loxia 21/2.8 (which I have) what are the plus/minus of the Voigtlander? Then if I also have a 24/1.4 GM and even the Batis 18/2.8 is it worth swapping out the Loxia for the Voigt?
swldstn wrote:
So I haven't had time to go through this whole thread yet. In general when comparing to the Loxia 21/2.8 (which I have) what are the plus/minus of the Voigtlander? Then if I also have a 24/1.4 GM and even the Batis 18/2.8 is it worth swapping out the Loxia for the Voigt?
I switched out my Loxia for the CV21/1.4 for two reasons:
1) I like the ergonomics of the Voigtlanders a lot more than the Loxias
2) The CV21 is 2 stops faster
The IQ of both lenses is spectacular. The build quality is equal. The Loxia is lighter and a little smaller. I was thrilled with both lenses and was sad to let my Loxia go.
I also have the 24 GM and the Batis 18. I like having separate MF and AF kits, although defending that preference becomes sketchy in this case, especially with the excellent MF performance of the 24GM. I do think that 21mm and 24mm are different enough focal lengths to justify keeping both, particularly if you're a landscape shooter. I love my Batis 18, but not for MF applications - the Batis implementation of MF is not very satisfying in my experience.
smpetty wrote:
I switched out my Loxia for the CV21/1.4 for two reasons:
1) I like the ergonomics of the Voigtlanders a lot more than the Loxias
2) The CV21 is 2 stops faster
The IQ of both lenses is spectacular. The build quality is equal. The Loxia is lighter and a little smaller. I was thrilled with both lenses and was sad to let my Loxia go.
I also have the 24 GM and the Batis 18. I like having separate MF and AF kits, although defending that preference becomes sketchy in this case, especially with the excellent MF performance of the 24GM. I do think that 21mm and 24mm are different enough focal lengths to justify keeping both, particularly if you're a landscape shooter. I love my Batis 18, but not for MF applications - the Batis implementation of MF is not very satisfying in my experience. ...Show more →
Same boat minus the Batis paddle.
I think the CV 21 is the better lens as well . Love the ergos over Loxia glass and I also have separate MF/AF kits with a Sony 24 . In fact my whole MF kit is Voightlander
Sep 07, 2019 at 09:38 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
smpetty wrote:
I switched out my Loxia for the CV21/1.4 for two reasons:
1) I like the ergonomics of the Voigtlanders a lot more than the Loxias
2) The CV21 is 2 stops faster
The IQ of both lenses is spectacular. The build quality is equal. The Loxia is lighter and a little smaller. I was thrilled with both lenses and was sad to let my Loxia go.
I also have the 24 GM and the Batis 18. I like having separate MF and AF kits, although defending that preference becomes sketchy in this case, especially with the excellent MF performance of the 24GM. I do think that 21mm and 24mm are different enough focal lengths to justify keeping both, particularly if you're a landscape shooter. I love my Batis 18, but not for MF applications - the Batis implementation of MF is not very satisfying in my experience. ...Show more →
Like Guy, I am in a very similar boat. I would add that I also like the CV 21 f/1.4 for its great close focus performance, and the only thing I didn't like about the Loxia was the aperture ring. I do wish the CV 21 f/1.4 were lighter, but in time I am likely to get the CV 21 f/3.5 which is truly light when I want a smaller kit.
On the AF side, I also have the Batis 18 and really like it, but because my MF kit is pretty small I am thinking of going with larger faster lenses for most of my AF kit. I may add the Sigma Art 28 f/1.4, the Sony ZA 50 f/1.4, the Sony GM 85 f/1.4, and the Sony GM 135 f/1.8. Even though I really like the Batis 18, I am not sure I will keep it. I might just use the CV 21 f/1.4 with the AF kit.
Thanks smpetty, Guy, and Steve S.
I got into both Batis and Loxia long before Voigtlander had their latest stuff and I sill have the 21, 35, 50 Loxia and the 18, 25, 40, 85, and 135 Batis. I've read the feedback here on the 40/1.2 and 50/1.2 Voitlanders an now the 21/1.4 and all sound like an upgrade for MF compared to the Loxia due to both IQ equal or better and better ergonomics. A also have older Nikon AI-S and Pentax lenses I adapt on rarer occasion now.
On the AF side the Batis is my "smaller" kit that I will draw out 2-3 lenses for and use. For larger AF I do now have the complete set of GM/G zooms from 16 through to 600 and for primes the GM/ZA from 24 to 135. So as Guy knows too much glass.
It looks with the new Voigtlanders swapping out all the Loxia for those will work nicely with the exception on the price drop that the used Loxias have suffered but I guess if something else comes a long that is a better value that is to be expected.If you get the 21 and 50 Voigtlanders is there a good 35mm since the 40/1.2 and 50/1.2 are too close in focal distance?
Sep 07, 2019 at 11:05 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
swldstn wrote:
Thanks smpetty, Guy, and Steve S.
I got into both Batis and Loxia long before Voigtlander had their latest stuff and I sill have the 21, 35, 50 Loxia and the 18, 25, 40, 85, and 135 Batis. I've read the feedback here on the 40/1.2 and 50/1.2 Voitlanders an now the 21/1.4 and all sound like an upgrade for MF compared to the Loxia due to both IQ equal or better and better ergonomics. A also have older Nikon AI-S and Pentax lenses I adapt on rarer occasion now.
On the AF side the Batis is my "smaller" kit that I will draw out 2-3 lenses for and use. For larger AF I do now have the complete set of GM/G zooms from 16 through to 600 and for primes the GM/ZA from 24 to 135. So as Guy knows too much glass.
It looks with the new Voigtlanders swapping out all the Loxia for those will work nicely with the exception on the price drop that the used Loxias have suffered but I guess if something else comes a long that is a better value that is to be expected.If you get the 21 and 50 Voigtlanders is there a good 35mm since the 40/1.2 and 50/1.2 are too close in focal distance?...Show more →
For my kit I have the 7 Artisans 28 f/1.4 to go in between the CV 21 and 50. Here is a nice review of the lens by Bastian at phillipreeve.net:
I am waiting for Voigtlander to make a nice 28mm lens for Sony E mount, but they haven't yet. There is also the CV 35 f/1.4 classic, but it is a different look closer to the Loxia 35 but pretty soft wide open with funky bokeh, but nicely behaved stopped down.
Steve Spencer wrote:
For my kit I have the 7 Artisans 28 f/1.4 to go in between the CV 21 and 50. Here is a nice review of the lens by Bastian at phillipreeve.net:
I am waiting for Voigtlander to make a nice 28mm lens for Sony E mount, but they haven't yet. There is also the CV 35 f/1.4 classic, but it is a different look closer to the Loxia 35 but pretty soft wide open with funky bokeh, but nicely behaved stopped down.
Hey Steve, Where did you pick up your CV 21mm (assuming the F1.4...) in Canada?
Thanks,
Corey
Sep 07, 2019 at 11:19 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Hardcore wrote:
Hey Steve, Where did you pick up your CV 21mm (assuming the F1.4...) in Canada?
Thanks,
Corey
I got mine from B & H, but you should be able to order one from Downtown camera in Toronto. I go to the US almost every week, so I often find it easier to buy there.
Steve Spencer wrote:
For my kit I have the 7 Artisans 28 f/1.4 to go in between the CV 21 and 50. Here is a nice review of the lens by Bastian at phillipreeve.net:
I am waiting for Voigtlander to make a nice 28mm lens for Sony E mount, but they haven't yet. There is also the CV 35 f/1.4 classic, but it is a different look closer to the Loxia 35 but pretty soft wide open with funky bokeh, but nicely behaved stopped down.
I love 28mm focal length and for me a 21, 28, 40 is a great spacing.
I see some users have move from the 40/1.2 Voigtlander to the 50/1.2. Did you? If you ignore focal length for the moment does the 50/1.2 offer any improvement/advantages over the 40/1.2? I go back and forth on these two focal lengths and both have an advantage so if lenses are equal I will choose more based on how I plan to use it. I am wondering for the Voigtlanders.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Like Guy, I am in a very similar boat. I would add that I also like the CV 21 f/1.4 for its great close focus performance, and the only thing I didn't like about the Loxia was the aperture ring. I do wish the CV 21 f/1.4 were lighter, but in time I am likely to get the CV 21 f/3.5 which is truly light when I want a smaller kit.
On the AF side, I also have the Batis 18 and really like it, but because my MF kit is pretty small I am thinking of going with larger faster lenses for most of my AF kit. I may add the Sigma Art 28 f/1.4, the Sony ZA 50 f/1.4, the Sony GM 85 f/1.4, and the Sony GM 135 f/1.8. Even though I really like the Batis 18, I am not sure I will keep it. I might just use the CV 21 f/1.4 with the AF kit....Show more →
I went through some changes in my kit as well. We are really lacking superb 28mm and 35mm MF E-mount lenses. (Voigtlander or Zeiss).
Strictly for landscapes though, I'm currently shooting CV 15/4.5 III, CV 21/1.4, Loxia 35/2, CV 65/2 and 100-400 GM. I find these 5 lenses do everything I need for any scene.
As far as resolution, my weakest lenses are the CV 15 and Loxia 35 but both have great qualities I appreciate like color rendering, sunstar rendering, flare resistance and low distortion.
I am very happy with my AF kit as well and it's similar to yours: 24/1.4, 50/1.4 ZA, 85/1.4 and 135/1.8 GM lenses. I recently added the Sigma 45/2.8 as a compact and light walk-around lens for the daytime. For low light and when only carrying one small/fast lens, I love the CV 40/1.2 Nokton.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I went through some changes in my kit as well. We are really lacking superb 28mm and 35mm MF E-mount lenses. (Voigtlander or Zeiss).
Strictly for landscapes though, I'm currently shooting CV 15/4.5 III, CV 21/1.4, Loxia 35/2, CV 65/2 and 100-400 GM. I find these 5 lenses do everything I need for any scene.
As far as resolution, my weakest lenses are the CV 15 and Loxia 35 but both have great qualities I appreciate like color rendering, sunstar rendering, flare resistance and low distortion.
I am very happy with my AF kit as well and it's similar to yours: 24/1.4, 50/1.4 ZA, 85/1.4 and 135/1.8 GM lenses. I recently added the Sigma 45/2.8 as compact and light walk-around lens for the daytime. For low light and when only carrying one compact lens, I love the CV 40/1.2 Nokton....Show more →
Did you give up on the ZM 35 1.4 Fred? I thought stopped down it resolves into the extreme corners?
Fred Miranda wrote:
I went through some changes in my kit as well. We are really lacking superb 28mm and 35mm MF E-mount lenses. (Voigtlander or Zeiss).
Strictly for landscapes though, I'm currently shooting CV 15/4.5 III, CV 21/1.4, Loxia 35/2, CV 65/2 and 100-400 GM. I find these 5 lenses do everything I need for any scene.
As far as resolution, my weakest lenses are the CV 15 and Loxia 35 but both have great qualities I appreciate like color rendering, sunstar rendering, flare resistance and low distortion.
I am very happy with my AF kit as well and it's similar to yours: 24/1.4, 50/1.4 ZA, 85/1.4 and 135/1.8 GM lenses. I recently added the Sigma 45/2.8 as a compact and light walk-around lens for the daytime. For low light and when only carrying one small/fast lens, I love the CV 40/1.2 Nokton....Show more →
Fred, I thought you had the CV 40 f1.2?
*Never mind, I saw that you still have the CV 40.
Sep 07, 2019 at 07:34 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
swldstn wrote:
I love 28mm focal length and for me a 21, 28, 40 is a great spacing.
I see some users have move from the 40/1.2 Voigtlander to the 50/1.2. Did you? If you ignore focal length for the moment does the 50/1.2 offer any improvement/advantages over the 40/1.2? I go back and forth on these two focal lengths and both have an advantage so if lenses are equal I will choose more based on how I plan to use it. I am wondering for the Voigtlanders.
I had the CV 40 f/1.2 and I switched to the CV 50 f/1.2. I think the 50 has a bit better bokeh (less situations provoke onion rings and a little better transition zone) and I prefer the 12 blade aperture of the 50 to the 10 blade aperture of the 40 although I don't see that as a big thing. The 50 is a little sharper wide open and a little sharper into the corners stopped down too, but the difference between these lenses isn't huge in anything. I liked the CV 40 f/1.2 very much. I just like the CV 50 f/1.2 a little more.
Sep 07, 2019 at 08:03 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Fred Miranda wrote:
I went through some changes in my kit as well. We are really lacking superb 28mm and 35mm MF E-mount lenses. (Voigtlander or Zeiss).
Strictly for landscapes though, I'm currently shooting CV 15/4.5 III, CV 21/1.4, Loxia 35/2, CV 65/2 and 100-400 GM. I find these 5 lenses do everything I need for any scene.
As far as resolution, my weakest lenses are the CV 15 and Loxia 35 but both have great qualities I appreciate like color rendering, sunstar rendering, flare resistance and low distortion.
I am very happy with my AF kit as well and it's similar to yours: 24/1.4, 50/1.4 ZA, 85/1.4 and 135/1.8 GM lenses. I recently added the Sigma 45/2.8 as a compact and light walk-around lens for the daytime. For low light and when only carrying one small/fast lens, I love the CV 40/1.2 Nokton....Show more →
After seeing your review Fred, I think the Sigma 45 f/2.8 looks like a nice addition for exactly what you use it for and I may well get one. Just waiting a short while to see if they sort out the AF-C on the lens.
grahamgibson wrote:
Yes, 1.4 vs 2.8 is a huge difference for milky way. But as shown earlier in this thread, the Nokton should be used at f2.2 to f2.5 for astrophotography to reduce corner aberrations. The loxia doesn't require stopping down. So the difference in that case is not as meaningful (1/3-2/3 stop). If your focus is on astrophotography, the 24GM can be used wide open at f1.4.
Thank you for sharing. I was concerned the difference 1.4 vs 2.8 wouldn't be very visible due to the star eating issue on Sony bodies. I don't have much opportunity to do astro so choosing my lens just for that would be unrealistic. The 24GM looks gorgeous but too close to 35 and I try to limit myself to 21/35/short tele kit.
grahamgibson wrote:
Yes, 1.4 vs 2.8 is a huge difference for milky way. But as shown earlier in this thread, the Nokton should be used at f2.2 to f2.5 for astrophotography to reduce corner aberrations. The loxia doesn't require stopping down. So the difference in that case is not as meaningful (1/3-2/3 stop). If your focus is on astrophotography, the 24GM can be used wide open at f1.4.
Here are three reasons the Voigtlander 21/1.4 is better than the Loxia 21 for 'astro':
1) Very low field curvature compared to Loxia 21's moderate field curvature at infinity. (our precious stars)
2) Lower vignetting when both are at f/2.8.
3) Similar coma correction at faster apertures (~f/2.2)
