The edge, though, is still midfield (the corner of course gives the outer field). While it doesn’t matter in practice, it might be our fir the pixel peepers to know if FC shows up in the corners..
That's the first thing I noticed David. However, on the Sony, there is very noticeable curvature at mid-field and therefore his test shows there is induced field curvature when combining this lens with a thicker sensor stack. Basically his edge crop was my mid-field crop.
@genji mentioned to me that the lens' focusing ring was always at the hard stop regardless of where he focus at infinity. On the Sony, that only happens at mid field. Center and extreme edges perform better a tad before the infinity hard stop.
Having said that, field curvature gets pretty much masked at f/4-5.6 making it still a great choice for landscapes on the Sony. Personally I see it as a general, candid/portraits lens so field curvature is not as relevant even wide open.
GMPhotography wrote:
I'm shooting Big Bronco right now. No difference in focus from center to extreme corner. Ziltch
On the Sony those are in the same plane. The mid-field is the area with curvature and @genji's test indicates the lens is not optimized for the Sony's thicker sensor stack.
GMPhotography wrote:
I should have said a modern Lux. Yes it's sharper and better corrected in my mind though it's the immediate falloff from sharp to OOF which reminds me of a Lux
Ahh, yes. This makes more sense. As a much more modern interpretation I get you.
Aug 14, 2019 at 12:01 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Fred Miranda wrote:
That's the first thing I noticed David. However, on the Sony, there is very noticeable curvature at mid-field and therefore his test shows there is induced field curvature when combining this lens with a thicker sensor stack. Basically his edge crop was my mid-field crop.
@genji@ mentioned to me that the lens' focusing ring was always at the hard stop regardless of where he focus at infinity. On the Sony, that only happens at mid field. Center and extreme edges perform better a tad before the infinity hard stop.
Having said that, field curvature gets pretty much masked at f/4-5.6 making it still a great choice for landscapes on the Sony. Personally I see it as a general, candid/portraits lens so field curvature is not as relevant even wide open....Show more →
Comparing your shots to Jonathon's (genji's) shots, I very slightly prefer the shots with the Leica. In addition to the induced field curvature it looks like there is just a bit of induced astigmatism (probably more induction of field curvature in one plane than the other) toward the corners. Still I think on Sony the performance is excellent stopped down to f/5.6 and very very good stopped down to f/4. It just seems to me a little better on the Leica. Of course they are not side by side tests and the lighting is different, etc., so I could be wrong. Still I would love to see an FE version of this lens that I think on Sony would be just a small bit better.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Comparing your shots to Jonathon's (genji's) shots, I very slightly prefer the shots with the Leica. In addition to the induced field curvature it looks like there is just a bit of induced astigmatism (probably more induction of field curvature in one plane than the other) toward the corners. Still I think on Sony the performance is excellent stopped down to f/5.6 and very very good stopped down to f/4. It just seems to me a little better on the Leica. Of course they are not side by side tests and the lighting is different, etc., so I could be wrong. Still I would love to see an FE version of this lens that I think on Sony would be just a small bit better....Show more →
Same here Steve. Field curvature also affects bokeh rendering but I don't see any rendering weirdness even when shooting wide open on the Sony. For anything else aside from landscapes at wide apertures, the M-mount should perform just as good on the Sony.
For a dedicated landscape lens, perhaps a future E-mount version would be preferred but it's not guaranteed Voigtlander will produce one.
thanks @genji for the test. Seems like it performs quite a bit better on your M.
I tested a bit more and just updated my rolling review. One interesting finding is that the Voigtlander is pretty soft at the close focusing distance. Here the Sony FE 1.8/85 smokes it:
That also explains why I was less happy with my (mostly tight) portraits while Fred was happier with his. I think this might be a little exaggerated by the thicker stack but it is mostly a result of it being a block focusing lens while the FE 1.8/85 at least has a fixed group.
Personally I like the lens quite a bit and I might be tempted to get one if there is ever an E-mount version but there are a few downsides too many with the adapted M-mount version for me to buy one now.
