hanay78 wrote:
thanks again for your answer. any conclusions in contrast?
Both of them can provide pleasant contrast, Apo-lanthar is very sharp, but the contrast is not rigid, Loxia seems to have lower contrast due to spherical aberration
waterden wrote:
Thanks very much indeed for this. It is perfectly clear that, for across-the-frame resolution at infinity focus, the APO-Lanthar wins hands down at f2 and, to a lesser extent, thereafter. The real question for me is whether it is sufficiently better, in practical rather than OMG terms, to warrant a switch, particularly as landscape photography is for me always on tripod at f8 or higher so the extraordinary corner to corner performance at f2 is only of academic interest.
The key factor (for me) when used wide open is the quality of subject separation and I suspect the Zeiss, with its signature mid range punch, might be the winner. I'd certainly be interested to know what owners of both think about that.
For A7Riv (61mp), the F8 already has obvious diffraction, and the smaller aperture diffraction will be very serious. It is necessary to change the traditional shooting habits, use the appropriate new shooting method，such as using F4 ～ F5.6 with the focus stack to obtain true high resolution Therefore, the performance of F4 ～ F5.6 is indispensable for landscape photography.
In fact, I don't care much about the quality of subject separation and bokeh. my focus is on landscape photography, and APO is well designed to correct the LoCAs, so it can expand large aperture landscape photography.
I think portrait and street photography should use AF, I am using Samyang AF 45 /1.8，very nice
may I ask if you are going to keep both? or after a trial phase you will keep only one?
olalafoto wrote:
Both of them can provide pleasant contrast, Apo-lanthar is very sharp, but the contrast is not rigid, Loxia seems to have lower contrast due to spherical aberration
I am not so sure about this lens. On my R3 I am experiencing color moire and webbing in tree branches against the sky, along with some reduced but existing fringing. So much for APO. It is unquestionably sharp and contrasty, perhaps too contrasty for my taste. Light fall-off is pretty heavy, even stopped down to f11, and I am even seeing a slight color shift to magenta in the corners. Yellows and oranges seem to be hyped. I also have the 65 and 110 APOs. I would call the 65 a neutral and relaxed presentation, which I am very happy with, but I would not say the same for the 50. I have several Loxias, but not the 50, so I can't make that comparison, but I do have the 1.4/50 Zeiss CY that at landscape apertures (5.6-11) is pretty hard to beat. I think the 50 APO does edge it out slightly in sharpness and in control of fringing, but the CY has a more relaxed, less hyped feel. These are first impressions based upon one outing, uncompressed raw, Lr C.
Well done comparison! Thanks for posting. Did you do a f/5.6 crop as well?
Do you mind if I link this comparison to the review? I wanted to link FM members' tests and samples for better visibility.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Well done comparison! Thanks for posting. Did you do a f/5.6 crop as well?
Do you mind if I link this comparison to the review? I wanted to link FM members' tests and samples for better visibility.
I'm having a very hard time deciding between this 50mm APO and the 50mm f1.2 Nokton
The APO is already (almost) perfect at f2, but the Nokton should be close enough at that aperture. f1.2 is tempting but MF at f1.2 or f1.4 is probably hard to use anyway.
Fboss wrote:
I'm having a very hard time deciding between this 50mm APO and the 50mm f1.2 Nokton
The APO is already (almost) perfect at f2, but the Nokton should be close enough at that aperture. f1.2 is tempting but MF at f1.2 or f1.4 is probably hard to use anyway.
You might also what to consider the aperture blade design of both lenses. The Nokton will already have prominent sunstars starting at f/2.0, while the APO will render round at both f/2.0 and f/2.8.
alphanumeric wrote:
I took it out for its second outing. This time during sunset, followed by blue hour in the Meatpacking District of NYC. All of these were shot wide open at F/2 on an a7R iii. They were shot in RAW and mildly processed, but no defringing, clarity, dehaze, or constrast added. Mostly just recovering details and giving it a color tone.
The lens is really a joy to walk around with. Between its fairly compact size and weight, to its exceptional performance that allows you focus on capturing the moment, instead of worrying about areas that would normally trip up a lesser quality lens.
If you want to pixel peep, follow the flickr link under each photo and download the full original resolution files.
Wow that second shot with OWTC in it is absolutely stunning. I rarely feel any connection with city/urban photographs but that one hit me right in the gut. Amazing work.
Fboss wrote:
I'm having a very hard time deciding between this 50mm APO and the 50mm f1.2 Nokton
The APO is already (almost) perfect at f2, but the Nokton should be close enough at that aperture. f1.2 is tempting but MF at f1.2 or f1.4 is probably hard to use anyway.
I've been using the 50 Nokton for a while, and if you're doing close-ish portraits where razor sharp focus on the eyes in critical, it is pretty hard to nail. Especially if you're at a weird angle or position where you can't hold the camera super steady. The focus assist only gets in the way imo. I usually adjust the focus then take 5 shots in rapid succession. 90% of the time I would get at least one shot where it was perfect. Then again, I'm no seasoned hand so I'm sure that sounds hilariously amateurish to some of the more experienced users here.
That being said I do feel like there's a significant difference in rendering between the Nokton 50 and the CV65, even at the same apertures. I'm planning to keep both 50's fwiw.
Looking at Bastian's review, and the samples from the 50/2 that we have seen in this thread, I think it will depend on your definition of close enough.
Fboss wrote:
I'm having a very hard time deciding between this 50mm APO and the 50mm f1.2 Nokton
The APO is already (almost) perfect at f2, but the Nokton should be close enough at that aperture. f1.2 is tempting but MF at f1.2 or f1.4 is probably hard to use anyway.
I loved my loxia 35mm but I sold it... It's becoming much harder to sell these days, even at a much lower price. It's rewarding when using it stopped down but I wanted to own only one 35mm, and the Loxia can't do everything.
I noticed that the prices of manual focus lenses drop quite significantly pretty quickly. They're like luxury cars. Loxia lenses sell now for about 50-60 percent of their listing prices.. CV 65 and 40mm have taken a big hit as well.
Fred Miranda wrote:
The Loxia 35/2 is my Biogon collectible.
Still love it for landscapes but unsure what will happen if Voigt releases a 35 APO...
twentysevenone wrote:
I've been using the 50 Nokton for a while, and if you're doing close-ish portraits where razor sharp focus on the eyes in critical, it is pretty hard to nail. Especially if you're at a weird angle or position where you can't hold the camera super steady. The focus assist only gets in the way imo. I usually adjust the focus then take 5 shots in rapid succession. 90% of the time I would get at least one shot where it was perfect. Then again, I'm no seasoned hand so I'm sure that sounds hilariously amateurish to some of the more experienced users here.
That being said I do feel like there's a significant difference in rendering between the Nokton 50 and the CV65, even at the same apertures. I'm planning to keep both 50's fwiw....Show more →
If you desire f1.2 or f1.4, this 50 APO won't scratch that itch--go for the Nokton and you won't regret it. I use my CV40 at f1.2 and f1.4 all the time. Takes a bit of practice, but I have plenty of in-focus images of my 4-year old, so you know it's possible
I find with the A7RIV’s improved EVF, I am pretty accurate focusing at portrait distances without magnification. It is much easier to focus MF glass on the new body. I turned off focus peaking and can often get focus nailed w/o even punching in to magnification.
The 50/1.2 is still pretty contrasty even wide open and relatively easy to focus compared to some other fast lenses. At f/2 it is sharp enough for me at close to MFD (improves more at f/2.8 and again at f/4, but f/2 is way better than f/1.2 or f/1.4). Not planning to upgrade or add the 50/2 APO at this point, even though it looks great. If I did more landscape I would be all over it but I used the lens mostly for people.
