Tell them Fred, please. They might listen to you
I still will take an updated 35mm f1.7 Ultron if they make one for E mount.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Voigtlander created something really unique here. The CV 50/2 APO is not only capable of extreme high resolution and contrast (same or better than 65/2 APO which I consider a reference lens), but it is also balanced enough to provide very pleasant and smooth rendering which is not always the case with high resolution/contrast lenses.
Color error correction is also the strongest I've seen in a 50mm lens -- and I keep asking myself, how did they do this!? ...and for this price.
Definitely looking forward to shooting with a wider focal length with similar characteristics.
Does anyone own both the CV50 APO and the Zeiss Sony 50 1.4 ZA? I'd love to hear some opinions. I'm most comfortable at 50mm snd the 50 1.4 ZA is almost always mounted to my a7r iv, but I would love to hear some pros and cons in comparing the two.
saxguy wrote:
Does anyone own both the CV50 APO and the Zeiss Sony 50 1.4 ZA? I'd love to hear some opinions. I'm most comfortable at 50mm snd the 50 1.4 ZA is almost always mounted to my a7r iv, but I would love to hear some pros and cons in comparing the two.
I think the images they produce have a different "feel". The ZA is perhaps a bit more "organic" and the APO more "clinical", but I wouldn't define the APO images as clinical, per se. Both are very sharp, but I have the impression that the APO is sharper, but I don't think this is necessarily a good thing in all use cases. I prefer the bokeh of the ZA more often than not, but that could just be a result of the 1.4 aperture.
Physically, the lenses are night and day. The ZA is big and relatively heavy and has AF. The APO is tiny and MF. The APO is much easier to cart around and perhaps more fun to use since the MF has a very nice feel to it.
While I am amazed by the APO, I still haven't decided if I like the way it renders as much as other options. I think for landscape or cityscape work it is hard to beat due to its sharpness and bite and it captures extremely subtle gradations of color and value beautifully. I also think it makes an outstanding black and white lens. For people, street, other more general purpose uses I'm not so sure.
All of this is subjective. I have not compared the two side by side on the same subject not have I done any real testing of either lens, so take what I say with a grain of salt. Others may have a completely different perspective.
lunar module wrote:
I think the images they produce have a different "feel". The ZA is perhaps a bit more "organic" and the APO more "clinical", but I wouldn't define the APO images as clinical, per se. Both are very sharp, but I have the impression that the APO is sharper, but I don't think this is necessarily a good thing in all use cases. I prefer the bokeh of the ZA more often than not, but that could just be a result of the 1.4 aperture.
Physically, the lenses are night and day. The ZA is big and relatively heavy and has AF. The APO is tiny and MF. The APO is much easier to cart around and perhaps more fun to use since the MF has a very nice feel to it.
While I am amazed by the APO, I still haven't decided if I like the way it renders as much as other options. I think for landscape or cityscape work it is hard to beat due to its sharpness and bite and it captures extremely subtle gradations of color and value beautifully. I also think it makes an outstanding black and white lens. For people, street, other more general purpose uses I'm not so sure.
All of this is subjective. I have not compared the two side by side on the same subject not have I done any real testing of either lens, so take what I say with a grain of salt. Others may have a completely different perspective.
Thanks, I do a lot of monochrome conversions and it seems like perhaps the micro contrast that the 50 APO can deliver may be beneficial in creating a more striking image (I like higher contrast). Unfortunately for my wallet, it looks like both could easily live in my kit.
saxguy wrote:
Thanks, I do a lot of monochrome conversions and it seems like perhaps the micro contrast that the 50 APO can deliver may be beneficial in creating a more striking image (I like higher contrast). Unfortunately for my wallet, it looks like both could easily live in my kit.
Yes. The classic solution to all lens questions! Own both. : )
I took the ZA and the APO with me this morning on my daily walk with my dog and tried to snap some photos of the same subject with each lens at the same (or at least close) settings. Here are a few for comparison. The most obvious thing I notice is that the APO has much more vignetting than the ZA.
Some more side by side comparisons of the ZA and the APO. To be honest, the differences (other than the vignetting on the APO) are pretty minimal. Please note that downsampling is wiping out a LOT of detail in these images that is present in the originals. The sharpness of both of these lenses is super impressive on the originals. Is there some way to avoid this?
