realVivek wrote:
OTOH, those who do not have (or isn’t interested in buying the 65/2) will not miss it when there is this 50/2.
The 50/2 behaves well with extension rings attached.
Yep, that is why it is a good general purpose lens. When I am primarily shooting macro, however, I much prefer not be restricted by extension tubes, so there is wider range of magnifications I can easily select without having to put tubes on and take tubes off. So, personally for when I shoot close ups and macro, I would still miss the 65 f/2.
In my opinion, the Sony FE 50/1.4 ZA has a nice balance between resolution and rendering. In other words, the correction for spherical aberration (SA) is just right providing neutral rendering where foreground and background are similarly smooth. The Voigtlander 50mm f/2 APO renders similarly since it's not under-corrected for spherical aberration either.
Lenses like the 40 and 50mm f/1.2 Nokton will have smoother rendering, especially at closer distance where SA is strongest.
The samples below show the area of magnification on the thumbnail, followed by a 1:4 magnified crop.
(Vignetting and chomactic aberration not corrected in post)
Fred Miranda wrote:
It won't be equal towards the corners at any aperture though (even > f/5.6). Both CV 40/1.2 and 50/1.2 lenses have strong center and mid-field at f/5.6 but the corner areas can't match the CV 50/2 APO's resolution. There is also visible astigmatism and lateral CA for the Noktons.
I've shot landscapes with the Noktons and was happy with IQ on the A7R3. For the A7R4, we have a better choice now.
So of the current crop of 35mm to 40mm lenses, which one would be the best choice if you really like the optical characteristic of the CV 50/2 APO, but you really like the 35-40mm FOV better?
I have the Contax 35-70 and the CV 40mm f1.2 and neither one seems ideal. They don't really seem to offer a significant improvement over my Sony 24-105mm at f8. Am I chasing unicorns? Or is there something (Loxia 35, Batis 40, Sigma or Samyang) that would offer a significant improvement in that 35-40 range? I had a Loxia 50mm, (Fred's copy actually) and it didn't do much for me, I think due to 50mm FOV. Any of the 35-40ish lenses of a reasonable size and weight worth a shot or just try the 50mm APO and hope I like it better than Loxia 50?
smpetty wrote:
I'm struggling to decide which lens to keep - the CV 50/2 APO or the CV 50/1.2 Nokton. Both are E-Mount and I'll be using the lens on an A7RIII.
The size is a wash - both are compact enough.
From f/1.2 to f/2, the Nokton is alone and, IMO, spectacular.
From f/2 to f/5.6, it seems that the 50/2 APO is hard to beat. This is a much used range for most, me included.
When closed down beyond f/5.6, I would imagine that the lenses are very close to equal. I would frequently use the lens for landscapes and waterfalls, so this range is important to me as well.
It is hard for me to choose the 50/2 APO over the 50/1.2 Nokton. The Nokton gives me a speed range and isolation that the APO can't. The Nokton, in my experience, has been wonderful closed down for landscapes. And I'd bet that the Nokton would do "good enough" in the 50/2 APO's home park from f/2 to f/5.6.
I realize that chromatic aberration will be less with the APO, but it has rarely been a problem for me with the Nokton. I suppose the bokeh balls would be better on the APO, but they aren't so important to me, and of course the APO can't do f/1.2 to f/2.
Am I missing anything in my comparison? They are both incredible lenses, but I can't keep both....Show more →
I'm having exactly the same issue. It would usually be a no brainer for me to get a superb lens like the 50/2 apo, but I already have a 50/1.2 (and 40/1.2) in M-mount, which I got primarily for wide-open flower use, but of course I can use it in other ways too. And my favorite flower lenses, Zeiss 50/1.4 ZE and Contax 50/1.4 (near twins). When I want perfection, I can use the Otus 55 or the GFX with 63/2.8, and once again I have the CV 65/2 apo-lanthar that I immediately ordered when I went back to Sony, and which is never leaving here again.
So....tough to say. Since I'm a lens pig, I may just get a 50/2 apo and be done with it, but I don't like to buy something, however good, if I can't put my finger on when I'll use it.
billsnature wrote:
So of the current crop of 35mm to 40mm lenses, which one would be the best choice if you really like the optical characteristic of the CV 50/2 APO, but you really like the 35-40mm FOV better?
I have the Contax 35-70 and the CV 40mm f1.2 and neither one seems ideal. They don't really seem to offer a significant improvement over my Sony 24-105mm at f8. Am I chasing unicorns? Or is there something (Loxia 35, Batis 40, Sigma or Samyang) that would offer a significant improvement in that 35-40 range? I had a Loxia 50mm, (Fred's copy actually) and it didn't do much for me, I think due to 50mm FOV. Any of the 35-40ish lenses of a reasonable size and weight worth a shot or just try the 50mm APO and hope I like it better than Loxia 50?...Show more →
The Sigma 35/1.2 is superb and better than anything else at its focal length but then you did mention reasonable size and weight so.....
DannyBurkPhoto wrote:
I'm having exactly the same issue. It would usually be a no brainer for me to get a superb lens like the 50/2 apo, but I already have a 50/1.2 (and 40/1.2) in M-mount, which I got primarily for wide-open flower use, but of course I can use it in other ways too. And my favorite flower lenses, Zeiss 50/1.4 ZE and Contax 50/1.4 (near twins). When I want perfection, I can use the Otus 55 or the GFX with 63/2.8, and once again I have the CV 65/2 apo-lanthar that I immediately ordered when I went back to Sony, and which is never leaving here again.
So....tough to say. Since I'm a lens pig, I may just get a 50/2 apo and be done with it, but I don't like to buy something, however good, if I can't put my finger on when I'll use it....Show more →
I currently have the CV 21mm f1.4 and 40mm f1.2 lenses. They have quickly become two of my most used lenses in my Sony kit. There is a good chance in 2020 the 50mm 65mm and 110mm APO lenses will be finding their way into my bag. The IQ of the 65 and 110 already had me sold, and so far this 50mm f2 APO is looking excellent too.
Bokeh is very smooth and better still, low contrast for excellent fore-aft separation off the focal plane. Low contrast leads to less apparent 'small balling'. Deeper, a shade more fine texture in the flower head crop. Very close, however.
Sunstar rendering compared to Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 Nokton:
The CV 50/2 APO's newly designed 12-aperture blade employs a special shape that becomes completely circular not only at f/2, but also at f/2.8, but how does that work for sunstars?
Sunrise side-by-side comparison between the Voigtlander 50/2 APO (12-blade hybrid aperture) versus Voigtlander 40/1.2 Nokton (10-straight-blade aperture)
Voigtlander 40/1.2 @f/2 (TOP) | Voigtlander 50/2 @f/2 (BOTTOM)
This result is expected since the Voigtlander is wide open and the aperture is fully circular.
Voigtlander 40/1.2 @f/2.8 (TOP) | Voigtlander 50/2 @f/2.8 (BOTTOM)
This result is expected since the new Voigtlander has a fully circular aperture at f/2.8.
Voigtlander 40/1.2 @f/4 (TOP) | Voigtlander 50/2 @f/4 (BOTTOM)
Both lenses show similar sunstar rendering.
The Voigtlander 40/1.2's sunstar has 10 points and the 50/2 APO has 12.
Fred Miranda wrote: Sunstar rendering compared to Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 Nokton:
The CV 50/2 APO's newly designed 12-aperture blade employs a special shape that becomes completely circular not only at f/2, but also at f/2.8, but how does that work for sunstars?
Today at sunrise, I did a side-by-side comparison with the Voigtlander 40/1.2 Nokton which has a 10-straight blade aperture.
Here are the results:
Voigtlander 40/1.2 @f/2 (TOP) | Voigtlander 50/2 @f/2 (BOTTOM): This result is expected since the Voigtlander is wide open and the aperture is fully circular
Voigtlander 40/1.2 @f/2.8 (TOP) | Voigtlander 50/2 @f/2.8 (BOTTOM): This result is expected since the new Voigtlander has a fully circular aperture at f/2.8
Voigtlander 40/1.2 @f/4 (TOP) | Voigtlander 50/2 @f/4 (BOTTOM): Both lenses show similar sunstar rendering. The Voigtlander 40/1.2's sunstar has 10 points and the 50/2 APO has 12.
I just received my copy and got a few quick shots. I love the handling of this lens . . . easy to focus, Love the size too. And in a few quick shots, colors seem to be wonderfully rich. Can't wait for tomorrow!
hanay78 wrote:
what an interesting moment, do I buy loxia or apo-lanthar... ? anxiously waiting for a comparison
Yes! It's odd to compare it to an AF 1.4 instead of the Zeiss Loxia 50 f2. I don't consider them as competitors at all.
Fred- are you suggesting that the Sony 50 1.4 is sharper or as sharp as the Loxia also? I have never considered any AF lens to be as sharp as a high end manual focus design. Kind of amazing if that is the case. And both from Zeiss, (sort of).
Hopefully someone with do the comparison with the Loxia soon.
stevesanacore wrote:
Yes! It's odd to compare it to an AF 1.4 instead of the Zeiss Loxia 50 f2. I don't consider them as competitors at all.
Fred- are you suggesting that the Sony 50 1.4 is sharper or as sharp as the Loxia also? I have never considered any AF lens to be as sharp as a high end manual focus design. Kind of amazing if that is the case. And both from Zeiss, (sort of).
Hopefully someone with do the comparison with the Loxia soon.
But thank you Fred for the extensive review!
Now you made me curious about which MF 135/1.8 is sharper than the Sony 135/1.8 GM.
I’ve been using the new Tamron 35mm f1.4 SP (Canon Mount, adapted), and it is, by far the best 35mm I’ve ever used, and it’s also great for Astro. My previous fave was the 35mm f2.0 Zeiss Nikon Mount).
billsnature wrote:
So of the current crop of 35mm to 40mm lenses, which one would be the best choice if you really like the optical characteristic of the CV 50/2 APO, but you really like the 35-40mm FOV better?
I have the Contax 35-70 and the CV 40mm f1.2 and neither one seems ideal. They don't really seem to offer a significant improvement over my Sony 24-105mm at f8. Am I chasing unicorns? Or is there something (Loxia 35, Batis 40, Sigma or Samyang) that would offer a significant improvement in that 35-40 range? I had a Loxia 50mm, (Fred's copy actually) and it didn't do much for me, I think due to 50mm FOV. Any of the 35-40ish lenses of a reasonable size and weight worth a shot or just try the 50mm APO and hope I like it better than Loxia 50?...Show more →
Chris VenHaus wrote:
I’ve been using the new Tamron 35mm f1.4 SP (Canon Mount, adapted), and it is, by far the best 35mm I’ve ever used, and it’s also great for Astro.
Infinity Performance compared to Voigtlander 65/2 APO-Lanthar
The Voigtlander 65mm f/2 APO-Lanthar Macro is one of the top lenses for the Sony E-mount. This lens is capable of extremely high resolution across the frame and many of us are wondering how the new CV 50/2 APO-Lanthar compares.
The CV 65/2 APO has the advantage being a longer focal length but to my surprise the Voigtlander 50/2 APO competed neck to neck and in many instances outperformed it.
Image thumbnail with area demonstrated at 1:1 magnification:
Distance: Infinity
Camera: Sony A7R IV
Focus: Center - Best of three @ 12.4x magnification
Software: Lightroom with my default landscape sharpening. All other settings set to default
PS: Vignetting* and distortion were NOT corrected. All in-camera corrections turned 'off'.
Center Resolution and Contrast:
Both lenses are similar at center wide-open which means very strong performance for the CV 50/2 APO since it is a shorter focal length.
f/2.8: Minor resolution improvement for both lenses.
f/4: No noticeable differences
f/5.6: Similar, no noticeable differences
f/8: Slight diffraction only visible at center. Both lenses still holding on to detail.
Mid-field Resolution and Contrast:
f/2: Surprising results. The CV 50/2 APO is slightly better at f/2 (mid-field). This is outstanding performance.
f/2.8: Minor changes for both lenses. Possibly the optimal aperture for the mid-field.
f/8: Some diffraction but still strong mid-field performance for both lenses.
Extreme Corner Resolution and Contrast:
f/2: Excellent at extreme corners on both. However, the CV 50/2 APO performs slightly better.
*The CV 50/2 APO crop is noisier because I increased exposure in post to compensate for its stronger vignetting.
f/2.8: Both similar but more detail and contrast for the 50/2 APO.
f/4: The CV 65/2 shows improvement, however, the CV 50/2 APO still performs slighlyl better.
f/5.6: Strong performance for both lenses.
f/8: Some diffraction but still strong extreme corner performance for both lenses.
rji2goleez wrote:
I just received my copy and got a few quick shots. I love the handling of this lens . . . easy to focus, Love the size too. And in a few quick shots, colors seem to be wonderfully rich. Can't wait for tomorrow!
Congrats Bob!
Very nice samples. Can't wait to take it for a real spin myself!
