Fred, thanks for the performance comparison against the 65/2. I have to say I disagree with your text on the extreme corner crops stopped down a bit....I think the 65/2 looks a touch better at f/2.8 and smaller, but of course we're splitting very fine hairs here.
Received my copy and took it out this morning to get some first impressions. 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 was used.
Unlike the 110 macro, I do occasionally see some green or purple fringing in the typical areas. Out of the photos below, you can see some in the tree branches of the photo with the girl carrying a yellow back pack.
If you want to pixel peep, follow the flickr link under each photo and download the full original resolution files.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Congrats Bob!
Very nice samples. Can't wait to take it for a real spin myself!
Thanks Fred! And thanks for the testing too! I think this lens is going to be a winner. It's overall equal to (if not some slightly better) than the 65/2 APO which is quite remarkable. So far I love the colors and rendering too.
A 65/2 has roughly a 30% advantage in native magnification, as compared to a 50/2 lens. Around 30% is a significantly tougher test of the 50mm lens. 100% crops will retain the advantage, for these images.
philip_pj wrote:
A 65/2 has roughly a 30% advantage in native magnification, as compared to a 50/2 lens. Around 30% is a significantly tougher test of the 50mm lens. 100% crops will retain the advantage, for these images.
My thoughts exactly.
When I compared the CV 110 to the CV 65, the former looked way better on 1:1 crops because of the higher native magnification. The CV 50/2 APO matching and even exceeding the resolution of the longer 65mm was a surprise to me. I'm starting to think this will be the top Sony lens.
The FE 50/1.4 ZA is the only lens that does slightly better at the very center but it can't come even close to the 50/2's mid-zone performance and that's where we usually like to position our subjects to. (Think rule of thirds)
That's a great set, rich realistic colour in dismal skies. The flat field gives images that perfectly settled cross frame look. Low distortion also important, LensTip found the 65/2 has 0.33% on full-frame, what is this one?
Front bokeh looks well drawn here, and the tricky foliage draw also very good. The 50/2 is unruffled shooting in low light. Bokeh rendering is present but not strident.
It's a reference lens that other relevant 50mm lenses can be compared to. But the image qualities go far past that, happily. At f2, these look soft and very stylish - nothing jangles. A kind of transparency, hyper-real almost. A little like a 100MP in a more content-rich focal length. Very happy to get one of these.
They didn't skimp on glass. I think here the designer is referring to the (additional over the 65/2) rear asph, to fix something some saw on the 65/2 - moderate coma:
'The front group is all anomalous dispersion glass, except for aspheric lenses. From the other end, I'm using glass that really takes care of color and eliminates chromatic aberration. ~New glass that didn't exist 10 years ago.~ Since the aspherical surface is added, there is no coma and the image is resolved to the outermost periphery, so you can be satisfied even if you take a picture of a star.'
I actually believed that would be the case before placing my order (and payment).
Fred Miranda wrote:
It's possible Voigtlander may raise the price of this lens. They've done this in the past.
I've heard that pre-orders are through the roof.
I’m using the new Tamron 35/2.8, Voigtlander 50/2, Voigtlander 110/2.5 or CanonTSE 90 II as my mid range kit. The 65/2 will go up for sale, as I’m not a massive macro shooter.
Lens is looking lovely, thanks, Fred! Can't wait to get my preorder Monday. I'm fairly certain I'm keeping my CV 40, 65, and 50 ZA but am wavering a bit on that last one.
