p.3 #1 · Voigtländer 50mm f2 apo VS Zeiss Loxia 50mm f2
I share similar subjective opinion as tunisia. I’ve owned Loxia 21, 35 and 50 and VC 40, 50/1.2 and now 50/2. I find VC 50/2 the most “lifelike” with neutral and accurate (to my eye/brain) color, lack of distracting aberrations or faults, a sense of “depth” due to whatever that, all things above and more I am sure combine to make me feel I am looking into a scene vs at a scene. Few lenses do that for me consistently like the 50/2.
p.3 #2 · Voigtländer 50mm f2 apo VS Zeiss Loxia 50mm f2
ysultan wrote:
Yes, I totally agree. For landscape, the Loxia 50mm is excellent. It's OK wide open but with several flaws. I'm just surprised that many people in this thread are saying the Loxia is the better lens.
I'm a huge Zeiss fan, but the CV 50mm is one of the few lenses that work in any situation without issues. When it's attached to my camera, I'm not concerned about stopping down a little to get more resolution or to get rid of the CA or SA or to get better bokeh rendering (as we do with the Loxia 35mm). It's just almost perfect regardless of the circumstances. I can say the same about Loxia 85mm but not 50mm.
Would a fair assement be that the Loxia 50 does well for Landscape, whereas the Voigtlander does well through out the whole f stop range like the Loxia 85
Jan 09, 2021 at 02:32 PM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
p.3 #3 · Voigtländer 50mm f2 apo VS Zeiss Loxia 50mm f2
IndyFab wrote:
Would a fair assement be that the Loxia 50 does well for Landscape, whereas the Voigtlander does well through out the whole f stop range like the Loxia 85
I don't have the Voigtlander 50 f/2 APO (yet), but I did have the Loxia 50 for a couple of years. The Loxia is a fantastic landscape lens, but I replaced it because I want a versatile 50 that can do a lot of things. I want my 50 to be a decent portrait lens wide open (the Loxia is pretty good but not close to ideal as a portrait lens). I want my 50 to be excellent for close up shots even wide open (the Loxia is ok for that but not very close to excellent). I want my 50 to be an excellent landscape lens (and here the Loxia does get full marks as an excellent landscape lens). Right now I have the Voigtlander 50 f/1.2 and I am glad I replaced the Loxia 50 with it. Although the Loxia is perhaps a bit better at landscapes, the Voigtlander is way better at portraits and a more versatile lens for what I shoot anyway. I plan to get the CV 50 f/2 APO, however, to replace the CV 50 f/1.2 and even though the 50 f/2 APO might not be quite as good as the 50 f/1.2 for portraits, it will be more versatile. I expect it to do portraits very well, landscapes very well, and be much better than the other two at close ups (as it has a floating element). So, there are lots of reasons to pick and like the Loxia 50, for me, however, it is the versatility that makes me want the CV 50 f/2 APO.
p.3 #4 · Voigtländer 50mm f2 apo VS Zeiss Loxia 50mm f2
IndyFab wrote:
Would a fair assement be that the Loxia 50 does well for Landscape, whereas the Voigtlander does well through out the whole f stop range like the Loxia 85
Yep; and the round blades at /2 and /2.8 makes it a great portrait lens.
In fairness though the Loxias "dual character" nature is also very nice.
p.3 #5 · Voigtländer 50mm f2 apo VS Zeiss Loxia 50mm f2
darrellc wrote:
. . .all things above and more I am sure combine to make me feel I am looking into a scene vs at a scene. Few lenses do that for me consistently like the 50/2.
I agree. I call it the Clean Window effect. The 65mm and the 50mm APO-Lanthar lenses both do this very well in all apertures and circumstances in which I have used them. The 50mm is simply much more pleasant to carry. I have never used the Loxia 50mm but I believe it is an excellent lens too.
p.3 #6 · Voigtländer 50mm f2 apo VS Zeiss Loxia 50mm f2
Things took a turn for me, unexpectedly. Since I did not want to go back to a three lens kit like before: Loxia 25, 35, 50, I scrapped the 35 because of the focal length.
I was not fully convinced of either the Loxia 50 or the Voigt 50 apo as the second lens next to the Loxia 50.
Taking a quick look at the other options while not expecting an alternative, I stumbled on the relatively new Zeiss Batis 40mm f2.
as I love Zeiss distagon lenses, it took little convincing to get me to order it. For me, it is the perfect companion to the Loxia 25.
p.3 #8 · Voigtländer 50mm f2 apo VS Zeiss Loxia 50mm f2
Steve Spencer wrote:
I don't have the Voigtlander 50 f/2 APO (yet), but I did have the Loxia 50 for a couple of years. The Loxia is a fantastic landscape lens, but I replaced it because I want a versatile 50 that can do a lot of things. I want my 50 to be a decent portrait lens wide open (the Loxia is pretty good but not close to ideal as a portrait lens). I want my 50 to be excellent for close up shots even wide open (the Loxia is ok for that but not very close to excellent). I want my 50 to be an excellent landscape lens (and here the Loxia does get full marks as an excellent landscape lens). Right now I have the Voigtlander 50 f/1.2 and I am glad I replaced the Loxia 50 with it. Although the Loxia is perhaps a bit better at landscapes, the Voigtlander is way better at portraits and a more versatile lens for what I shoot anyway. I plan to get the CV 50 f/2 APO, however, to replace the CV 50 f/1.2 and even though the 50 f/2 APO might not be quite as good as the 50 f/1.2 for portraits, it will be more versatile. I expect it to do portraits very well, landscapes very well, and be much better than the other two at close ups (as it has a floating element). So, there are lots of reasons to pick and like the Loxia 50, for me, however, it is the versatility that makes me want the CV 50 f/2 APO....Show more →
Steve! Stop ! What are you thinking? If you buy one lens that can do the work of three, that eliminates the rationale for buying two additional lenses!
p.3 #9 · Voigtländer 50mm f2 apo VS Zeiss Loxia 50mm f2
It may have been Walter Mandler who said that the only way to get to know a lens is to use it for a year; everything else is a shortcut. In any event that's my experience. It's easy to evaluate things like centering, sharpness in the corners at various f-stops, and so forth), but those are not good predictors of whether I'm going to really connect long term with a lens in actual use.
So I wonder, nearly two years out from choosing the Batis 40 as the solution to your Loxia vs Apo-Lanthar dilemma, do you find the Batis 40's color and contrast as satisfying to work with as the Loxia 25's?
I'm in kind of the opposite place as you were. I have the Batis 40 and find myself tempted to try the Loxia 35 and 50 in its place.
p.3 #11 · Voigtländer 50mm f2 apo VS Zeiss Loxia 50mm f2
ChrisMak wrote:
Things took a turn for me, unexpectedly. Since I did not want to go back to a three lens kit like before: Loxia 25, 35, 50, I scrapped the 35 because of the focal length.
I was not fully convinced of either the Loxia 50 or the Voigt 50 apo as the second lens next to the Loxia 50.
Taking a quick look at the other options while not expecting an alternative, I stumbled on the relatively new Zeiss Batis 40mm f2.
as I love Zeiss distagon lenses, it took little convincing to get me to order it. For me, it is the perfect companion to the Loxia 25....Show more →
Don't you mean the Tamron Batis 40mm f/2? Is there anything Distagon about it?
p.3 #12 · Voigtländer 50mm f2 apo VS Zeiss Loxia 50mm f2
Voightlander is a better lens than the Loxia and colours are changeable in post. I don’t shoot Jepg. I only have a Loxia 25. I have the Voightlander APO’s 35, 50 and 110.
I have now settled on
Loxia 25 - CV35 apo - Loxia 50
I bought the Loxia 35 again new, but sold it because the inherent weaknesses made me enjoy it less than when I had my first copy.
The CV35 apo does not quite have the Zeiss colors I like so much, but it is a superior lens in all other regards.
The Loxia 50 has less obvious weaknesses, and so for 50mm, the great Zeiss colors keep this lens in my bag, and I would not want to trade the color rendition for the better technical qualities of the CV50 apo
p.3 #15 · Voigtländer 50mm f2 apo VS Zeiss Loxia 50mm f2
ChrisMak wrote:
I have now settled on
Loxia 25 - CV35 apo - Loxia 50
I bought the Loxia 35 again new, but sold it because the inherent weaknesses made me enjoy it less than when I had my first copy.
The CV35 apo does not quite have the Zeiss colors I like so much, but it is a superior lens in all other regards.
The Loxia 50 has less obvious weaknesses, and so for 50mm, the great Zeiss colors keep this lens in my bag, and I would not want to trade the color rendition for the better technical qualities of the CV50 apo
I currently own the Loxia 25 and CV 50 APO. I sold the Loxia 35 and 50 some time back. I just ordered a Loxia 50 again based to some degree on this thread. I too miss the color and look of the Loxia 50 and have not been wowed by the perfection that is the 50 APO. I suspect after some testing of the Loxia 50 vs the CV 50 I will end up trading the CV 50 for the CV 35 APO and end up exactly where you are ending up.
Sun stars on the Loxia lenses are so much better for cityscapes that I have even considered the Loxia 35 just for that purpose.
p.3 #16 · Voigtländer 50mm f2 apo VS Zeiss Loxia 50mm f2
It's good to see that many people have more or less made up their minds, and have expressed sound reasons for it. Indecision about a four year old lens is probably not the best state of mind to be in. Maybe Cosina can try a little harder next time with version 2. ;-)
There has been a lot written about Zeiss color. I would greatly appreciate somebody posting some links which demonstrate images of the same subject where a Zeiss lens is compared to other lens brands.
There has been a lot written about Zeiss color. I would greatly appreciate somebody posting some links which demonstrate images of the same subject where a Zeiss lens is compared to other lens brands.
Aren't some of Fred's Lens reviews - where he compares a lens to its Zeiss equivalent pretty revealing in regard to color differences (or lack of)? Like this:
I don't see much difference between the color or contrast renderings of the Voigtlander and the Loxia 21s. Whatever differences you think you see in one aperture pair is shifted slightly in the next pair - particularly in the mid-field tests.
p.3 #19 · Voigtländer 50mm f2 apo VS Zeiss Loxia 50mm f2
Frankly, I'm frustrated about Zeiss color.
Many people praise it but there is no evidence to support that praise.
My post on DPR (https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4697411) showed the Loxia 35 and two other 35mm lenses. Nobody could identify the Loxia because the color of all three lenses was the same.
Steve Huff compared Zeiss and Leica 50mm lenses and their color was identical.
It appears to me that "Zeiss color" is an idea without evidence. In blunter words, "A Myth".
p.3 #20 · Voigtländer 50mm f2 apo VS Zeiss Loxia 50mm f2
AeroPhoto wrote:
Frankly, I'm frustrated about Zeiss color.
Many people praise it but there is no evidence to support that praise.
My post on DPR (https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4697411) showed the Loxia 35 and two other 35mm lenses. Nobody could identify the Loxia because the color of all three lenses was the same.
Steve Huff compared Zeiss and Leica 50mm lenses and their color was identical.
It appears to me that "Zeiss color" is an idea without evidence. In blunter words, "A Myth".
The thing is, accurate colour - ie passing all visible frequencies more or less evenly - is not that hard to achieve nowadays, though some wides still have a caste in the corners.
So you would hope and expect that top lenses would be identical in this respect.
That's not to say that some lenses still have a slight overall caste; typically warmer meaning more blue light is absorbed than other frequencies. But many really good ones don't. Not that I care much in this era of easy colour management.
The idea of typical colour, or in Zeiss' case "zeiss colour" I think stems from the time when there was much more colour variation between lenses, even between different lenses in the same brand. So a brand that could guarantee all their lenses were similar had an advantage, especially in cinematography.
But these days most brands have internal consistency, and many are genuinely neutral. Those lenses looking the same is a feature, not a bug!
