Thanks for waiting until I have a toddler to make the manual focus lens I've wanted for 10 years Voigtlander. Now I can make technically perfect out of focus images.
...and there's a decent chance I'm going to buy it anyway.
A feature of the mid-FL CV APOs is the effect on focusing of the very high microcontrast at the focal plane. The enhanced separation and its EVF 'sparkle' makes manual focusing a breeze for experienced MF users (Sony), and it quickly builds confidence in those prepared to put in a little practice. Even in poor light it's very good. CV have long made their general purpose lenses fast acting, with quick ring rotation (90-120 degrees), hopefully this one is no exception.
The new 35/2 APO is a few percent higher in lens microcontrast at f2 than the 50/2, so it should essentially be the same in this respect. And 35mm gives you more accurate focus leeway at f2 than does 50mm. Maybe try one in a shop, see what you think.
Tamron 35 1:2 Macro
Samyang 35/1.4
Sigma 35/1.2
CV 1.2 SE
CV F2 APO
FE 1.8
1.4 GM
Sigma i F2
Samyang f2.8
Sony F2.8 ZA
1.4 ZA
RX1’s
Loxia 35/2
12 35’s native to FE. Excluding RX1’s and Sigma whoppers. Excluding the ones that come free with numerous zooms. Excluding when 24 GM becomes the best 35/2 on a7RIII/a7rIV. Also excluding lenses like B40 or Sammy/Sig 45’s.
18-20-21-25 lengths are even more populated.
Which legacy DSLR brand ever had so many native 35’s. Or 24’s or 20’s or 50’s or 85’s for that matter? You even have odd 55/65/110s here Sony just has too many choices.
there's even the uber cheap ones from Yongnuo and Viltrox
DaveFP wrote:
What is the shortlist of other possible manufacturers?
I don't have a good picture of all Japanese companies that can handle lens manufacturing / production for companies like Zeiss but Kyocera Optec (https://global.kyocera.com/prdct/optec/history.html) is one that is still active and has history with Zeiss (producing Contax Yashica lenses), and if Tamron produced Batis lenses they could have also produced Loxia lenses... There are other less known optical / production companies in Japan that could also be possible manufacturing partners but I haven't studied them in detail.
Juha Kannisto wrote:
I don't have a good picture of all Japanese companies that can handle lens manufacturing / production for companies like Zeiss but Kyocera Optec (https://global.kyocera.com/prdct/optec/history.html) is one that is still active and has history with Zeiss (producing Contax Yashica lenses), and if Tamron produced Batis lenses they could have also produced Loxia lenses... There are other less known optical / production companies in Japan that could also be possible manufacturing partners but I haven't studied them in detail.
Thanks. Odd that an industry insider never broke the story.
fwdesign wrote:
Agree. I can live with the 50 APO's size, but this is larger, especially compared to other 35/2 lenses. Not sure how much of an advantage it has over the ZM 35/1.4. By the way, how did you determine the APO is bigger?
Desmolicious wrote:
Specs on B&H say the ZM 35 1.4 is 65.2mm long
Specs at the beginning of this thread say the Voigtlander is 67.3mm long.
I already hate the size of the ZM, it takes up about 1/3 of the VF on a Leica M. And it is a 1.4 lens.
The VM50/2 APO is about the same size as the 50 Lux ASPH. I agree that for 35mm on a rangefinder, making the VM35/2 APO ~5mm longer than the 50, and the same diameter, isn't great for viewfinder blockage. Once again I'll harp on the fact that Cosina felt it necessary to stick to a 'thick' unified design also common to the f/1.2 trio. I guess it works for the trio, but for these f/2 lenses it's unnecessarily wide.
As I mentioned earlier, the now discontinued VM35/1.7 is a fairly long lens for a 35mm rangefinder lens, but is thinner and uses the Leica standard 46mm filter thread. This lens is a really good performer (IMO) so I'll be interested to see what, if anything, the 35 APO does better. I'm sure it will be better in some way on paper, but whether that will be noticeable in use might be another matter.
It appears there's another difference between the two. Look at the distance scale on each lens. The spacing is tighter on the E mount version suggesting it has a faster/shorter focus throw than the M mount version. Perhaps this is to accommodate the E mount's much closer MFD without making the total focusing ring travel too long. For me though, I'd rather have slower/longer focus throw at farther distances for better ability to fine-tune focus at those distances.
It appears there's another difference between the two. Look at the distance scale on each lens. The spacing is tighter on the E mount version suggesting it has a faster/shorter focus throw than the M mount version.
I think this is because the e mount version focuses closer.
You're too quick. I just added that to my post but you beat me to it. I agree, but I do think it might result in slight functionality differences in respect to ease of fine tuning focus placement at certain distances.
Tamron 35 1:2 Macro
Samyang 35/1.4
Sigma 35/1.2
CV 1.2 SE
CV F2 APO
FE 1.8
1.4 GM
Sigma i F2
Samyang f2.8
Sony F2.8 ZA
1.4 ZA
RX1’s
Loxia 35/2
12 35’s native to FE. Excluding RX1’s and Sigma whoppers. Excluding the ones that come free with numerous zooms. Excluding when 24 GM becomes the best 35/2 on a7RIII/a7rIV. Also excluding lenses like B40 or Sammy/Sig 45’s.
And I still wait for the 28mm f2 APO .
Don`t understand why Voigtlander did not update this very old design.
They came out with soooooooo many 35mm lenses in the last 10 years.
We need a better smaller alternative 28mm lens !!!
18-20-21-25 lengths are even more populated.
Which legacy DSLR brand ever had so many native 35’s. Or 24’s or 20’s or 50’s or 85’s for that matter? You even have odd 55/65/110s here Sony just has too many choices. ...Show more →
Really - they should have come out with a nice 28mm f2 APO !
who really needs so many 35mm options ?
knshshnk wrote:
there's even the uber cheap ones from Yongnuo and Viltrox
I quite like the cheapest 7Artisans/Viltrox 35/2. There's 25 full-frame E-mount 35's listed over at Dyxum. The Samyang APS-C 35/1.2 which pretty well covers full-frame would make 26.
I'm switching back to Sony with the a1. My go to setup right now is the Leica SL2 and the APO Summicron-SL 35 & 50. I'm really hoping the a1 with this lens can render similarly to the Leica. I may end up with the CV 35 and 50 APO for stills. I do a lot of black and white conversions and find that APO lenses usually provide stellar results for my black and white images.
Interesting. Out of curiosity, what is it about the a1 that attracts you to the camera and system? Many/most of the folks I see who are compelled to switch systems are eyeing the a1 as a powerhouse action camera or a video do-it-all.
saxguy wrote:
I'm switching back to Sony with the a1. My go to setup right now is the Leica SL2 and the APO Summicron-SL 35 & 50. I'm really hoping the a1 with this lens can render similarly to the Leica. I may end up with the CV 35 and 50 APO for stills. I do a lot of black and white conversions and find that APO lenses usually provide stellar results for my black and white images.
I do many types of photography - landscape, portraits, event with mostly candid images, product and food photography, wildlife (including BIF). The SL2 is an amazing camera for when I go out and shoot slowly. I used my a9ii for everything else. I was hoping I could have replaced my a9ii for everything except wildlife, but the AF system of the SL2 is not great for shooting moving subjects. I did a photoshoot a few months ago with a chef from NYC who was releasing his own branded caviar line and I had taken my SL2 with me. I noticed I was missing focus a lot (in continuous autofocus - which is not a strong point of the SL2). My daughter had her a7r iii with her and I ended up finishing the shoot with her camera.
I love the imagery from the Leica when I use it to its strengths, but I'm at the point where I can't really justify having two different systems for different uses. I figure the a1 will be able to cover all my shooting scenarios. FWIW, I am branching a bit into video as well, so it will definitely help there.
Cool. I shoot an a7r3 and find it good at many things, from moving children and people, to slower landscape work. I love the CV APO 50 for this type of work and expect the 35 might exceed it. Overall, I expect the a1 will satisfy and excel at nearly everything you want to do. I've been waiting for a camera from Sony that married a denser sensor with the fast action tech of the a9 series. I wish it wasn't such a big investment to get it, but I at least know that one day I'll have an upgrade path for my a7r3.
saxguy wrote:
I do many types of photography - landscape, portraits, event with mostly candid images, product and food photography, wildlife (including BIF). The SL2 is an amazing camera for when I go out and shoot slowly. I used my a9ii for everything else. I was hoping I could have replaced my a9ii for everything except wildlife, but the AF system of the SL2 is not great for shooting moving subjects. I did a photoshoot a few months ago with a chef from NYC who was releasing his own branded caviar line and I had taken my SL2 with me. I noticed I was missing focus a lot (in continuous autofocus - which is not a strong point of the SL2). My daughter had her a7r iii with her and I ended up finishing the shoot with her camera.
I love the imagery from the Leica when I use it to its strengths, but I'm at the point where I can't really justify having two different systems for different uses. I figure the a1 will be able to cover all my shooting scenarios. FWIW, I am branching a bit into video as well, so it will definitely help there. ...Show more →
DavidBM wrote:
I think this is because the e mount version focuses closer.
I'm impressed by the CV 35/2 APO's MTF performance, especially when compared to the CV 50/2 APO's. No hint of field curvature and strong resolution/contrast across the field likely due to low color error.
The CV 50/2 APO gets a big bump from f/2 to f/4 (link), but based on the MTF for both lenses, it looks like the new CV 35/2 APO will perform even better at f/2 and f/2.8.
