It's seems like this aperture mechanism is a V2.......
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, I just looked at my CV 50/2 APO VM's aperture shape and it's completely round at f/5.6. I don't have the E-mount version anymore but based on the f/5.6 sunstar samples I posted above, it was not completely round like the VM version. Weird.
Aside from f/2, Voigtlander mentions round aperture shape at f/2.8, f/5.6 and f/16 for the CV 35/2 APO E-mount but only f/2.8 for the 50/2 APO E-mount. So, it looks like they have slightly different aperture mechanisms.
Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO vs Voigtlander 50mm f/2 APO E-mount (Optical Design):
Voigtlander 35/2 APO E-mount Design: 11 elements in 9 groups with two (2) double sided aspherical elements, five (5) with anomalous partial dispersion and an integrated floating-focus system
Voigtlander 50/2 APO E-mount Design: 10 elements in 8 groups with two (2) double sided aspherical elements, five (5) with anomalous partial dispersion and an integrated floating-focus system
Feb 15, 2021 at 12:40 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Fred Miranda wrote:
The 35/2 APO E-mount has a stronger MTF performance wide open, but sagittal/meridional lines are not as tight.
Those look like excellent MTF performance. A little more astigmatism for the 35 than 50, but it is still very low and excellent across the frame performance from wide open.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Those look like excellent MTF performance. A little more astigmatism for the 35 than 50, but it is still very low and excellent across the frame performance from wide open.
Yes, perhaps the best we've seen in a 35/2 lens.
It's the same weight and length as the Sigma 35/2 DG DN (but noticeably skinnier) and only 6mm longer than the 50mm f/2 APO E-mount.
Compared to the Sigma, the new CV 35/2 APO has longer MFD though. (0.35m vs 0.27m)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, perhaps the best we've seen in a 35/2 lens.
It's the same weight and length as the Sigma 35/2 DG DN (but noticeably skinnier) and only 6mm longer than the 50mm f/2 APO E-mount.
Compared to the Sigma, the new CV 35/2 APO has longer MFD though. (0.35m vs 0.27m)
Yeah, it interesting because the CV 35/1.2 is .3m MFD , only 35grams heavier but 7.4mm shorter. It's crazy how many different pathways there are optically to get to roughly the same Field of view.
Granted, AFAIK Sony & Voigtlander both use calculated MTF instead of measured but at least from the MTF the Sony looks more impressive to me seeing that the Sony is at 1.4 and there's less astigmatism. At f2 I'd be very surprised if the APO does better.
EDIT: Apologies to Fred, didn't see the f2 qualifier to this statement.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, perhaps the best we've seen in a 35/2 lens.
It's the same weight and length as the Sigma 35/2 DG DN (but noticeably skinnier) and only 6mm longer than the 50mm f/2 APO E-mount.
Compared to the Sigma, the new CV 35/2 APO has longer MFD though. (0.35m vs 0.27m)
I think I can handle a 13.8" (35cm) MFD (from the sensor plane) in a 35mm optic.
More importantly it has a floating element focusing system so it should be great at MFD, correct?
Oh the choices in the 35, 40, and 45mm range we have!
Next up on what I want to see is the flare/ghosting characteristics and the off-center coma, but we'll have to wait for Fred to get his hands on one.
This plays right into my overall lens scheme of having fast, medium and slow lenses at certain focal lengths:
20/1.8GM - 21/2.8Lox - 21/3.5CV
35/1.4GM - 35/2APO CV - 35/2.8Sony
85/1.4GM - 85/1.8 Sony - 85/4ZM
135/1.8GM - 135/3.4APO Telyt
I don't have the 35/1.4 not 85/1.4 yet and my bank account is fine with that. Will pre-order the 35/2APO most likely.
Feb 15, 2021 at 01:57 PM
Steve Spencer Online • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Granted, AFAIK Sony & Voigtlander both use calculated MTF instead of measured but at least from the MTF the Sony looks more impressive to me seeing that the Sony is at 1.4 and there's less astigmatism. At f2 I'd be very surprised if the APO does better.
You can't compare MTFs from different manufacturers this way. We don't know if they are using the same assumptions or not. For example, in these two sets of MTFs it looks like Voigtlander is correcting for diffraction and Sony is not (I don't think the F/8 numbers could be that high correcting for diffraction), and if that is true the graphs certainly aren't comparable.
Steve Spencer wrote:
You can't compare MTFs from different manufacturers this way. We don't know if they are using the same assumptions or not. For example, in these two sets of MTFs it looks like Voigtlander is correcting for diffraction and Sony is not (I don't think the F/8 numbers could be that high correcting for diffraction), and if that is true the graphs certainly aren't comparable.
Possibly, I was just responding to the claim of "best MTF @ 35mm". If you wanna go really deep down the rabbit hole, any company that doesn't publish MTFs of production lenses is essentially putting smoke and mirrors over their manufacturing capabilities which leaves essentially... Zeiss?
OLAF is of course invaluable here, but we never know when Rodger will have the time & the inventory just lying around for testing. Speaking of OLAF, Sony has been on a real roll with their G and GM primes lately. I'm inclined to give them a little benefit of the doubt—not so much as to believe there would ever be a manufactured lens that would match that chart... but perhaps enough that it would take the #1 slot for Sony until we see enough tests of both lenses to get an opinion of the aggregate performance.
Looks like the new CV 35 f2 Ultron V2 is up on their site as well, in black and silver with a focus tab. Voigtlander seems like it listens. Everything about this APO and the new ultron looks wonderful.
Jmonat7 wrote:
Looks like the new CV 35 f2 Ultron V2 is up on their site as well, in black and silver with a focus tab. Voigtlander seems like it listens. Everything about this APO and the new ultron looks wonderful.
I wonder/suspect/hope if this re-released 35/2 ultron has been tweaked at all to play nice on both the Sony and Leica sensor stacks like other newer CV releases.
I have the CV 35/2 Ultron v1, but it's really quite poor on a stock Sony.
Granted, AFAIK Sony & Voigtlander both use calculated MTF instead of measured but at least from the MTF the Sony looks more impressive to me seeing that the Sony is at 1.4 and there's less astigmatism. At f2 I'd be very surprised if the APO does better.
MTFs are manufacturer/technique specific.
You can only compare them within the same brand/line.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I wonder/suspect/hope if this re-released 35/2 ultron has been tweaked at all to play nice on both the Sony and Leica sensor stacks like other newer CV releases.
I have the CV 35/2 Ultron v1, but it's really quite poor on a stock Sony.
I don't think there was an optical change. Only cosmetics and focusing ring style.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
I wonder/suspect/hope if this re-released 35/2 ultron has been tweaked at all to play nice on both the Sony and Leica sensor stacks like other newer CV releases.
I have the CV 35/2 Ultron v1, but it's really quite poor on a stock Sony.
It's a hopeful thought. It seems like the smaller the lens, the worse it performs when adapted to a Sony. It also looks like most of the updates have been cosmetic. It was already a killer lens but it would be nice though if they released a corrected E mount version. I doubt they'd be able to manufacture a high-performing ASPH lens of that size that pairs well on both a native M mount and adapted mount.
