p.1 #1 · Voigtlander 35 f2 apo vs sony 35 f1.4 gm for landscape/astro stitch
So I've had notably lenses covering the 35mm range including the 16-35 gm, lox 35 zeiss 35 f2.8 as well as the zeiss 35 f1.4. currently have the lox 35 but am a bit disappointed by it for landscape use let alone astro stitching.
Now I know there hasn't been much exposure with these 2 newly announced lenses but I'm leaning towards getting 35 gm. I love shooting 35mm for my landscapes. Price is not an issue as both or close to each other. For those who shoot these genres which would you choose and why?
p.1 #3 · Voigtlander 35 f2 apo vs sony 35 f1.4 gm for landscape/astro stitch
Interesting you raise this issue. Both are ultra-modern in that they have flat fields, very high micro-contrast (to the point you'll notice it straight off) and that image quality is across the entire frame. We expect major differences in bokeh.
None of these might be enough to sway you to one or the other, so second order preferences might come into play for you. It might be best to go off what you like in the already available but recent lenses from both makers.
p.1 #4 · Voigtlander 35 f2 apo vs sony 35 f1.4 gm for landscape/astro stitch
Zayne12 wrote:
So I've had notably lenses covering the 35mm range including the 16-35 gm, lox 35 zeiss 35 f2.8 as well as the zeiss 35 f1.4. currently have the lox 35 but am a bit disappointed by it for landscape use let alone astro stitching.
Now I know there hasn't been much exposure with these 2 newly announced lenses but I'm leaning towards getting 35 gm. I love shooting 35mm for my landscapes. Price is not an issue as both or close to each other. For those who shoot these genres which would you choose and why?
We know of the short comings of the Loxia 35, but what does not appeal to you using the Loxia 35 @ f5.6, 8, 11.for Landscape. We hear so many times that its good stopped down for landscape. is it the rendering, not sharp across the frame?
p.1 #5 · Voigtlander 35 f2 apo vs sony 35 f1.4 gm for landscape/astro stitch
I am an absolute moron and have ordered both. 35mm is my favorite focal length, so that's how I justify it in my mind, but I know it's ridiculous. If it weren't for the fact that I absolutely love the shooting experience (and the image quality) of the 50mm APO, I would have stuck with the GM and probably been thrilled. If I'm shooting video or doing anything where I know I need to get the shot, I'll probably use the GM, but I think the 35 APO will be like driving a manual transmission for me. Not necessarily better, but more enjoyable.
p.1 #6 · Voigtlander 35 f2 apo vs sony 35 f1.4 gm for landscape/astro stitch
mjlamott wrote:
I am an absolute moron and have ordered both. 35mm is my favorite focal length, so that's how I justify it in my mind, but I know it's ridiculous. If it weren't for the fact that I absolutely love the shooting experience (and the image quality) of the 50mm APO, I would have stuck with the GM and probably been thrilled. If I'm shooting video or doing anything where I know I need to get the shot, I'll probably use the GM, but I think the 35 APO will be like driving a manual transmission for me. Not necessarily better, but more enjoyable. ...Show more →
If I could justify both I would order both so IMO it is not a foolish thing to do.
For me to pick up the APO I would force myself to consider selling my Loxia.
Thing is, I really love the Loxia and I have two other MF 35s that I would never consider selling.
It's one of those "My name is David. I am a lensaholic" issues.
p.1 #7 · Voigtlander 35 f2 apo vs sony 35 f1.4 gm for landscape/astro stitch
For one the veiling flare is harsh and 2nd the ghosting is bad when I shoot into the sun with it which for me is unacceptable. And my copy seems to be decentered on the right side I have to run some more test just to confirm I didn't miss focus. Than there's the bad coma so it throws out the question of using this lens for astro stitching. I do enjoy my loxias 50 and would consider that a gem of a lens along with the 25 for some reason I've the lox 35 3 times or more I don't know how many times I repurchased it at this point and I keep selling it. Sorry for my rant but these are the reasons I'm compelled to upgrade plus I have extra money lying down from off selling some gear I had.
IndyFab wrote:
We know of the short comings of the Loxia 35, but what does not appeal to you using the Loxia 35 @ f5.6, 8, 11.for Landscape. We hear so many times that its good stopped down for landscape. is it the rendering, not sharp across the frame?
p.1 #8 · Voigtlander 35 f2 apo vs sony 35 f1.4 gm for landscape/astro stitch
I'm curious as to why you would go with apo if you were just doing landscapes? I have owned both the 65 apo and currently the 110 apo which are both phenomenal but I haven't used the later for landscapes.
DaveFP wrote:
I love the idea of owning both but that doesn't make lot of sense for me.
I'm going with the GM.
I am sure that it will meet my landscape needs.
If I were a landscape specialist I would choose the APO.
p.1 #9 · Voigtlander 35 f2 apo vs sony 35 f1.4 gm for landscape/astro stitch
Moron is a little harsh I would say it's as if you walked into the candy isle and was floored by the choices so you just picked up everything haha.
As for me I can't justify owning the same focal length twice I don't like redundancy much so I build my kit around having 12mm to 200mm covered which is what my current kit is looking like.
mjlamott wrote:
I am an absolute moron and have ordered both. 35mm is my favorite focal length, so that's how I justify it in my mind, but I know it's ridiculous. If it weren't for the fact that I absolutely love the shooting experience (and the image quality) of the 50mm APO, I would have stuck with the GM and probably been thrilled. If I'm shooting video or doing anything where I know I need to get the shot, I'll probably use the GM, but I think the 35 APO will be like driving a manual transmission for me. Not necessarily better, but more enjoyable. ...Show more →
p.1 #11 · Voigtlander 35 f2 apo vs sony 35 f1.4 gm for landscape/astro stitch
Zayne12 wrote:
I'm curious as to why you would go with apo if you were just doing landscapes? I have owned both the 65 apo and currently the 110 apo which are both phenomenal but I haven't used the later for landscapes.
Don't need 1.4
Want APO
Prefer MF lenses for landscape
Smaller lens in the bag
p.1 #12 · Voigtlander 35 f2 apo vs sony 35 f1.4 gm for landscape/astro stitch
A large percentage of CV APO users buy them for landscapes, at which they excel. My way of putting it is that the excellence wide open simply broadens in DOF as you stop down. Colour and contrast stay intact, highlights sparkle. CV believes in a strong f2 but still improves to f4 and beyond in a very flat field. I don't use profiles so always look for properly designed lenses.
It's quite intoxicating. The 50mm might have the best outer frames of any 50mm, so very suitable indeed for landscapes. The 35mm is 5% stronger again, and f5.6 will be enough for many compositions. So yeah, hopes are high. No need to rush this, CV know how to get supply done, going on past performance (Leica users waited 18 long months for their 50/2 APO on its release.)
p.1 #13 · Voigtlander 35 f2 apo vs sony 35 f1.4 gm for landscape/astro stitch
I have not tried the 50 although I have been tempted to purely because the ergonomics on the cv lenses are miles ahead of the loxia but I've capture some images with my lox 50 that everytime I return to them I'm still amazed. I feel that lens is a no compromise lens.
philip_pj wrote:
A large percentage of CV APO users buy them for landscapes, at which they excel. My way of putting it is that the excellence wide open simply broadens in DOF as you stop down. Colour and contrast stay intact, highlights sparkle. CV believes in a strong f2 but still improves to f4 and beyond in a very flat field. I don't use profiles so always look for properly designed lenses.
It's quite intoxicating. The 50mm might have the best outer frames of any 50mm, so very suitable indeed for landscapes. The 35mm is 5% stronger again, and f5.6 will be enough for many compositions. So yeah, hopes are high. No need to rush this, CV know how to get supply done, going on past performance (Leica users waited 18 long months for their 50/2 APO on its release.)...Show more →
p.1 #14 · Voigtlander 35 f2 apo vs sony 35 f1.4 gm for landscape/astro stitch
FWIW your chances of getting a good first copy are 'much' better with the Voigtlander than the GM. That has been my experience with numerous GM lenses - all of which were sent back. I don't own the 35 yet but have the 65 and the 50 Lanthers and both are outstanding and my first copies.
p.1 #15 · Voigtlander 35 f2 apo vs sony 35 f1.4 gm for landscape/astro stitch
Unless you need F1.4, Voigtlander 35mm APO-Lanthar is more attractive than Sony A35mm F1.4 GM.
Possibly Sony GM may better/higher resolution, but color rendition would be more favorable.
For Sport or wedding or wild life, or video (dynamic), Sony GM is right choice.
For landscape and street (static). APO is good choice in less money. Sony GM has MF function, but
APO is more smoother in usage.
Don't know about you but I don't enjoy seeing content slide off the edge of the image, and I won't happily use any lens that blurs what is shown there. It's hard to grasp that lenses are made for specific primary purposes, which is where the design decisions go to realising.
Other uses, they may or may not be as good as lenses that are designed more for general purposes or specifically for landscapes, like f3.5 wides. So while the new GM (as an example) may be as good and please some more even than the APO and will still do what is primarily designed for, that is not its main purpose and it's certainly unfair to expect excellence of an f1.2 lens. Fast lenses stopped down do not magically turn into something else, as Roger Cicala discovered in a review of field curvature in fast 35s a few years back.
