The Voigtlander 35mm f/2 is the fourth APO-Lanthar lens released for the Sony E-mount. Because it's not macro lens like the Voigtlander 65mm f/2 and 110mm f/2.5 Macro APO-Lanthar lenses, it's made very compact and weighs only 306 grams (M-mount) and 355 grams (E-mount).
Inheriting the apochromatic optical design, the Voigtlander 35/2 APO is highly corrected to eliminate (or minimize) longitudinal chromatic aberration.
The optical design consists of 11 elements in 9 groups with two (2) double sided aspherical elements, five (5) with anomalous partial dispersion and an integrated floating-focus system. (For both E and M-mount)
The Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO-Lanthar has a nice balance between optical performance and compactness. It addition, the newly designed 12-aperture blade employs a special shape that becomes completely circular not only wide open, but also at f/2.8, f/5.6 and f/16.
Software: Lightroom with my default landscape sharpening. All other settings set to default
PS: Vignetting and distortion were NOT corrected. All in-camera corrections turned 'off'.
___________
Will the Sigma perform similarly to the Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO at infinity? Here are some 100% crops showing center, mid-field and extreme corner areas.
I've updated the infinity crops using my 3 copy of the Voigtlander. This E-mount copy performs very similarly to my M-mount copy (on the Leica). It's capable of high resolution throughout the image field, which my prior couple copies were not.
At 35mm Center Resolution and Contrast: Sigma 35/2 DG DN vs Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO-Lanthar
Center at f/2: Surprisingly the Sigma performs a tad better wide open at infinity distance. The Voigtlander shows a bit less purple fringing (LoCA)
Center at f/2.8: Both lenses improve and are now similar
Center at f/4: Not much changes
Center at f/8: Both diffract and perform similarly
At 35mm Extreme Corner Resolution and Contrast: Sigma 35/2 DG DN vs Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO-Lanthar
Extreme corner at f/2: WOW! The Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO has the best 35mm corners I've tested to date! It does significantly better than the Sigma here. Noticed how the Sigma has wider AOV by looking at the houses' sizes. (I've reframe the shots)
Extreme corner at f/2.8: Both lenses improve slightly. The Voigtlander 35/2 APO is still vastly superior at f/2.8
Extreme corner at f/4: Big improvement for the Sigma and optimal aperture for the Voigtlander. The latter is able to capture high frequency detail at the extreme corners.
Extreme corner at f/5.6: The Sigma improves very slightly while the Voigtlander was already optimal at f/4
Extreme corner at f/8: Both diffract. Even at f/8, the Voigtlander does better in terms of resolution in the area but the difference is much smaller now
I'm happy to report that the Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO-Lanthar is virtually a flat-field lens with low field curvature making it an ideal landscape lens.
Crops showing the extreme corner area:
(Left crop focused at center and right crop focused at the extreme corner)
Crops showing the Mid-zone area:
(Left crop focused at center and right crop focused at Mid-zone)
Interesting fact:
When testing the Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO vs Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN, it's noticeable how much wider the Sigma is.
My guess is that it's a 32-33mm lens while the Voigtlander is a true 35mm lens. Just some information for those deciding on these two lenses.
The Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO seems over-corrected for spherical aberration and therefore some outlining is present in specular highlights. The optical design seems optimized for high resolution and contrast across the field while offering a more structured rendering. Some may see it as a balanced approach while others will prefer lenses with smoother rendering.
Because the design minimizes axial CA and spherical aberration, when shooting wide open, rendering can look smooth at close distance (helped by blur), or a bit structured depending on subject distance and background complexity.
With the subject focused at mid/long distance (3-6m), where the transition zone is part of the OOF background, rendering may appear busy as specular highlights show visible outlining. On the other hand, foreground rendering always look pleasant and smooth to my eyes. Stepping the lens down to f/2.8 reduces outlining significantly and specular highlights remain round, thanks to Voigtlander's ingenious aperture mechanism.
Optical vignetting is moderate, so expect cat's eye shape bokeh and a slight increase in DOF towards the corners. At mid-distance, a slight swirling effect may appear depending on background complexity.
Overall, although not fully uniform across the field, I consider the Voigt 35mm f/2 APO's rendering pleasant at close distance and structured (and sometimes a bit harsh) at mid and long distance. Axial CA is pretty much not existent giving images a modern look.
Here are some samples showing rendering with the subject focused at different distances:
Thank you very much for these first pictures. I can see, that this lens delivers perfectly where it matters most. Field curvature, sharpness and contrast at any aperture. Looking forward your further results. And looking foreward even more for mine to come mid of next week.
Rendering characteristics out of focus at close and midfield distances may be a good argument for keeping the 40/1.2. These lenses can complement each other.
Not easy to compare these lenses side by side since the Sigma 35mm f/2 DG DN is noticeable wider than 35mm.
For this rendering comparison, I did my best to have similar framing which required the camera to be about 10 inches closer when shooting with the Sigma.
Rendering Comparison at 0.75m:
SIGMA (TOP), VOIGTLANDER (BOTTOM) | Close distance comparison (0.75m): At this distance, I find the Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO more uniform from background center to edges while the Sigma shows a bit more DOF increase towards the corners.
1:1 crop showing focused area: Although the lighting changed slightly, it's obvious the Voigtlander 35mm f/2 is a bit sharper at this distance. The Sigma has a bit more SA.
1:2 crop showing the OOF center area. The Sigma is slight smoother even at this distance
1:1 crop showing the top left area: The Voigtlander's rendering is a smoother towards the corners at this distance. (more uniform than the Sigma with lower optical vigentting)
The Voigtlander 35mm f/2 APO seems over-corrected for spherical aberration and therefore some outlining is present in specular highlights. The optical design seems optimized for high resolution and contrast across the field while offering a more structured rendering. Some may see it as a balanced approach while others will prefer lenses with smoother rendering.
Because the design minimizes axial CA and spherical aberration, when shooting wide open, rendering can look smooth at close distance (helped by blur), or a bit structured depending on subject distance and background complexity.
With the subject focused at mid/long distance (3-6m), where the transition zone is part of the OOF background, rendering may appear busy as specular highlights show visible outlining. On the other hand, foreground rendering always look pleasant and smooth to my eyes. Stepping the lens down to f/2.8 reduces outlining significantly and specular highlights remain round, thanks to Voigtlander's ingenious aperture mechanism.
Optical vignetting is moderate, so expect cat's eye shape bokeh and a slight increase in DOF towards the corners. At mid-distance, a slight swirling effect may appear depending on background complexity.
Overall, although not fully uniform across the field, I consider the Voigt 35mm f/2 APO's rendering pleasant at close distance and structured (and sometimes a bit harsh) at mid and long distance. Axial CA is pretty much not existent giving images a modern look....Show more →
This is exactly what I wanted to see, and the “neutral” draw it what I was getting from the sample photos that I’ve seen. Thanks for doing this. The manual focus, better flare resistance, sun stars will be the draw for people over the sigma. The sigma has auto focus, more pleasant rendering, and is wider and cheaper while still being optically wonderful. Interesting trade-offs.
VOIGTLANDER (TOP), SIGMA (BOTTOM) | 5.5 meters: At this distance, I find the Sigma's rendering smoother at transition zone whereas the Voigtlander shows visible outlining making the draw a bit more structured
Focused area a f/2: There is more bite on the Voigtlander image (higher contrast, resolution) and it's also noticeable the difference in rendering between these two lenses
1:1 crop showing the OOF mid-zone area: Notice the specular highlights' outlining difference. Things look much smoother at f/2.8 (see crop below)
1:1 crop showing the OOF mid-zone area: (same crop as above but now at f/2.8 for both lenses). The Voigtlander's rendering improves at f/2.8
nehemiahphoto wrote:
This is exactly what I wanted to see, and the “neutral” draw it what I was getting from the sample photos that I’ve seen. Thanks for doing this. The manual focus, better flare resistance, sun stars will be the draw for people over the sigma. The sigma has auto focus, more pleasant rendering, and is wider and cheaper while still being optically wonderful. Interesting trade-offs.
From what's seen in my images, I would prefer the Voigtlander for landscapes. The Sigma comes close in terms of resolution and many will prefer its rendering making it perhaps a better all-rounder.
While the comparison with the Sigma 35 is certainly most apt, I’m looking forward to seeing a comparison to the 35GM. The CV looks like a strong contender for a general landscape lens. Still, I can’t help but feel a 25-28mm APO would be more useful in this regard.
Fred Miranda wrote:
From what's seen in my images, I would prefer the Voigtlander for landscapes. The Sigma comes close in terms of resolution and many will prefer its rendering making it perhaps a better all-rounder.
Entirely agree. Especially as I don’t find the flare resistance that great on the 35i.
magiclight wrote:
Yes, the OOF rendering looks very harsh. You cant complain about field curvature and resolution though.
I still have my Loxia which has nice rendering and performs well as a landscape lens.
Seems to be difficult to find a well corrected 35mm lens that renders OOF pleasantly.
While the Loxia 35 f/2 is a very nice option stopped down, I personally find it to have even harsher rendering than this Voigtlander 35 f/2 APO. It did not fare well at all for rendering in Nehemiahphoto's blind test of 35mm lenses on the the alt forum.
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Entirely agree. Especially as I don’t find the flare resistance that great on the 35i.
I can already say that ghosting flare control is superior for the Voigtlander (will post soon) and of course the 12-point defined sunstars at any aperture other than f/2, f/2.8, f/5.6 and f/16 are top reasons to prefer it. I think it has the best axial CA control from any 35mm I've seen to date. That's a big deal for those sensitive to CA.
