DaveFP Offline Upload & Sell: Off
|
philip_pj wrote:
'Can you tell me about the rendering difference between the two?'
They are struggling to do so, aren't they? 
I can suggest a technique for you to deduce much of the differences in such lenses simply by looking at their respective image threads. And it can readily tell you which of them is the most versatile, though one must be cautious here - many lenses are not yet fully explored by enough users in other than highly selected categories, and the two wider APO CVs fall into this definition, being 'out of mainstream' connoisseur lenses.
1. Here one can see the overwhelming usage people have chosen to put their GM 50/1.2 to:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1697615/30
It's the last full page of images and it speaks volumes to the aware viewer. The 'formula' appears on almost all GM 50mm image pages.
But more on the 'lens image noticer technique'. For each image, classify according to the following attributes: focus distance; subject matter; stranger or family/friend if a people image; presence of nature; presence of artifacts (excess boke / lit up balls etc); degree of coloration; thematic repetitiveness (multiples of the same theme/topic), presence of fine detail (centre and outer frame).
It's less easy for the 50/2 APO because image-sharing owners must decide if they want to use the dedicated FM review thread, the open Sony thread, or the dedicated Voigtlander thread. The first of these carried on at length on technical issues, but it's still the best guide for image noticers to check out.
2. Here is a representative 50/2 APO page to start from:
https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1625777/54
It will become very clear, very quickly which of these two fine lenses is the more versatile in actual usage, and which therefore offers more creative opportunities than the other. And that is what we expect of APO lenses of 'all aperture/all of frame' excellence, that also have such substantive advantages in deployment - ergo/handling, engagement, weight, frontal area (filter size), metal fabrication, multi-mount capabilities, streetability, travelability, backcountry, etc.)
If you want I can offer more on the rendering issue, but it's preferable for you to pursue 'image analysis' as outlined above, and match them to your needs. Finally, here is an image pair of two highly detailed f4 / ISO 100 high resolution images from the (excellent) Lenstip site, showing fine image motifs, textural surfaces, colour tonality and separation, despite the very different lighting / season conditions:
GM 50/1.2: https://pliki.optyczne.pl/son50GM/son50_fot07 (jpeg) in:
https://www.lenstip.com/601.12-Lens_review-Sony_FE_50_mm_f_1.2_GM_Sample_shots.html
CV 50/2 APO: https://pliki.optyczne.pl/voi50apo/voi50_fot09 (jpeg) in:
https://www.lenstip.com/613.12-Lens_review-Voigtlander_Apo_Lanthar_50_mm_f_2_Aspherical_Sample_shots.html
Expand both. Take you time, scan left and right, move from one image to the other, back and forth. See what you think....Show more →
I really don't understand this post.
Why in the world would I want to compare the rendering of two lenses by looking directly at their images when people on the internet can describe them for me?
Makes no sense.
/s
|