p.3 #1 · 50mm 1.2 Sony - Sigma - Voigtlander Has anyone compared them?
Yogifi wrote:
Nokton is always a (little) bit more vintage feeling that I haven't seen from the GM samples of people. It's not vintage in the image quality (notable exception is larger apertures in very close range with that retro looking glow) but just something about the images, perhaps the colours - and it's only slight. I like it.
I don't think it's the colors; in comparison images, the colors of the GM and the Nokton are almost identical to my eye. But I can't say exactly what it is. It's probably the bokeh, the different sharpness fall-off, the lower clarity and probably also the contrast, combined with the slightly lower resolution, sharpness, and some other image defects that the GM doesn't have. It's difficult to pinpoint the cause, as it can be quite different in different situations. In the end, though, it doesn't really matter.
p.3 #2 · 50mm 1.2 Sony - Sigma - Voigtlander Has anyone compared them?
philip_pj wrote:
'Am I the only one who finds it weird to consider a lens less suitable for portraits because it is sharp?'
I'm the one to argue this case with you. Me and the great accumulation of evidence in the cine field as DPs all over try to work around the harsh look of digital and the sheer unpleasantness and repulsive look it (unnecessarily) imparts to human skin. DPs want to take the harsh edge off their footage.
We will be moving on from the simplistic equation we see in your above - that 'sharpness = image quality'. As its reach and power fall away dramatically in the box office, the cine world is now understanding the simple truth that 'image appeal = image quality'.
They see now that they don't decide this, the viewing and paying public do! And they don't want the fake digital look, outside of cartoons.
APO and APO-adjacent lenses are flat lenses that aim to deliver super levels of color correction, to the relative neglect of all other considerations broached in the design phase of lens development. Portraits are not a primary design target.
ARRI and others now openly talk about their efforts to portray skin in a true-to-life manner. These people, who occupy elevated positions in the field, understand they have to treat spatial frequencies differently. They reduce high spatial frequency lens micro-contrast to provide a real world facsimile to their imagery, while retaining lower spatial frequencies to shape the content. Even sharpness addicts Zeiss now do this.
As for dealing with new age sharp lens rendering in post,
(i) you are spending valuable time trying to undo what the lens was designed to excel at;
(ii) the micro-contrast is baked in and it will still impact the image in other deleterious ways because the entire aim is not true-to-life presentation - so we often encounter: bokeh ball effects of over-corrected SA, very poor image depth (lots of ED/APD glass), and
(iii) a general lack of character caused in part by an overemphasis on corners and outer frames.
The entire notion that such lenses can be as good as dedicated portrait lenses is therefore questionable. A lot of people are starting to see this - a good development....Show more →
Last week I had the chance to see and spend several hours at the Leica: A Century of Photography exhibition in the Fernán Gómez Centro Cultural de la Villa in Madrid, Spain. The exhibition is very beautiful and striking, representing a century of Leica photography and including many iconic images as well as many that I had not seen before. The images are presented in very large prints that obliterate, even at appropriate viewing distances, any sharpness that may have been in the original image. But even so, it was clear that many of the images could never have been critically sharp to begin with. But each one is a beautiful and important photograph.
p.3 #4 · 50mm 1.2 Sony - Sigma - Voigtlander Has anyone compared them?
Yogifi wrote:
Nokton is always a (little) bit more vintage feeling that I haven't seen from the GM samples of people. It's not vintage in the image quality (notable exception is larger apertures in very close range with that retro looking glow) but just something about the images, perhaps the colours - and it's only slight. I like it.
Nifty Fifty wrote:
I don't think it's the colors; in comparison images, the colors of the GM and the Nokton are almost identical to my eye. But I can't say exactly what it is. It's probably the bokeh, the different sharpness fall-off, the lower clarity and probably also the contrast, combined with the slightly lower resolution, sharpness, and some other image defects that the GM doesn't have. It's difficult to pinpoint the cause, as it can be quite different in different situations. In the end, though, it doesn't really matter.
I agree, it's not the colors but rather a lot of other things.
Here is a comparison between two 50mm lenses focused 1m away, the book shelf is 4m away and there are highlights at 2 and 3m and in the shelf. One lens is a lens discussed recently with a kind of old style and the other one is a modern recently released lens sometimes described as very very sharp.
I don't think there is anything about the colors that destroys or makes any of the renderings. Image width 2800 pixels.
p.3 #5 · 50mm 1.2 Sony - Sigma - Voigtlander Has anyone compared them?
Nifty Fifty wrote:
I don't think it's the colors; in comparison images, the colors of the GM and the Nokton are almost identical to my eye. But I can't say exactly what it is. It's probably the bokeh, the different sharpness fall-off, the lower clarity and probably also the contrast, combined with the slightly lower resolution, sharpness, and some other image defects that the GM doesn't have. It's difficult to pinpoint the cause, as it can be quite different in different situations. In the end, though, it doesn't really matter.
Yeah I'm not entirely sure what it is - you're probably right about it not being the colours since you've done the actual side by sides with those two. There's something or things that add up to give that impression of a little less modern with the nokton but it's done well and it's like a subtle touch and I personally really like the look.
It's difficult for me to point to why but everything you mentioned sounds like it'd be right.
Even when I look at side-by-sides like with the shot from Jonas above (I'm guessing the one on the right is the one considered more modern?) I find it surprising how small the differences are between lenses sometimes while still getting a specific vibe from one lens and not the other after seeing a number of images from them.
Like with samyang I'll lean towards filmic edits, with sigmas a bit more contrasty, with noktons I tend to leave it as is, and control the urge to add a tiny bit of grain.
p.3 #6 · 50mm 1.2 Sony - Sigma - Voigtlander Has anyone compared them?
Yogifi wrote:
I find it surprising how small the differences are between lenses sometimes while the images themselves (one after the other) can still giving off a certain vibe.
That's exactly how I feel, and I'm just as surprised by it.
p.3 #7 · 50mm 1.2 Sony - Sigma - Voigtlander Has anyone compared them?
Jonas B wrote:
I agree, it's not the colors but rather a lot of other things.
Here is a comparison between two 50mm lenses focused 1m away, the book shelf is 4m away and there are highlights at 2 and 3m and in the shelf. One lens is a lens discussed recently with a kind of old style and the other one is a modern recently released lens sometimes described as very very sharp.
I don't think there is anything about the colors that destroys or makes any of the renderings. Image width 2800 pixels. https://photos.imageevent.com/jonas_b/fotoforum2022andfw/2x50_f2_web_2800px.jpg
Very nice.
I’m going to guess the lens on the left is the Nokton 50/1.2 and the one on the right is the Viltrox 50/2 air. Both are nice at f2.
p.3 #8 · 50mm 1.2 Sony - Sigma - Voigtlander Has anyone compared them?
mudlake wrote:
Very nice.
I’m going to guess the lens on the left is the Nokton 50/1.2 and the one on the right is the Viltrox 50/2 air. Both are nice at f2.
Thank you.
That's correct, you are right. I wasn't sure the hints would be enough but there was no problems for you identifying the lenses!
p.3 #12 · 50mm 1.2 Sony - Sigma - Voigtlander Has anyone compared them?
Nifty Fifty wrote:
You simply have a good memory.😄
Well, he did something good. Here are the same lenses again but now at f2.8. I wonder if the Viltrox 50/2 AIR really is an f2 lens. (I have the same question about the TTArtisan 40/2, will check those images as well.)
p.3 #13 · 50mm 1.2 Sony - Sigma - Voigtlander Has anyone compared them?
Jonas B wrote:
I wonder if the Viltrox 50/2 AIR really is an f2 lens. (I have the same question about the TTArtisan 40/2, will check those images as well.)
Look at the comparison photos with the classic car that I posted in the Viltrox thread. At aperture 2 and ISO 800, the GM had a shutter speed of 1/30 and the Air had 1/25 of a second. I would say yes, it does have an aperture of 2.
The f/2.8 bokeh at f/2.0 is a deliberate decision by the Viltrox lens designers, as is the vignetting. Our China expert has already explained this several times here.🤦🏻♂️
p.3 #14 · 50mm 1.2 Sony - Sigma - Voigtlander Has anyone compared them?
Nifty Fifty wrote:
Look at the comparison photos with the classic car that I posted in the Viltrox thread. At aperture 2 and ISO 800, the GM had a shutter speed of 1/30 and the Air had 1/25 of a second. I would say yes, it does have an aperture of 2.
The f/2.8 bokeh at f/2.0 is a deliberate decision by the Viltrox lens designers, as is the vignetting. Our China expert has already explained this several times here.🤦🏻♂️
Thank you.
Hmm... I'm not sure:
I checked my images and the CV50/1.2 is exposed at 1/40 of a second while the Viltrox image is taken at1/30. Measuring the white card in focus the CV image is a tad brighter before adjustment. So, I still wonder.
I notice the lenses are very similar at f/2.8.
(I used controlled light for this with two flicker-free LED panels.)
(I don't need any more explanations about the Chinese lenses. I like the highlight attenuation feature though.)
p.3 #16 · 50mm 1.2 Sony - Sigma - Voigtlander Has anyone compared them?
I'm just processing a few wedding photos shot with a 1.8/50 FE shot mostly at f2.5 (because I lent my 1.4 out) and I'm impressed.
I'm seriously thinking about not lugging around a heavier lens anymore. I was worried about the AF speed but haven't seen a single mis-focused shot yet.
p.3 #18 · 50mm 1.2 Sony - Sigma - Voigtlander Has anyone compared them?
The 50mm f1.8 has a clean look that I like. In a self-portrait compact AF shootout test I did, I preferred it in one of the few comparisons to the 55mmf1.8 and just after it in another.
I haven't used it extensively, just enough to know I want to keep it (though it is close as I have a few of these compact 50-ish AFs), but I have seen some nervous bokeh in a couple shots towards the edges, it was like of a dog sitting near the grass though and me looking down, the rest are fine.
p.3 #19 · 50mm 1.2 Sony - Sigma - Voigtlander Has anyone compared them?
Picture This! wrote:
@raminolta@, I hear you.
This guy is on a spree to litter as many threads as he can every day with his so-called expert comments. If you look at the Simera threads as well as the "which lenses have 3D pop" and more recently the Zeiss ZM 35 thread, you'll quickly realize he's a self-proclaimed mentor that "helps" people see, what cinematic rendering is and how clueless Zeiss, Nikon and other companies except Thypoch are. Verbal diarrhea pretty much. Someone that cant backup fancy words with some decent photos gets 0 credibility.
He points to a Nikon 50/1.8s thread which has some amazing photos and posts an "example" of how a portrait ought to look like. His so-called example is from a 75mm lens not to mention it being mediocre at best. He won't post A-B comparisions, nor will be repond to any questions. I'm pretty sure he's being incentivized by Thypoch. Except, a bunch of us will simply not buy a Thypoch lens just because of how repulsive this person is. I hope Thypoch are not naive enough to work with someone of this caliber. ...Show more →
Just want to say, independent of the discussion, personal attacks are completely uncalled for and unworthy of the mutual respect which is the norm on this forum. You should apologise.
p.3 #20 · 50mm 1.2 Sony - Sigma - Voigtlander Has anyone compared them?
rob_ww wrote:
Just want to say, independent of the discussion, personal attacks are completely uncalled for and unworthy of the mutual respect which is the norm on this forum. You should apologise.
Normally I would agree about that but philip_pj certainly hasn't showed a lot of respect for the community since he started to promoting his favorite lens brand.
I actually see no need for an apology from anyone but philip_pj.
