Below are some shots with my new Voigtlander 40 f/1.2 for Canon RF using my Canon R5 II camera while I was on a walk at a local wooded park.. I really like this combo. The Canon focus aids are super easy to use and were in general very accurate. I did lose one shot because the AF system that the focus aid uses didn't know I wanted to focus on the flower in the focus box insted of the leaf that it picked out and on the butterfly shot, which is cropped a lot, the AF system couldn't pick out the butterfly and I had to use magnification (to be fair I did not have the AF system in insect detection mode as the butterfly just happened into the scene unexpectedly). Despite those two small hiccups, I like the focus confirmation system on Canon a lot and it worked well almost all the time.
Canon EOS R5m2Voigtlander NOKTON 40mm F1.2 lens40mmf/2.01/800s100 ISO0.0 EV
Canon EOS R5m2Voigtlander NOKTON 40mm F1.2 lens40mmf/2.01/400s100 ISO0.0 EV
Canon EOS R5m2Voigtlander NOKTON 40mm F1.2 lens40mmf/2.01/3200s100 ISO0.0 EV
Canon EOS R5m2Voigtlander NOKTON 40mm F1.2 lens40mmf/2.01/800s100 ISO0.0 EV
Canon EOS R5m2Voigtlander NOKTON 40mm F1.2 lens40mmf/2.81/200s100 ISO0.0 EV
Nice to hear this. Voigtlander 40mm 1.2 RF maybe has better quality than first version.
All the Voigtlander lenses I have are M-mount, and I use them on the Canon R5. I wouldn't want to change that. I don't know if the RF versions aren't a bit like the Sony E-mount versions, and those render images slightly differently than the M versions. I prefer the M-mount image quality. It might have worse cornering properties, although perhaps the difference with the Canon R5 isn't as significant as with other Canon R models. From what I've seen, the Canon R5 sensor handles the Leica M-mount best. Now, there are AF confirmed adapters from Boryoza and Shoten — that supposedly offer the same performance as the dedicated Voigtlander RF lens. I wish Voigtlander would make such an adapter without macro due to the loose.
szwayko wrote:
Nice to hear this. Voigtlander 40mm 1.2 RF maybe has better quality than first version.
All the Voigtlander lenses I have are M-mount, and I use them on the Canon R5. I wouldn't want to change that. I don't know if the RF versions aren't a bit like the Sony E-mount versions, and those render images slightly differently than the M versions. I prefer the M-mount image quality. It might have worse cornering properties, although perhaps the difference with the Canon R5 isn't as significant as with other Canon R models. From what I've seen, the Canon R5 sensor handles the Leica M-mount best. Now, there are AF confirmed adapters from Boryoza and Shoten — that supposedly offer the same performance as the dedicated Voigtlander RF lens. I wish Voigtlander would make such an adapter without macro due to the loose. ...Show more →
One of the problems with the original CV 40 f/1.2 both for Leica M mount and Sony E mount is that you could sometimes see onion ring shapes in the bokeh balls. As Fred reports the latest version of the Leica M mount lens seems to have refined the polishing of the aspherical elements so you don't see those shapses any more. I am cautiously optimisitic that the RF version also has better polished asphericals and won't show onion ring shapes in the bokeh either. I haven't encountered any yet at least.
With regard to Canon cameras, it is the R5 II that does better with adapted lenses (and probably even this native mount RF version) as it has a back side illuminated (BSI) sensor. I think the R5 original has a front side illuminated (FSI) sensor and that is something to look out for if you are adapting lenses as especially wide angle lenses will likely have some false color issues on FSI sensors. That was true on Sony cameras too, but Sony has long ago switch to BSI sensors and Canon has just more recently done so.
I will very likely get the Shoten (or similar) adapter before long. I suspect I will get the announced Voigtalnder 90 f/4 APO-Lanthar which is coming in Leica M mount to pair with this CV 40 f/1.2 for RF mount and when I get that lens I will definitely get the adapter. For my use, I like the extension provided by the adapter as I hope to exploit the close focus capabilities of that lens and have a bit more extension I see as a pretty big plus. I also expect that will be a lens that will adapt with very close to zero issues with the sensor cover glass as it is both long and has a slow max aperture.
