Bob
You need to get a job as the photographer for the Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce or Tourist Bureau--your pictures of our fair city are spectacular--so crisp and colorful.
rji2goleez I like your Voigtlander 35/1.2 shots very much. Almost bought this lens but backed out of the deal at the last second. Your pics makes me regret that decision.
Rich M's very vibrant sunflower shot, Jacob D's winter shots, ebrandon's Monumental art... many great shots from everyone.
Here I got a snapshot (from behind some branches) of a loony old man taking an afternoon stroll on the quickly melting ice of our now not so frozen lake, not wearing any protective gear whatsoever...
This is with the Mutar II. I can't say that I see any difference at all using either Mutar I or Mutar II with the Contax 100-300. Both produce pretty poor results at infinity, and much more acceptable results at shorter distances.
Alan Ness wrote:
Bob
You need to get a job as the photographer for the Minneapolis Chamber of Commerce or Tourist Bureau--your pictures of our fair city are spectacular--so crisp and colorful.
Alan
Thanks Alan! Being new to the city, everything I shoot feels new and refreshing. The city has a lot to offer and since I walk to and from work, the NEX is a perfect camera for walking the city on my 'commute'.
ebrandon: I have the G21 and the tabs were hitting the area around the sensor, so I removed. It seemed to clear up some of my magenta cast and it is very sharp. I just ordered a 55mm UV filter. What brand was yours ? Contax ? I ordered a hoya pro 1. Was it just too much vignetting ?
I love the closeups I can get with the lens. DSC02024 by AustinIsWeird, on Flickr
daleaherman wrote:
ebrandon: I have the G21 and the tabs were hitting the area around the sensor, so I removed. It seemed to clear up some of my magenta cast and it is very sharp. I just ordered a 55mm UV filter. What brand was yours ? Contax ? I ordered a hoya pro 1. Was it just too much vignetting ?
I love the closeups I can get with the lens.
Terrific pic of your dog!
The tabs of my G21 also hit the baffling inside the NEX5N, making some marks inside the camera although seemingly doing no functional damage. I'm a klutz and never work on my own lenses, so I brought it to a professional who trimmed the tabs a bit for me and now they don't hit anymore.
The filter was an old-style "B+W 55E slim 010 1x MC" filter. With the filter the amount of smearing in the edges & corners was much worse than without the filter. Also, with the filter I thought the lens was decentered with more smearing on the left edge than the right edge. Without the filter the smearing on the left & right edges is symmetrical.
philber wrote:
Bob, your shots have convinced me to cancel my ZM 35 f:2.0, which I have on order since mid-December, and switch it to the CV. I tried it briefly and really liked it, but Luka and Boris steered me to the Zeiss.
I don't think that I've recommended the ZM35 over the CV 1.2/35.
Of these two lenses I would clearly prefer the Voigtländer: ultra smooth bokeh, great center sharpness wide open, very good sharpness corner to corner stopped down and great mechanics/haptics.
The real question is how does the Voigtländer compare to the Leica Summilux 35. In my opinion the bokeh and probably also the sharpness stopped down is better on the Voigtländer and sharpness outside the center wide open is better on the Summilux. In addition the size of the VC 1.2/35 is huge compared to the Summilux and also the filter size is much bigger.
But altogether I think the VC 1.2/35mm is a good choice for you, Philippe.
Bobu wrote:
I don't think that I've recommended the ZM35 over the CV 1.2/35.
Of these two lenses I would clearly prefer the Voigtländer: ultra smooth bokeh, great center sharpness wide open, very good sharpness corner to corner stopped down and great mechanics/haptics.
The real question is how does the Voigtländer compare to the Leica Summilux 35. In my opinion the bokeh and probably also the sharpness stopped down is better on the Voigtländer and sharpness outside the center wide open is better on the Summilux. In addition the size of the VC 1.2/35 is huge compared to the Summilux and also the filter size is much bigger.
But altogether I think the VC 1.2/35mm is a good choice for you, Philippe.
If I remember correctly, Luka said the ZM 35/2 was tops at infinity, but I've never used the CV 35/1.2. The CV looks fantastic. The size, even with the version II, is its limiting factor, for me.
Sorry Boris if I used your name in error. Apologies. I distinctly remember Luka's comments, and thought you said something similar about the ZM 35's excellence. Obviously this was a mistake.
Luka's point about the ZM35 is that it is a great, very sharp landscape lens, stopped down and at distance, IIRC. The more wide open and the closer, the weirder it can get.
No problem Philippe. Luka was rating the ZM35 as one of the best (the best?) 35mm lens stopped down at inifinity, but wide open at close distances he also found sometimes a weird bokeh .
I agree with you, Gary, my copy was great, but, unfortunately, due to my not liking the 24 f:1.8 ZA, this 35 will be my only fast lens on my 7, so the extra stop matters...
Bobu wrote:
(...)
The real question is how does the Voigtländer compare to the Leica Summilux 35. In my opinion the bokeh and probably also the sharpness stopped down is better on the Voigtländer and sharpness outside the center wide open is better on the Summilux. In addition the size of the VC 1.2/35 is huge compared to the Summilux and also the filter size is much bigger.
After having compared the CV35/1.2 to the Lux35/1.4 ASPH pre-FLE, and compared them quite thorough, the sad truth is that you need both of them.
The Lux has less LoCA and better bokeh in most situations. The CV aperture blades are nicer (imo) though. The CV is sharp edge to edge when stopped down while the Lux can't render anything sharp from border to border to save its place in the bag. As you mentioned, wide open the Lux beats everything, stopped down to f/2.4 or f/2.8 the CV is as good or better.
This is my experience from one copy of the CV and two different 35Lux lenses, on the Nex-5 and then the 5N.
EDIT: I forgot to mention the CV35/1.2 has zero focus shift. It's sometimes convenient being able to focus at f/2 (higher contrast and easier focus in some situations) and then open up. The Leica has to be focused at the working aperture all the time.
Rich M wrote:
I support Hawk in his innovation and would purchase from him before looking for cheaper copycats.....but that's just me.
R
That is a very noble idea, but I doubt Hawk or any of these adapter makers pays licensing fees to either Sony or Leica for their mounts. If they are all stealing from one another, I'll just buy whatever is cheapest.
