Re: FM Review of the Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 Nokton
gordec wrote:
For those who have owned both Loxia 35 or CV 40, now you have had time to re-evaluate after the CV40 honeymoon period, do you see anything the CV 40 do that the L35 just cannot? Or are they very similar as a general purpose walkaround lens? Any of you would go back to L35?
I'm constantly debating between the 2. The CV40 is on backorder which give me more time to ponder.
BTW I have 16-35 GM, so 35 is kind of covered but obviously the GM is not a walkaround lens.
The CV 40 has 1.2; which gives you the same separation as a 50mm f1.4 but at a wider angle. It's about the separation of a 35mm f1.0, so that's certainly a big benefit of the CV40.
The CV 40 has nicer bokeh than the L35 at f2, and is a little sharper as well at f2.
On the other hand, I marginally prefer the contrast and 'zing' of L35 stopped right down (despite the annoying aperture reflection that the CV doesn't have in extreme conditions.)
I somewhat indulgently have both. If I had to chose I'd probably go the CV, so long as I had some way for getting 35 in either a prime or a quality zoom. But in the end it comes down to what you want. If it's a manual focus environmental portrait kind of lens you want, the L35 really is not a good choice, and the CV is an excellent one. If it's a landscape lens you want, it's a much harder choice, and I might go L35. But the CV can do both, and the Loxia struggles on the other side of things.
