Re: FM Review of the Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 Nokton
antst wrote: SharpContrast wrote: antst wrote:
I guess the only real move I can make is to order both, M-version and E-version and compare which I like more ))))
Thats what I did : ) and I sold the e-mount version on.
I see, you had the same choice I have, ultron 35/1.7 vs nokton 40/1.2 E/M
I also use an m-mount camera so that added to my reasons for getting the VM.
I have a soft spot for the ultron and actualy feel its quite a different animal to the 40mm. The depth of field with the Nokton is significantly less and I use it more like a portrait lens, where as the Ulton is better for capturing mutiple subjets with in an enviromment.
The Ulton is the shapest 35mm lens I've ever used, sharper than ZM35 1.4, LM 35mm 1.4 fle and the FE35 2.8 when being shot at the same aperture.
Re: FM Review of the Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 Nokton
antst wrote: SharpContrast wrote: antst wrote:
I guess the only real move I can make is to order both, M-version and E-version and compare which I like more ))))
Thats what I did : ) and I sold the e-mount version on.
I see, you had the same choice I have, ultron 35/1.7 vs nokton 40/1.2 E/M
I also use an m-mount camera so that added to my reasons for getting the VM.
I have a soft spot for the ultron and actualy feel its quite a different animal to the 40mm. The depth of field with the Nokton is significantly less and I use it more like a portrait lens, where as the Ulton is better for capturing mutiple subjets with in an enviromment.
Also the Ulton is the shapest 35mm lens Ive ever used, sharper than ZM35 1.4, LM 35mm 1.4 fle and the FE35 2.8 when being shot at the same aperture.
