urbanwild wrote: KLaban wrote:
My two walk around lenses are Voigtlander Z mount 40mm f/1.2 and Nikon Z 40mm f/2, both particularly useful when shooting in those locations where discretion is key and where photography can and does offend. One MF and one AF. Both very compact and lightweight. The Voigtlander serves both as a characterful and exceptionally sharp lens.
My Z 50mm f/1.8 S and Z 85mm f/1.8 S rarely get a look in on location these days.
Really curious to know how these two 40mm lenses compare at f5.6-f11 in terms of sharpness, contrast and colour.....and also compared to the 35 apo. I now have both 35 and 50 apos and will start using them this week. I also have the 40mm f2 SE and it's good, but not amazing. Thought I would replace it perhaps with the CV 40 1.2 (or keep both if I want an AF 40).
My take on the 40mm 1.2 vs the 35mm APO is that the APO has a lot of resolution which is not particularly clinical in my view, probably this is to do with it being very contrasty and saturated. This results in the APOs producing images which often need little to no work in post.
The strength of the 40mm f1.2 (which I’ve briefly tried) is when you use it close to wide open. The results are special as noted by KLaban, whereas stepped down it’s very good. If you don’t expect to use it at f1.2 - f2 then consider the APO. If you value the character of the 40mm @ f1.2 - f2 then get the 40mm.
I still have a place in my heart for the 40mm f1.2 so even though I have the 35mm and 50mm APOs, I am likely to buy the 40mm f1.2 as well.
I also have the Nikon 40mm f2 - it works well and of course, it's AF, it's a very sensible lens to own. If you purely want decent results and don't care about how a lens feels in your had then the Nikon is a good option at a bargain price.
Oct 06, 2024 at 07:54 AM
Previous versions of Clivem2's message #16656797 « Voigtlander for Nikon Image Thread »
