freaklikeme wrote:
True, but the label itself doesn't address spherochromatism as I understand it. Apochromatic is the ability to focus the three colors on the same plane. We need a better label for lenses that do the same outside of the plane of focus.
And I agree. I'd like to see an APO 35/2.
I have heard that the new Milvus 35/1.4 has excellent near Otus 28 level 2ndary color correction. Lots of low dispersion glass elements need to be used in the design like the Otus 28 which greatly adds to the price. Canon designed the new 35Lmk2 to have good LoCA correction but did not due this for their new 85/1.4. Nikon has poor 2ndary color correction in their lenses like new 28/1.4. I think Zeiss will continue making their new designs having good 2ndary color correction as a way to differentiate at the high end of the performance scale. Sigma might be the closest 2nd.
The extraordinary new Milvus 35mm has stronger MTF than the Otus 28mm, both measured at f4, and far better outer frames. It promises to banish mid aperture CoF as well. Half a pound lighter than the O/28. It is clearly one of the best lenses ever made for the format, stronger than the Otus 85mm too. At $2000, just $300 more than the Canon that so underwhelmed Photozone. I'd love to use one of these, a genuine all purpose 35mm. I doubt anything at 35mm gets close.
philip_pj wrote:
The extraordinary new Milvus 35mm has stronger MTF than the Otus 28mm, both measured at f4, and far better outer frames. It promises to banish mid aperture CoF as well. Half a pound lighter than the O/28. It is clearly one of the best lenses ever made for the format, stronger than the Otus 85mm too. At $2000, just $300 more than the Canon that so underwhelmed Photozone. I'd love to use one of these, a genuine all purpose 35mm. I doubt anything at 35mm gets close.
Hello! I am pretty new to this forum but wanted to THANK everyone who had been testing and reviewing the CV65! I started reading on Phillip's website and turned up later on this thread, which conviced me to buy the lens myself. I was always debating with myself if it is the 50 or 85 I should take, now I made peace with myself...just amazing this lens! AGAIN, thanks and keep on enjoying!
A great lens as is. But I will not replace either 50 or 85 with this. 50mm is a very important focal length no matter do landscape or portrait, stitch 3 vertical frame with 50% overlap I got another important focal 35 for landscape. And 85 is claasic portrait lens that no 65 can replace.
This is a great lens and Sony user really should add this one if budget allow, but replace 50? I don't know. I will always rate focal length more important for getting the shot than color correction or resolution. Not to mention, difference will be small compare to competition for most relevant images.
Yeah, true... not an easy one. This decision I still have to take, I am not on unlimited budget either, therefore I have to do something. The FE 55 1.8 I have is very close to the CV 65 (focal length), although very different. For me 50 mm was never that important, the CV65 just gives me more options and is manually a joy to use.
Yeah, I don't think of it as replacing 50, but replacing a mid focal length expensive lens. For me it's more of an economic replacement than a focal length replacement. The lucky thing about 50s is that there are a lot of 50s, and an awful lot of them are quite good stopped down a bit. Also an awful lot of them have great bokeh. And since so many were made in the old days, prices aren't so bad. So surely I will always have a handful of 50s, and when I carry one it might likely be the Olympus 50 MC 1.4, which is compact and lightweight and has excellent bokeh and also very good sharpness stopped down. It does not have brilliant contrast and flare resistance like the Loxia 50 I will likely give up, but I can't afford to have everything, and I can't carry everything with me (though sometimes I try). So I can probably give up the Loxia 50. I would not give up the Loxia 21 for this lens, even though I don't use it as much as any 50.
Stevvi wrote:
Yeah, true... not an easy one. This decision I still have to take, I am not on unlimited budget either, therefore I have to do something. The FE 55 1.8 I have is very close to the CV 65 (focal length), although very different. For me 50 mm was never that important, the CV65 just gives me more options and is manually a joy to use.
It's really FL preference. I like to go from 35 to 85 but now shooting 35, 65, 135 is even better for me. I also have the 55/1.8 ZA for a one lens solution when shooting people, traveling light, etc.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Chris,
I don't think the 55/1.8 ZA really competes with the CV 65/2 APO. They share similar FL and aperture but IMO, fulfill different applications. One is 1:2 macro without tubes, has mechanical MF and is better corrected for CA. The 55/1.8 ZA is efficient when carrying light and AF is crucial...like shooting action, people (eyeAF) or time is against us and we need to grab something quick.
Aside from strong spherochromatism and perhaps accentuated onion rings, it's hard to find flaws on this lens for its size and weight. If you have a good copy, I think it's definitely worth keeping it....Show more →
Thanks, Fred. No worries, I'm going to hold onto my 55 1.8. I tried to take a closer look at the CV 65 at a store the other day, but they didn't have Voigtlander e-mount lenses on display. I'll have to ponder this one a little bit longer, let's see whether I can hold out longer than David did .
philip_pj wrote:
The extraordinary new Milvus 35mm has stronger MTF than the Otus 28mm, both measured at f4, and far better outer frames. It promises to banish mid aperture CoF as well. Half a pound lighter than the O/28. It is clearly one of the best lenses ever made for the format, stronger than the Otus 85mm too. At $2000, just $300 more than the Canon that so underwhelmed Photozone. I'd love to use one of these, a genuine all purpose 35mm. I doubt anything at 35mm gets close.
But the Milvus 35/1.4 retains some of the SA haze wide open that its zf 35/1.4 relative has and thus is not as sharp wide open as the Otus 28 or the 35Lmk2. If you are paying for a fast wide lens, then i assume performance wide open is more important.
And designing a fast 28 is much more tougher than designing a fast 35. So i would expect the 35 to be sharper.
28 is a great environmental portrait focal length.
Fred Miranda wrote:
It's really FL preference. I like to go from 35 to 85 but now shooting 35, 65, 135 is even better for me. I also have the 55/1.8 ZA for a one lens solution when shooting people, traveling light, etc.
35/65/135 is a nicely spaced set, with the focal length approximately doubling each time. I like 28/50/90 for the same reason.
wayne seltzer wrote:
I have heard that the new Milvus 35/1.4 has excellent near Otus 28 level 2ndary color correction. Lots of low dispersion glass elements need to be used in the design like the Otus 28 which greatly adds to the price. Canon designed the new 35Lmk2 to have good LoCA correction but did not due this for their new 85/1.4. Nikon has poor 2ndary color correction in their lenses like new 28/1.4. I think Zeiss will continue making their new designs having good 2ndary color correction as a way to differentiate at the high end of the performance scale. Sigma might be the closest 2nd. ...Show more →
I was surprised they didn't try a little harder with the new 85L. Not that it doesn't look like a fantastic lens in other ways, and the price is decent. A friend of my suggested that this may be their 85L built for speed, and that there's a an 85/1.2 vIII in the works that will be more Otus-level.
Cosina's last couple of releases, though, make them all look like they're not trying very hard. The 35/1.7 that, while not as well corrected as an Otus or even the 35LII, still manages to punch well above its weight class. And now this lens, that will probably compare favorably to the Otus 55, with only the loss of a stop, a lot of bulk, and two-thirds of the expense.
I should have my VC 65 today. My planned testing is obviously Big Bronco against my Sony 85 1.8. I can do the full wall here but I'm more interested in my Batis 135 against it so I'll have to do a half wall because of space for me to get back. I'll do center tests though with all three and see what we come up with. Really looking forward to this lens. I wanted it the day it was announced so if been waiting awhile. My landscape kit should be 12-24, Loxia 35 need to buy one,VC 65 and Batis 135
My AF kit is 12-24, FE 35 1.4, FE 85 1.8 and Batis 135
I may sneak in a Sony 28mm but really for just grip and grin.
I'm down to only a A9 right now with a A6300 backup. I sold my A7rII. I'm hoping new announcement soon but I'll rent the A7rII for paying work when needed for now
I like 6.5mm (circular fish), 10, 15, 21, 35, 65, 100, 135 and 200 primes as a landscape kit, supplemented with the new 100-400 for distant telephoto work. I think that will cover my bases pretty well for an upcoming A9R once I fill in the missing lenses.
GMPhotography wrote:
I should have my VC 65 today. My planned testing is obviously Big Bronco against my Sony 85 1.8. I can do the full wall here but I'm more interested in my Batis 135 against it so I'll have to do a half wall because of space for me to get back. I'll do center tests though with all three and see what we come up with. Really looking forward to this lens. I wanted it the day it was announced so if been waiting awhile. My landscape kit should be 12-24, Loxia 35 need to buy one,VC 65 and Batis 135
My AF kit is 12-24, FE 35 1.4, FE 85 1.8 and Batis 135
I may sneak in a Sony 28mm but really for just grip and grin.
I'm down to only a A9 right now with a A6300 backup. I sold my A7rII. I'm hoping new announcement soon but I'll rent the A7rII for paying work when needed for now...Show more →
