DavidBM wrote:
One of the striking things about this lens that I didn't expect really is the effect of the f1.2 on exposure.
Generally I say "you don't buy a fast lens for light gathering these days, you buy if for the DOF effects" and that's often true.
But because this lens is usable at f1.2, and looks no nice for portrait stuff at night at f1.2, you really do end up close to base ISO wandering around handheld in the city at night, which makes an old film user like me a bit giddy. And in mixed city light (or social photos in restaurants etc) you often need to lift shadows or dodge quite a bit, to the point where "the high ISO on modern cameras is so good", while true, is starting to be not quite enough... ...Show more →
I noticed that too. Shooting in low light at f/1.2 allows one to keep ISO at 200 or 400 which yields much cleaner files with higher dynamic range. That makes a different in post-processing.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, at CENTER, the CV 40/1.2 is already outstanding at f/1.7 (same level as the CV 35/1.7) and way better than the Loxia 35 wide open. What I meant by "f/4.5 being optimum" was for resolution across the entire image field combined with FC masking.
Any chance we can get some comparison shots with the FE 55? I would love to see shots with both wide open and then at f/1.8 on both with something like the life guard jeep or people shots... medium distance with some background blur in low light. Not asking for much am I?
Picked mine after work and had to cycle up the hill to get the last sunrays of the day. It looks like a good copy and makes fun!
Thanks again for the helpful reviews.
Got mine! Less than a day from the UK (via Germany) to Stockholm is pretty darn fast.
It's smaller than I expected, but kind of dense. Feels very nice on the a7II.
Gosh. Two new lenses in a week. First the APO Lanthar. Yes, it really is about perfect from wide open. Long ago I had the Sony 55 1.8 and I just didn’t like the rendering, clinically sharp, just a bit too clinical and “crunchy” for my liking, Replaced that with a 50 Loxia, quite happy with that.Now the Voigtlander for a touch more reach and near flawless optical characteristics.
I’ve had a CV 35 1.2 II since my M9 days and repurposed it with an adapter for the A7RII. But it was just a bit nose heavy for a walk around 35, but I absolutely love the character/drawing of that lens.
The 40 arrives today.... I’m praying and hoping and betting it has the character of the CV35, warts and all...
Thanks everyone for the review and all the samples.
B&H now says not available and they had it for today in stock
I was going to buy one today but need to sell my CV 35 1.7 plus PCX 5000 listed on the B&S now. Someone needs to grab it before I change my mind . I might be being really stupid here buying this 40
Interesting they switched to curved blades for the M version, but I actually think that makes sense as it will probably be used for portraits a lot more than landscapes on an M. I wonder what frame lines it will call up 35mm or 50mm neither is ideal, but I assume 35mm.
BastianK was correct about the VM version then. In Japan the MRSP of the VM version is 120K yen vs. 135K for E-mount but apparently there's no hood with the VM and accessory hood has MRSP of 12K so they'll be pretty close.
Looks like it is the same optional hood LH-08 that 35/1.2 II has.
Will the Leica version be a bit more compromised optically being a 52mm thread instead of 58mm? Or is it not enough to matter? The advantage of the Leica Mount is TAP. Of course then there is the question as to whether the lenses are differently optimized for the different sensor stacks....
Luvwine wrote:
Will the Leica version be a bit more compromised optically being a 52mm thread instead of 58mm? Or is it not enough to matter? The advantage of the Leica Mount is TAP. Of course then there is the question as to whether the lenses are differently optimized for the different sensor stacks....
It may not perform optimally on the Sony sensor. On top of that you lose EXIF, auto-magnification, auto-IBIS and the de-clicking feature. With TAP, it will weight 450g.
Luvwine wrote:
Will the Leica version be a bit more compromised optically being a 52mm thread instead of 58mm? Or is it not enough to matter? The advantage of the Leica Mount is TAP. Of course then there is the question as to whether the lenses are differently optimized for the different sensor stacks....
The English text says it's optimized for both film and digital so I guess the digital will be something with a thin sensor cover like Leica.
Steve Spencer wrote:
Interesting they switched to curved blades for the M version, but I actually think that makes sense as it will probably be used for portraits a lot more than landscapes on an M. I wonder what frame lines it will call up 35mm or 50mm neither is ideal, but I assume 35mm.
Steve,
Where did you read about that. This would basically deteriorate sunstar rendering in exchange for rounder specular highlights stepped down.
The Japanese version talks more about the aperture blades: http://www.cosina.co.jp/seihin/voigtlander/vm-mount/vm-40mm1_2/index.html
Auto-translation:
A beautiful blurred
telescope with 10 diaphragm blades Adopting a 10 aperture diaphragm in order to make a hole shaped like a circle close to a circle. The out focus part is a natural depiction, the point light source etc is also not a polygon but a round and soft blur.
Juha Kannisto wrote:
The Japanese version talks more about the aperture blades: http://www.cosina.co.jp/seihin/voigtlander/vm-mount/vm-40mm1_2/index.html
Auto-translation:
A beautiful blurred
telescope with 10 diaphragm blades Adopting a 10 aperture diaphragm in order to make a hole shaped like a circle close to a circle. The out focus part is a natural depiction, the point light source etc is also not a polygon but a round and soft blur.
Thanks! I can understand a little better with this link.
Very interesting they changed the aperture blade shape. I would not like that at all but I'm sure others will.
Oct 19, 2017 at 10:48 AM
Steve Spencer Offline • • • • • • • Upload & Sell: On
Fred Miranda wrote:
Steve,
Where did you read about that. This would basically deteriorate sunstar rendering in exchange for rounder specular highlights stepped down.
It was in the link you posted. Specifically they said:
10-blade circular aperture diaphragm for beautiful bokeh
I assumed that meant curved blades, but perhaps I was over interpreting.
Steve Spencer wrote:
It was in the link you posted. Specifically they said:
10-blade circular aperture diaphragm for beautiful bokeh
I assumed that meant curved blades, but perhaps I was over interpreting.
No, you were right. I overlooked the 'circular' word as it's unusual for Cosina.
The translated Japanese version reads:
"Beautiful blur taste with 10 diaphragm blades. In order to make the hole in which the diaphragm blades form a circle, we adopted a 10 aperture diaphragm.
The out focus part is a natural depiction, the point light source etc is also not a polygon but a round and soft blur."
Could someone kindly provide some details on what it is about the Leica mount which allows for an overall lighter lens?
Is this potentially a less sharp lens since the sensor is unable to resolve as many details or is the mount itself more conducive to achieving similar image quality using less glass?
