goo0h wrote:
So, you now favoring this lens over the 40/1.2?
Yes, I'm.
The CV 50/1.2 was first introduced in M-mount and it didn't work great on the Sony sensor. During that time, I was shooting with the 40/1.2 and loving the images it produced. My previous CV 50/1.2 copy was well centered but not as sharp as the "SE" version I received last week.
Right now I am really enjoying shooting with the CV 50/1.2 SE on the Sony. It's sharper than my CV 40/1.2 and has better rendering, lower field curvature and no focus shift.
Fred Miranda wrote:
...you can see how smooth the rendering is at mid-distance.
The 50mm Nokton continues to impress me with its beautiful transitions and almost magical ability to pull the subject out of a crazy background (which is something I face nearly every day). Your subject matter is more fun, of course.
Boiler room hoist
New workspace dividers, retrofitting an "open" office for social distancing
MikeEvangelist wrote:
The 50mm Nokton continues to impress me with its beautiful transitions and almost magical ability to pull the subject out of a crazy background (which is something I face nearly every day). Your subject matter is more fun, of course.
It's my favorite from the f/1.2 Noktons but I also like the new 35/1.2.
The CV 75/1.5 and 50/1.2 give me almost the same blur for full body portraits. However, for head and shoulders, the 75mm wins with less facial distortion and more blur. Both lenses are easy and accurate to focus on the Leica even wide open.
Let’s call it the magic machine.
I have shot 40 also but the moment this 50 appeared, i bought it. My take is that i can do mostly everything with any focal length between 35 to 50 but a 1.2 50 is additionally nice for portraits and a cream machine.
MikeEvangelist wrote:
The 50mm Nokton continues to impress me with its beautiful transitions and almost magical ability to pull the subject out of a crazy background (which is something I face nearly every day). Your subject matter is more fun, of course.
Fred i know you have said something about it somewhere but i hope this SE version has exactly the same optical formula as the non-SE version...asking this because you said your SE is sharper (wide open?)?
Fred Miranda wrote:
Yes, I'm.
The CV 50/1.2 was first introduced in M-mount and it didn't work great on the Sony sensor. During that time, I was shooting with the 40/1.2 and loving the images it produced. My previous CV 50/1.2 copy was well centered but not as sharp as the "SE" version I received last week.
Right now I am really enjoying shooting with the CV 50/1.2 SE on the Sony. It's sharper than my CV 40/1.2 and has better rendering, lower field curvature and no focus shift.
nandadevieast wrote:
Fred i know you have said something about it somewhere but i hope this SE version has exactly the same optical formula as the non-SE version...asking this because you said your SE is sharper (wide open?)?
Not the best macro lens, but the rendering is interesting
If you want less spherical aberration wide open at close-up distances, you can try an achromat lens and set the Voigtlander to infinity. The Marumi achromats work very well for that. Alternatively the 50/1.2 performs great at MFD one or two stops down.
Fred Miranda wrote:
If you want less spherical aberration wide open at close-up distances, you can try an achromat lens and set the Voigtlander to infinity. The Marumi achromats work very well for that. Alternatively the 50/1.2 performs great at MFD one or two stops down.
Yes I know and I have now a leica that I don't really use. It was just a little joke since this lens is really known to be hazy wide open at mini focus
hesb wrote:
Yes I know and I have now a leica that I don't really use. It was just a little joke since this lens is really not to be hazy wide open at mini focus
I actually don't mind the SA at closer distances, especially when shooting portraits.
And here I just picked up, at a price I couldn't refuse, a used Zeiss Loxia 50 f/2 for landscape stuff....this thread is making me wish I would have just bit the bullet and grabbed a CV 50 like I normally planned so I could do some portrait stuff too!
Thing is, it's fairly new so not many on the B & S boards, and I prefer to buy lenses used if I can.
Thanks for all the tests Fred and photos everyone! I have been wanting the 50/1.2 in E mount ever since it came out, but haven't been able to find anywhere to buy it in Norway, not even any used ones.
Last summer I found a used 40/1.2 E in great shape for half the new price and have enjoyed it a lot, but the field curvature and sometimes busy transition zone have started to annoy me for wide open shots. (I still like it though and intend to keep it even though I get a 50mm.)
So, back to CV 50/1.2. There is one(!) shop in Norway that sells the VM version and it may be possible to find a used one too. Fred and others who have tried it: When used on a stock Sony does it too have less FC and smoother transition zone than the CV 40 in E mount? Or do I need the 50mm in E mount to see a clear improvement?
HelenaN wrote:
So, back to CV 50/1.2. There is one(!) shop in Norway that sells the VM version and it may be possible to find a used one too. Fred and others who have tried it: When used on a stock Sony does it too have less FC and smoother transition zone than the CV 40 in E mount? Or do I need the 50mm in E mount to see a clear improvement?
Smoother transition: yes.
Less FC: not really.
I would recommend to get the 50mm 1.2 E, unless you also have an M-mount camera.
Why not order from one of the reputable dealers in Europe?
I am pretty sure Robert White ships to Norway, too.
There will be induced field curvature and some minor increase in astigmatism as well. The VM version on the Sony never quite matches the E-mount even stopping down.
Thank you Bastian and Fred! You have convinced me to go for an E mount version. I like the handling of the 40mm so I think I'd prefer the 50/1.2 E, but the smaller size and lower price of the SE is also tempting...
Looking at the list of distributors at Voigtländer's own site I found one in Denmark, but they charge a lot to send outside of EU, so I have to think about that.
HelenaN wrote:
Thank you Bastian and Fred! You have convinced me to go for an E mount version. I like the handling of the 40mm so I think I'd prefer the 50/1.2 E, but the smaller size and lower price of the SE is also tempting...
HelenaN wrote:
I had a look at Robert White, but it seems like they don't sell the 50/1.2 E either, even though they have both the 40mm E and SE.
You might want to contact them directly rather than only looking at their online store. Here in Montréal where I live, our local "Voigtländer Boutique" doesn't list any of the SE lenses but they're available. I think they just haven't had a chance to update their website.
By the way, I'm a big fan of your photography and you are one of the main reasons I'm planning to pick up a few of the Noktons (probably the new 35mm and the 50mm).
Thank you Bastian! Wonder why it didn't show up when I searched. Anyway, it seems like they do ship to Norway. That's great.
(I'm definitely not going to order from the Danish shop. When converting their price I found that they charge approx. $1500 for the lens + $63 for shipping.)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Aside from the difference in focal length, here are the CV 50/1.2 Nokton advantages compared to the CV 40/1.2:
1) The CV 40/1.2 is equipped with 10 aperture blades (10-point sunstar) while the 50/1.2 has 12 for 12-point sunstars. The extra 2 aperture blades also yields slightly rounder specular highlights when stopped down. There are some shooters who prefer 10-point sunstars but I prefer sunstars with 12. All recent Voigtlander lenses have 12 aperture blades.
2) The CV 40/1.2's field of view is narrower than 40mm. It's about 42mm while the CV 50/1.2's FOV is a bit wider (49mm). So, if you are considering the 40mm for that wider FOV, in reality they are not as far apart in terms of field of view as the numbers suggest. (~7mm instead of 10mm).
3) The CV 50/1.2's transition zone is smoother compared to the 40/1.2's. Overall rendering is more pleasant to my eyes. It seems like Voigtlander changed their aspherical moulding process as well since the 50/1.2's specular highlights are pretty much free of onion ring pattern which is not the case with the 40/1.2.
4) Neither lens is equipped with a floating element group which means they won't perform optimally at close distance. However, it's less of an issue with the 50mm because one would usually stay a bit further away from the subject. The further the better performance (less spherical aberration). This is even more of an issue with the new 35/1.2 Nokton since compositions tend to be closer to the subject at 35mm.
5) The CV 50/1.2 is a better lens optically. Stronger resolution/contrast at center and across the field. (less field curvature and focus shift as well)
6) When using the 50/1.2 VM on a Leica M body, you will have frame lines available which is not the case with the 40/1.2....Show more →
Nice summary Fred - thanks. Now you've been shooting them both a while, how would you summarize the differences between the Sigma 45mm f2.8 and the CV 50/1.2? Are you ready to crown the mid-range cream machine?
