I have always liked the 21mm focal length and the Voigtlander excels at sunstars. I have contemplated the Sony 20/1.8 for the AF but then I bring my self back down to earth and remind myself that I really don't need AF for my 21mm shots generally speaking. I wish the Voigtlander 21 was a little smaller and lighter but for what it is, I can't complain about that. If you are happy with MF, I definitely think it can replace the Sony 20 and Loxia 25. I don't have the Loxia 25 but I do have the 21, 35 and 85 and they stay because I like their rendering just as much as Voigtlander's rendering.
I can't comment on the Sony 20/1.8 but I've just replaced the Loxia 25/2.4 with the CV 21/1.4 so yes, I think it is a valid replacement. Rendering and resolution are surprisingly similar between them, with the CV 21/1.4 doing everything just a tad better (especially at f/2.4 and below).
Is the CV 21/1.4 special? Yes. But so is the Loxia 25. I just didn't like its handling and that it doesn't fit my Voigtländer lens kit.
billsnature wrote:
Since this old thread is still active... I have to ask.... How are people feeling about the CV21 f1.4 vs the Sony 20mm f1.8?
I have the Sony 20G and the Loxia 25mm that I keep just for sunstars and color, but I sometimes wonder if I would be happier with the CV 21mm f1.4 to replace both. I current use 20mm G for astro and just upgraded my 16-15GM to the version II.
Is this just a GAS attack for me or is there something special about the CV 21mm F1.4?
I have Sony 20 1.8 and it's an excellent lens. It replaces Voigtlander 21 3.5 color-skopar. If you can live without AF and sacrafise some of optical superiority of Sony 20G, I'd consider th CV21. My reasons would sunstars, DOF, build quality/MF experience. In your case (astro) I suggest some research how compare two lenses in this area, perhaps 20G has less coma but I'm not sure. I can't give up eye-track AF even at wide angle because of my kids, this is the other factor you should consider.
billsnature wrote:
Since this old thread is still active... I have to ask.... How are people feeling about the CV21 f1.4 vs the Sony 20mm f1.8?
I have the Sony 20G and the Loxia 25mm that I keep just for sunstars and color, but I sometimes wonder if I would be happier with the CV 21mm f1.4 to replace both. I current use 20mm G for astro and just upgraded my 16-15GM to the version II.
Is this just a GAS attack for me or is there something special about the CV 21mm F1.4?
Went through this and chose the CV 21/1.4. I found it to the best compromise between the gorgeous but slower Loxia, the convenient 20/1.8 but that I find lacks sunstars and "pop" and other larger/heavier options. The CV has stunning image quality, it's hands down the best lens I own. It doesn't have the best coma correction in the corners wide open, but not an issue to me as I do astro once in a blue moon and the results are great to my taste. I gladly accept this trade-off to not end-up with a behemoth/perfectly corrected lens. If astro is your primary focus, there are chances you would own a tracker anyway and won't shoot wide open.
I changed Sony 20 for Nokton 21 some time ago and I'm really satisfied. Sony is also great and autofocus is useful in some family, everyday situations... but Voigtlanders are always something special - color, contrast, sunstars, I just love this style. Even casual street photos look better to me on Voigtlander (if you can only manage focusing).
I only miss selling 40/1.2 some years ago
I bought this lens some months ago and I used it a lot during the last month between Uk and Italy.
I can only say... insane glass!
Using it with the Visoflex 020 on M10r from the vertical tilt (I do love the Hasselblad style, thinking on 907x...) I shot so many pictures between 1.4 and 2.0 with a sharpness all around the frame impressive and the big stars coming out...
Using this lens with the 50 APO is a pleasure; during the shooting and the editing as well!
The first picture is a 2.0 ... the whole frame is excellent!
I just picked one up today in M Mount as they're on sale right now through Camera Quest. I've been looking for a good wide option for my kit. I just sold my Q3 since I'm not a primarily 28mm shooter. Along with my CV 15 4.5 and 50mm APO Summicron-SL on the SL3 I should have a great three lens travel kit. Can't wait to get this lens - I love the CV 40 1.2 and this seems to have a lot of the same magic.
I think i can cautiously say this is the first lens for me that "works" on the sony 61mp sensor for me. From f1.8 onwards the sharpness is adequate. Before f2 the infinity focus is just before the hard stop but at smaller apertures the lens seems to do just fine left on the hard stop, much easier to use compared to the loxia 21.
My copy of the lox 21 exhibits the same issue as described by HelBen85 on his copy with much of the right side unacceptably soft. Still prefer it's sunstars though.
Up to now I have had 3 zeiss lens, the decentered loxia 21, a touit 32 x mount with an aperture ring that had bad contacts and would jump randomly and a batis 85mm which did not exhibit problems.
sselhtrim wrote:
I think i can cautiously say this is the first lens for me that "works" on the sony 61mp sensor for me. From f1.8 onwards the sharpness is adequate. Before f2 the infinity focus is just before the hard stop but at smaller apertures the lens seems to do just fine left on the hard stop, much easier to use compared to the loxia 21.
My copy of the lox 21 exhibits the same issue as described by HelBen85 on his copy with much of the right side unacceptably soft. Still prefer it's sunstars though.
Up to now I have had 3 zeiss lens, the decentered loxia 21, a touit 32 x mount with an aperture ring that had bad contacts and would jump randomly and a batis 85mm which did not exhibit problems.
I agree completely. A perfect example of how B&W can be infinitely better.
It really is a great lens (I must confess, I prefer using it on Leica). I must find time to try it with B&W film. Might get a chance in Oxford this week, if the weather’s a bit better.
sandycrane wrote:
It was a closeup flower photo, I think by Fred, that prompted me to buy this fantastic lens. Wide angle with Bokeh is quite something!
While I don't use the 21/1.4 lens as often as my other lenses, it consistently delivers when I require a fast ultra-wide option. The 0.5m MFD is excellent on the M-version, but the 0.25m on the E-mount is a standout feature.
saxguy wrote:
Full dsclosure, I didn't go through this whole thread, but has anyone compared the CV 21 1.4 to the new version of the Sigma 20mm ART 1.4?
I had the Sigma 20mm f1.4 DG DN for about a year after it was released, but sold it before I picked up a used copy of the Nokton 21mm f1.4. The main reason I bought the Nokton was I acquired an A7CR, and I was looking for a set of small primes to pair with the smaller body for more discrete urban shooting. I had just previously picked up a Nokton 50mm f1.2 and was blown away with the great IQ and UE in such a small form factor. Not only is the Sigma 20mm bigger and heavier than the Nokton 21mm, but the hood seems a lot bigger than it needs to be. Even shooting with the A7RV, I was reluctant to take the Sigma 20mm out, so it just sat on the shelf most of the time. The Nokton is just so much more discrete.
In terms of image quality, that wasn't really a factor in my decision. They are both more than sharp enough corner to corner, even on my 61MP bodies.
There is a minor difference in FL, but I will typically pair it with a 35mm or 50mm, so they both complement those equally.
As far as usability is concerned, the MF of the Nokton is not a problem for me, given it's such a wide angle and is easy to nail focus with the MF assist feature. In fact, I really enjoy the using the CV (21/50/110) lenses more than my Sony AF lenses.
has anybody done Astro photography with the m-mount version of the lens? I see conflicting things, and I would like to know what the coma correction is like in the corners wide-open..
Hello...sorry for being a bit lazy but 50 pages long thread exhaused me (I gave up after first 10 or so )...so, maybe there was a talk about this lens (or VM ver.) vs 21/2.8 zeiss distagon (or same optics milvus ver.)?
Anyone with both these lenses care to comment?
Thanks
(I gave up after first 10 or so )...so, maybe there was a talk about this lens (or VM ver.) vs 21/2.8 zeiss distagon (or same optics milvus ver.)?