Thanks, Fred. The CV21 still seems like a very solid choice for astro, f2.2-2.5 is very usable. Lots of folks use the Loxia at f2.8 for astro. The 24GM is the pick if that's your focus though! The GM of course is also amazing with OOF rendering; that lens is smooth as butter. Seems like it's hard to go wrong with any of these; they all have their minor strengths but perform at very high levels overall.
grahamgibson wrote:
Thanks, Fred. The CV21 still seems like a very solid choice for astro, f2.2-2.5 is very usable. Lots of folks use the Loxia at f2.8 for astro. The 24GM is the pick if that's your focus though! The GM of course is also amazing with OOF rendering; that lens is smooth as butter. Seems like it's hard to go wrong with any of these; they all have their minor strengths but perform at very high levels overall.
I agree. The CV 21/1.4 shares that high contrast rendering signature similar to what we see with the 40mm and 50mm f/1.2 Nokton lenses at mid-distance while the 24 f/1.4 GM has the smoothest bokeh I've seen in a 24mm lens. Even in crop mode, it's similar to the Sonnar 35/2 which is no easy feat.
On the other hand, the Voigtlander 21's high micro-contrast and the wider FL gives scenes a 3D feeling which is also unique and it's something I don't see much with the GM.
The CV 21/1.4 Nokton has good coma performance at least 1-stop from wide open. At about f/2.2 coma became acceptable and it's optimal at f/2.8. It does not match the outstanding coma performance from the FE 24/1.4 GM which has great coma performance from wide open. Compared to the Loxia 21/2.8, it matches its wide open performance at about f/2.2 or f/2.5.
Thanks for these additional tests, Fred. The CV's performance at 2.2 looks great to me, especially bearing in mind that iso noise will limit print size well before these small amounts of coma are noticeable, which is why I find the Loxia 21 even wide open perfectly fine too.
GMPhotography wrote:
Well breathing is good no breathing is not good at all. Just had to be said.
Thank you, your contribution to my photographic well being has been invaluable ))
Now, can someone please provide some details regarding focus breathing on the new CV 21 1.4 ?
nazdravanul wrote:
Thank you, your contribution to my photographic well being has been invaluable ))
Now, can someone please provide some details regarding focus breathing on the new CV 21 1.4 ?
well I've been drinking any answer may be compromised .
Let's start with Lateral CA correction for the CV 21/1.4 Nokton and compare it to the Loxia 21/2.8.
LaCA does not improve as the lens is stopped down so I will be comparing the lenses at f/5.6 and f/8.
Note: I'm editing my files in Lightroom and there is an automatic profile being applied to both Voigtlander and Loxia files. If you are editing in CaptureOne, there will definitely be more LaCA in these samples.
All In-Camera corrections were set to "OFF"
Lightroom's "Remove Chromatic Aberration" and "Enable Profile Corrections" set to "OFF" (both lenses)
Lateral CA is pretty much a lossless correction in post and it's not something to worry too much about. It's different than Axial CA which is difficult to correct but improves as the lens is stopped down.
Very slight better performance for the Loxia 21/2.8 (LaCA)
Again showing the Loxia performs slightly better corrected for CA. This is not surprising since the Voigtlander is 2 stops faster.
Lateral CA is corrected for the Voigtlander file by checking Lightroom's Remove Chromatic Aberration
I like putting these two color aberrations in the same category because they both improve when stepping down the lens.
Axial CA correction (Also called Longitudinal CA or LoCA) is a more difficult aberration to correct in post but in the case of the Voigtlander 21/1.4, it's no longer an issue at f/2.5 or smaller apertures. I had to provoke to make it show at wider apertures but it will show up under high contrast lighting.
This is a very extreme case but shows how LoCA can be present when shooting wide open and how it gets tamed at f/2.8
Here is a comparison to the Loxia 21/2.8 with both lenses @f/2.8. The Voigtlander actually performs better at f/2.8
Here is an example of purple fringing for the Voigtlander 21/1.4. This color aberration is present on the focus area in high contrast lighting. It improves at f/2 and is pretty much gone at f/2.8
Another example showing how axial CA gets drastically improved at f/2.8 (f/2.5 looks very similar)
Fred Miranda wrote:
Sure, I did a quick test and there is some focus breathing but it's milder compared to the 24/1.4 GM's.
I will post some samples later today.
Pretty impressive how they managed to make a better landscape lens than the loxia 21mm, and keep it at a similar size but also 2 stops faster. The 21mm f3.5 is nice for the size and price, but didn’t seem like a great value versus a used Loxia. This on the other hand, is quite impressive!
I think overall this lens really drives home how great Voigtlander is doing with these FE lenses. Their designs are fast or exotic, compact, and seem like a much better value than their loxia counterparts.
I don't see the new CV21 as a better landscape lens (than the Loxia 21), just an alternative. Most landscapes are not taken below f2.8, and sharpness is very similar for the CV and Loxia. The latter also still has the edge over the CV in terms of flare resistance, which is an important landscape criterion. Also in relation to the size/weight, the advantage of the CV21/3.5 (230g) over the Loxia (400g) was much lauded on this forum, yet a comparable advantage of the Loxia over the CV21/1.4 (560g) is largely ignored.
Which lens is better? Voigtlander 21/1.4 or Loxia 21/2.8?
Resolution and Contrast: Both superb at f/2.8 so there is no winner here. They perform very similarly at center, mid and corners from f/2.8 until diffraction sets in.
Field Curvature: The Loxia's moderate inwards field curvature has always being a weakness. The Voigtlander 21/1.4's field curvature is wavy where the mid-zone gets more affected. Both lenses benefit from f/4 or smaller for a more even sharpness across the field.
Color Aberration control: The Voigtlander has slightly better LoCA correction at f/2.8 while Loxia has slightly better lateral CA control.
Sunstar Rendering (10-point sunstars vs 12): This is subjective but the new 12-blade aperture tends to render shorter sun-rays at smaller apertures like f/8-11 compared to apertures with 10 blades. Specular highlights look also more rounded when comparing both lenses stopped down. With the Voigtlander 21/1.4, it's possible to get defined sunstars at f/2 for night scenes. That's not possible with the Loxia which needs about f/3.5 for similar sunstars.
Vignetting: Similar vignetting from f/4 and smaller apertures but the Voigtlander performs better at f/2.8 where the Loxia is wide open.
Distortion: Similar distortion as well but the Voigtlander has slightly less barrel distortion.
Astro: The Voigtlander wins for astro with the possibility of low coma from f/2.2 and a stronger performance at f/2.8 (compared to the Loxia wide open)
Physical side: The Loxia is a smaller lens and weighs 166g less.
Aperture size: The Voigtlander is more versatile in low light being 2 stops faster (Lower ISO images for higher IQ). It's capable of more blur to enhance subject isolation.
Rendering: Their rendering is very similar at f/2.8 with the Voigtlander being only a tad smoother. Contrast and micro-contrast are high for both lenses and they render beautiful colors.
Ergonomics and build quality: Both lenses are very well built and a pleasure to manual focus. Personally, I prefer the ergonomics of the Voigtlander with faster de-clicking which does not require the lens to be unmounted; aperture in front of the lens which is easier to operate, especially with gloves; much easier mount/unmount where it's a pain for the Loxia line. (Yes, Pocketpano is a must)
IBIS: The Voigtlander is capable of 5-axis IBIS since it reports distance while the Loxia is only capable of 3-axis stabilization.
Flare resistance: Both have impressive veiling suppression and are capable of high contrast images under backlighting. However, ghosting is present in images from both lenses even more so for the Voigtlander, depending on light angle and intensity. Both Loxia 21/2.8 and Voigtlander 21/3.5 E-mount perform better here.
))
