scrappydog wrote:
Your 24GM is good for astro. Mine produces elongated stars in the periphery, has a lot of CA, and is not good for astro. I read a review where the reviewers copy was similar to mine.
---------------------------------------------
fplstudio wrote:
I have a similar experience on the copy I rented. Lots of coma wide open, usable only from around f/2.2 and my term of reference is the 16-35 GM. Still a light sucker and brilliant for all the rest.
I will compare the CV 21/1.4 vs GM 24/1.4 side by side for coma just to make sure the results are consistent.
Has anyone already compared the overall rendering (not just bokeh) / colors with the Loxia 21mm? I am very interested in the Voigtländer, but in the past I found, the rendering of the 60mm very flat compared to the 50mm Loxia, so I stayed with the Loxia.
Does anyone know if one of the two lenses (Voigtländer 21mm f1.4 / Loxia 21mm f2.8) is a Little bit wider than the other?
sandycrane wrote:
Well, it seems the old Zeiss "magic" was really Cosina magic. The colors and contrast of the Voigtlander Nokton series is phenomenal!
I don't think so. There was no comparison of the overall rendering in this review. On page 5 you can see complete pictures taken with both lenses, albeit in smaller sizes, and for me the colors of the Loxia look a bit better.
Of course, the last samples of Fred look great but these are great pictures, not necessarily because of the used lens.
However, I see a continuous improvement of the Voigtländer lenses. For my taste, the rendering (for landscape shots) of the 60mm f2 was good, but much worse than that of the 50mm Loxia, the 40mm f1.2 was better, but still not as good as the Loxias. I have not yet tested the 50mm f1.2, but after all I've seen here, I like the Loxia a bit better. So the Loxia stays for the time being.
I think Voigtländer is coming - to my taste - now slowly where the Loxias were a few years ago, not in terms of sharpness, but color rendering. If I would like their rendering as much as the rendering of the Loxias/Batis, I would replace my Loxias immediately, because the haptics annoy me (mounting and unmounting, scratch sensitivity, sensitivity to mechanical impacts) and last but not least I like the sunstars of the last Voigtländer lenses even better.
DaveFP wrote:
I have just started thinking of picking up a Loxia 21.
Any good reason to continue in that direction vs going with this lens?
I like the idea of 1.4 at a similar size but I know more about Zeiss's build quality and service.
Thoughts?
Much as I love the Loxia 21, if buying today (new, retail), I'd be inclined toward the VC 21/1.4. Similar IQ, 2 extra stops, and a couple hundred cheaper. Fred's Balboa Ferris Wheel says it all for IQ wide open. I have not yet fallen under the spell of the VC lenses, but that seems only a matter of time if they have the same electronic functionality as Loxia on Sony bodies.
Gunzorro wrote:
Much as I love the Loxia 21, if buying today (new, retail), I'd be inclined toward the VC 21/1.4. Similar IQ, 2 extra stops, and a couple hundred cheaper. Fred's Balboa Ferris Wheel says it all for IQ wide open. I have not yet fallen under the spell of the VC lenses, but that seems only a matter of time if they have the same electronic functionality as Loxia on Sony bodies.
Hi Jim - inclined to agree with you. These new CVs look pretty compelling.
My problem is that I have an addictive personality when it comes to lenses.
If I buy the CV and I like it I am am going to want the 50 and if I buy the 50...... (rinse and repeat).
In any case yeah; at this point I'd would buy this over the Loxia.
DaveFP wrote:
Hi Jim - inclined to agree with you. These new CVs look pretty compelling.
My problem is that I have an addictive personality when it comes to lenses.
If I buy the CV and I like it I am am going to want the 50 and if I buy the 50...... (rinse and repeat).
In any case yeah; at this point I'd would buy this over the Loxia.
We sound very similar in that regard -- I love having lots of alternatives on hand!
Now that I've gone through all Fred's images and analysis, and read many of the remarks of others, I will affirm that I'm happy sticking with my Loxia 21, at least for the foreseeable future. I don't even have a problem mounting or unmounting Loxia lenses.
But if VC comes out with a rocking 28/1.4 for a great price, I might have to get one and try it (same for an 18mm). Then I'd be on that slippery slope toward the VC 40/1.2 and 21/1.4. That could spell the end of my love of the Zeiss ZE 28/2 which is a little hard to precisely focus due to wide open blurry SA (great lens stopped down though!).
Has anyone else noticed the VC 21/1.4 seems about 1mm or 1.5mm narrower FOV than the Loxia? Another point in Loxia's favor, IMO.
Gunzorro wrote:
We sound very similar in that regard -- I love having lots of alternatives on hand!
Now that I've gone through all Fred's images and analysis, and read many of the remarks of others, I will affirm that I'm happy sticking with my Loxia 21, at least for the foreseeable future. I don't even have a problem mounting or unmounting Loxia lenses.
But if VC comes out with a rocking 28/1.4 for a great price, I might have to get one and try it (same for an 18mm). Then I'd be on that slippery slope toward the VC 40/1.2 and 21/1.4. That could spell the end of my love of the Zeiss ZE 28/2 which is a little hard to precisely focus due to wide open blurry SA (great lens stopped down though!).
Has anyone else noticed the VC 21/1.4 seems about 1mm or 1.5mm narrower FOV than the Loxia? Another point in Loxia's favor, IMO.
A 28mm lens seems less relevant now, to me at least, given the outstanding 24mm f1.4 GM and the new Sony A7RIV. A fantastic 24mm cropped to 28mm FOV from a 61MP sensor seems more than enough for me (for now, at least).
httivals wrote:
A 28mm lens seems less relevant now, to me at least, given the outstanding 24mm f1.4 GM and the new Sony A7RIV. A fantastic 24mm cropped to 28mm FOV from a 61MP sensor seems more than enough for me (for now, at least).
With 61MP, a 24mm FL cropped to 28mm gives us 45MP. (26MP when cropped to ~35mm)
So, the FE 24/1.4 GM cropped to 28mm yields higher resolution than when using it on the A7R3!
Fred Miranda wrote:
With 61MP, a 24mm FL cropped to 28mm gives us 45MP. (26MP when cropped to ~35mm)
So, the FE 24/1.4 GM cropped to 28mm yields higher resolution than when using it on the A7R3!
28/24=1.166x
61/1.166/1.166=44.86MP
True, but there will still be about half a stop worse high ISO performance at a 28mm angle of view and a little more than a stop worse high ISO performance when cropping to 35mm, which might well be something one cares about when shooting an f/1.4 lens.
Steve Spencer wrote:
True, but there will still be about half a stop worse high ISO performance at a 28mm angle of view and a little more than a stop worse high ISO performance when cropping to 35mm, which might well be something one cares about when shooting an f/1.4 lens.
Unlikely but SNR/DR performance may be improved for the new 61MP sensor.
So it will be roughly equivalent to an excellent 28mm f1.8 (only using the somewhat reduced center portion of the 24mm f1.4)? . . . Great, imho.
Steve Spencer wrote:
True, but there will still be about half a stop worse high ISO performance at a 28mm angle of view and a little more than a stop worse high ISO performance when cropping to 35mm, which might well be something one cares about when shooting an f/1.4 lens.
That could spell the end of my love of the Zeiss ZE 28/2 which is a little hard to precisely focus due to wide open blurry SA (great lens stopped down though!). 