Iunno, I shot with just the CV 10mm for a few months exclusively, and those definitely look wider. A little birdie told me Laowa is working on a 7.5mm FF for Sony, is this true? lol
Bob_S wrote:
Possibly, perhaps I should clarify my point which was that this groundbreaker didn't make anyone here (with collectively 500+ years of experience in pro photography) say anything like 'that's definitely wider than 12mm'.
My point is the lens needs to be demonstrated to produce something a CV10 or the Sony 12-24 can't, in order to sell it to people other than those who simply want to tell their buddies they are shooting at 9mm.
It's like most supercar drivers, they can't possibly demonstrate the skill to maximise 1000 horsepower (or a third of that), so why buy the product?
But doesn't that go back to (and challenge) your point about "need"? Nobody buys a supercar because they need it.
MAubrey wrote:
But doesn't that go back to (and challenge) your point about "need"? Nobody buys a supercar because they need it.
Again, I have to disagree, supercars are usually designed for a need, if your business is racing, you need race cars.
If your business is photography and you can capture your scene with a 12mm, using a 9mm may improve the output, to demonstrate that well would be prudent of the company that is offering the product.
Bob_S wrote:
Again, I have to disagree, supercars are usually designed for a need, if your business is racing, you need race cars.
If your business is photography and you can capture your scene with a 12mm, using a 9mm may improve the output, to demonstrate that well would be prudent of the company that is offering the product.
Supercars are street cars modeled off of race track cars that millionaires and billionaires buy. They don't buy them to race.
ftllens wrote:
Iunno, I shot with just the CV 10mm for a few months exclusively, and those definitely look wider. A little birdie told me Laowa is working on a 7.5mm FF for Sony, is this true? lol
Bob_S wrote:
I do. Everyone I track them with does also. Your data/perception is incorrect.
I'm glad to hear they're used in your circle, but I'm not inexperienced here and my own experiences are totally different. Opposite, actually. My perception is correct.
But to make a better anology. If a 9mm is a supercar, then a 10mm is also a supercar. Maybe your expectations are wrong because you're acting like a 10mm is a Prius.
I see that the orders are open. Is there any optical differences between M and Sony E mount? Is it optimized for each camera sensor thickness or can M Mount be used on on other cameras eg Sony?
kevin_laowa wrote:
Official launch on 29th. Will share more sample images vs Voigt 10/5.6
serhan_ wrote:
I see that the orders are open. Is there any optical differences between M and Sony E mount? Is it optimized for each camera sensor thickness or can M Mount be used on on other cameras eg Sony?
In the case of the slow ultra wide Voigtlander lenses (10,12 and 15mm), there is no difference in performance when using the VM version on the Sony. So, it's likely the same with this new Laowa. I am guessing there is only a mount and flange distance change between the versions.
There is a difference in what a race car driver (member of a smaller group) calls a 'supercar' and what the non-race-car-drivers call 'supercar', maybe.
I would call a race car a race car. A supercar indeed is a billionaire's toy that nobody would risk damaging on track. I doubt Bob drives, races and regularly damages Koenigseggs, Bugattis and the like... Bob_S wrote:
I do. Everyone I track them with does also. Your data/perception is incorrect.
Fred Miranda wrote:
In the case of the slow ultra wide Voigtlander lenses (10,12 and 15mm), there is no difference in performance when using the VM version on the Sony. So, it's likely the same with this new Laowa. I am guessing there is only a mount and flange distance change between the versions.
yes, and it looks like in one photograph appeared a 14mm small lens with metric 52 thread for filters. I hope it performs well, as i look for something wider than lox 21 with filters for a long time
shadow9d9 wrote:
I wish the philipreeve review had a picture of the 10 vs 9 side by side, just for perspective change.
It has now.
I just got the review sample last week and completed some comparisons to the 5.6/10 in the meantime,
but I had to rush the review a bit this morning as I wanted these comparisons to be out with today's official press release, as I thought these will be most interesting to many of you.
Now the article is a bit rounder with also much better product pictures
Fred Miranda wrote:
In the case of the slow ultra wide Voigtlander lenses (10,12 and 15mm), there is no difference in performance when using the VM version on the Sony. So, it's likely the same with this new Laowa. I am guessing there is only a mount and flange distance change between the versions.
I got told they change some element spacing, but I think this may very well be within mount tolerances,
as my M version actually performs slightly better on Sony (not a big difference though).
hanay78 wrote:
yes, and it looks like in one photograph appeared a 14mm small lens with metric 52 thread for filters. I hope it performs well, as i look for something wider than lox 21 with filters for a long time
There will also be a 14mm 4.0 (very low distortion, 52mm filter thread) and a 11mm 4.5 (62mm filter thread).
I also think the 14mm 4.0 might be the ultra wide Loxia lens we have been waiting for, sharing the 52mm filter thread of the series.
I have a good sample of the 11mm 4.5 in E-mount, but for now I will prioritize reviewing the 9mm 5.6.
When it comes to the 14mm 4.0 I have to wait for a replacement as this one is not centered good enough.
