madNbad wrote:
I have been reading reviews of this lens and really like the images but not enough to move on from my 35 Nokton Classic SC which has been a joy to use.
I love the Nokton classic too!
The main advantage the 1.5 has - a bigger, much more comfortable tab. Makes it much more enjoyable for me to use.
madNbad wrote:
I have been reading reviews of this lens and really like the images but not enough to move on from my 35 Nokton Classic SC which has been a joy to use.
The hood looks great, would you kind sharing where it came from?
I got the new, improved V2 square hood for the 35mm f/1.5. It is very nice. None of the Voigtlander hoods look aesthetically pleasing with this lens (in my opinion). This hood matches the lens nicely.
_jim_ wrote:
I got the new, improved V2 square hood for the 35mm f/1.5. It is very nice. None of the Voigtlander hoods look aesthetically pleasing with this lens (in my opinion). This hood matches the lens nicely.
Hi Jim, hood looks fantastic. I'm very interested, however on the website it states 'If you are very particular about vignettes, this might not be for you.'
Don't suppose you or anyone else has a photo comparison of the vignette wide open with/without the lens hood installed.
Lee Paul wrote:
Hi Jim, hood looks fantastic. I'm very interested, however on the website it states 'If you are very particular about vignettes, this might not be for you.'
Don't suppose you or anyone else has a photo comparison of the vignette wide open with/without the lens hood installed.
Thanks,
Lee
Curious. When I got the hood, I shot a couple sample shots on a white wall (about 1.5 meters away) with hood on/off. I looked at the camera screen on my A7rII and felt like I didn't see any difference in vignette, so I didn't even bother to import them to my computer.
Is it possible there is slightly more vignette when shooting at infinity, wide-open? Maybe...but I've never looked (because why would I shoot at infinity, wide-open?). I mostly shoot film and the vignette from the lens/hood combo doesn't offend or jump out in any way that is different from any other fast 35 I've shot.
Lee Paul wrote:
Hi Jim, hood looks fantastic. I'm very interested, however on the website it states 'If you are very particular about vignettes, this might not be for you.'
Don't suppose you or anyone else has a photo comparison of the vignette wide open with/without the lens hood installed.
Thanks,
Lee
So, all of this is to say, is there a situation where the hood might cause additional vignette?
I'm extremely torn between this lens and the Ultron 35 f2 for my M11 (I own Ultron but in the the v1 version with the focus screw, which I would upgrade to a v2). Do we have any good image comparisons between those two lenses I could inspect? I mostly do street + occasional environmental portraiture, so ergo, size, weight are all critical factors. The extra stop is compelling here vs the Ultron, but I'm worried that the bokeh of this lens may feel a bit too flat or clinical, compared to the more "painterly" Ultron...
Unrelated, but I recently went through my own 28 journey and ended up losing the ultron and sticking with the nokton + color skopar, fun to see other folks went with that loadout as well. That tiny 2.8 might be my favorite lens at the moment.
Me personally, I would go for the Ultron when it comes to optical performance. For build and feel, the Nokton. The Ultron on even recent copies can have inconsistent focus feel and sometimes a little binding when shooting vertically. I dont think the Ultron 35mm Type I had these focus binding issues, but I'm not certain.
The Nokton feels much like the Ultron 28mm ASPH II. The Ultron 35mm ASPH II is built different. I've had both Ultron 35mm and 28mm disassembled and the latter is built quite differently.
That's good to know. I've never been totally happy with the focus feel on my copy of the Ultron (hoped it was just bad luck, but sounds like it's more prevalent). Fred's comparisons are great as always, I'd curious to see some more real world usage (i.e. Nokt at 1.5 vs Ultron at 2.0 to get a sense of what they're capable of in a portrait setting).
Would love to hear _jim_'s thoughts, as he's posted some beautiful portraits around here with both the Nokt and Ultron. Any preference between the two today? I think this probably just comes down to a stylistic preference between characterful vs modern rendering, and I just need to do a bit of soul searching...
I really like the rendering of 50mm Nokton f1.2 VM Asph. How does 35mm Nokton f1.2 VM III compare in terms of rendering, vignetting, CA, etc.. How similar are they?
_jim_ wrote:
I got the new, improved V2 square hood for the 35mm f/1.5. It is very nice. None of the Voigtlander hoods look aesthetically pleasing with this lens (in my opinion). This hood matches the lens nicely.
Fred Miranda wrote:
Can you still use the original cap with the squarehood v2?
It does not appear so. I have a UV filter permanently affixed to the lens and the hood won't mount with the filter + cap. Even if it did, you'd have to take the hood on/off every time you want to remove the cap. The good news is that the square hood ships with a round metal friction cap that does a great job.
_jim_ wrote:
It does not appear so. I have a UV filter permanently affixed to the lens and the hood won't mount with the filter + cap. Even if it did, you'd have to take the hood on/off every time you want to remove the cap. The good news is that the square hood ships with a round metal friction cap that does a great job.
I almost bought the black paint hood for the CV 28/1.5 and 35/1.4, but after reading about the vignetting it can cause, I decided to stick with the Voigtlander version.
Fred Miranda wrote:
I almost bought the black paint hood for the CV 28/1.5 and 35/1.4, but after reading about the vignetting it can cause, I decided to stick with the Voigtlander version.
Hmmm. I have used the square hood on the 35 and never noticed any additional vignetting. Which, isn't to say that it isn't possible, but I've just never seen it. I'm a bit skeptical.
