RustyBug
Offline
• • • • • • •
Upload & Sell: On
|
 p.14 #1 · Voigtlander 28mm f/2 APO-Lanthar Review | |
Fred Miranda wrote:
Great post. I agree that having more choices often leads to more confusion and indecision about what to carry or own. Detailed reviews with real results, samples, and tests can be more helpful than videos that focus mostly on personal opinions.
I'd have to respectfully disagree here...the rendering difference between the 28/1.5 Nokton and the 28/2 APO is more than subtle. They're easy to distinguish even in casual sample comparisons. The 28 APO delivers a far more corrected and refined look: CA correction is in a completely different league (virtually absent on the APO), and bokeh transitions are smoother, cleaner, and more neutral. The Nokton leans into a more classic and structured rendering (which I love), with stronger outlining and some visible fringing wide open. Now, if you had said the APO is close to the Ultron, I would completely agree. Those differences are much smaller.
As for viewfinder blockage, they're about the same without hoods. But from a rendering standpoint, they only begin to look somewhat similar when stopped down...and even then, the APO maintains its edge in overall precision and refinement. The Nokton gives you that unique f/1.5 blur, yes, but it comes with its own trade-offs.
As capable as the Q2's 28mm f/1.7 lens is, with the mandatory software distortion correction, it's not on the same level optically as the CV 28/2 APO. Yes, both have a modern signature, but there are clear differences beyond distortion. Edge-to-edge sharpness, microcontrast, CA handling, and overall technical rendering (setting aside subjective preferences) all favor the APO. That said, I get your point that in real world images, both have a modern look and produce beautiful results. My point is that although modern lenses can look similar, there are still noticeable differences for those of us who care about these details....Show more →
And yup, you've nailed what I didn't say very well regarding my perspective of the Q2 Lux. The one thing the Q2 Lux has is that macro mode that is pretty unique to have also. That'll be the thing that I'm "giving up" the most. But, I figure the MFD of the APO is close enough that a bit of cropping isn't a massive difference. Particularly, when you realize that the Lux is simply being pulled farther from the film plane to enlarge the projection. Basically, an optical version of cropping-ish, anyway, that takes a corresponding IQ / contrast diff. Six of one, 1/2 dozen the other kind of thing. And, yes, the uncorrected APO will be significantly diff in terms of distortion vs. the Lux.
That said ... as I currently have the M 24/2.8 APSH and the 35/2 ASPH ... I'll likely pick up the 28 APO (not the Nokton) in due time. I've also got the 50/1.5 Nok and the 40 Cron-C for when I want those diff rendering. Imo, my WA stuff is generally more technical, than aesthetic rendering oriented. Of course, that's a personal decision and everyone's YMMV applies. But, even though the APO is more technical oriented ... it's falloff doesn't seem to suffer from nervous bokeh, etc. Still very pleasing, even if there are others that are "more pleasing". "Max" bokeh isn't my agenda for my WA's ... but, pleasant enough is fine for my needs ... in understanding the quid pro quo of things.
|
The CV 28/2 APO never gives distracting rendering. It's similar to the CV 50/2 APO but with less optical vignetting and more rounded bokeh balls. In a way, it has a rendering style like the RX1's Sonnar 35/2 but without any color fringing or onion ring bokeh artifacts. Now we just need a CV 35/2 APO-Lanthar II with the same signature and compact size.
