“With the “classic” in the name and based on what I have seen from the M-mount version my expectations were rather low. As it seems so far for good reasons: this lens is in no way competitive to modern designs. Sharpness is anything but great, corners never reach the quality of most other primes and many aberrations like Coma or Astigmatism are not well corrected.
So for now I think this is a lens mostly for people who just like the look of the harsh and nervous bokeh, but still want to enjoy some modern features like Exif data and decent coatings or do not want to get into adapting legacy lenses.”
Hmm seems the Voigtlander 35mm f1.4 may not be all that great, first review from Phillip Reevevaayinga it's no way competitive to modern 35mm lenses.. might need to hunt out a 40mm...
https://www.sonyalpharumors.com/fir...reeve-lens-no-way-competitive-modern-designs/
I'll read that link later but from the clip you've posted it does seem disappointing... but I'll hope for better real world results as there were reports of problems with the 40mm f1.2 but since I took my first picture with mine I've thought it was near enough perfect.
If the 35mm is as good as an FD, Rokkor or Zuiko I'll be more than happy
Fingers and toes crossed for the 35mm f1.4
PS.
It's just struck me that "modern 35mm lenses" may mean the new lenses we've seen in the last few years... Sigma Art sort of quality and Sigma Art sort of size and weight... If that's the sort of lens the reviewer has in mind I wonder if he really expects Sigma Art type quality in a lens this compact? I wonder if that's the problem?
I'll give mine a good work out when I get it
Well I've read possibly hundreds of this guy's reviews, he's usually spot on the mark.
Having read it he's not comparing to the Sigma Art glass or even the Loxia but other Leica Mount glass (Zeiss 35 1.4 ZM & Voigtlander 35 f1.7 Ultron)
I'll read that link later but from the clip you've posted it does seem disappointing... but I'll hope for better real world results as there were reports of problems with the 40mm f1.2 but since I took my first picture with mine I've thought it was near enough perfect.
If the 35mm is as good as an FD, Rokkor or Zuiko I'll be more than happy
Fingers and toes crossed for the 35mm f1.4
PS.
It's just struck me that "modern 35mm lenses" may mean the new lenses we've seen in the last few years... Sigma Art sort of quality and Sigma Art sort of size and weight... If that's the sort of lens the reviewer has in mind I wonder if he really expects Sigma Art type quality in a lens this compact? I wonder if that's the problem?
I'll give mine a good work out when I get it
You’d really be happy if an $800 lens was as good as a £30 lens?
I’d be bloody fuming.
You’d really be happy if an $800 lens was as good as a £30 lens?
I’d be bloody fuming.
A nokton 35 is 400 and helicoid around 80-100. Benefit being all your lenses would have closer focus via that method.
What have I missed here?
Get the samyang one matePeople seem to think that the Voigtlander 35mm f1.4 FE is a poopy plop and not worth the money.
Time will tell but I think I'm going to see more positives than negatives.
Is yours on the way Chris or did you cancel your order?
I expect it'll be it'll be less than half price compared to GM24-70. But if it's actually as good as if not better than DSLR version I may even buy this new or pre-order ithttps://www.thephoblographer.com/2018/02/22/true-tamron-28-75mm-f2-8-coming-sony-fe-lineup-cameras/
Looks like the size saving was true at 4.6” long and 550g. Depending on price, it could be a welcome realistic workhorse lens.
Shoot at f1.4 bruvMy Voigtlander 35mm f1.4 has arrived and.... drum roll.... I'm very happy!
I'll do more tests later but for now based on shots of Mrs Woof Woof, a brick wall, my alarm clock (for close focusing) and next doors roof (for middle distance stuff) here are my findings... note that I can't as yet comment on night time pictures including bright lights
- Build is excellent as is the weighting of the focus and aperture rings.
- There's vignetting at wider apertures but it's easily within the range of CS5 to correct and hardly there by f2.8.
- There's CA in the centre at f1.4 but it settles at f1.6 and seems to be gone at f2.
- It's sharp enough at f1.4 in the centre area of the frame and very sharp at f2.
- It's sharp across the frame at f5 but with weaker corners.
- The very corners are the weakest area but by f5 I'd say they're good and at f8 I'd say very good. So this should be fine for whole picture sharpness.
- Bokeh is subjective. I'd describe it as busy and pretty much what I'd expect from a 35mm f1.4 but much less so by f1.7 and I have no complaints at f2. YMMV.
Edit - added point -
- At f1.4 I expected some blooming on brighter objects but I'm so far not seeing any.
I'm very happy with this lens and my A7+this fits in the same small back that the A7+35mm f2.8 or Panny GX80 and 17mm f1.8 fit in, so I'm pleased.
If anyone is interested I'll post pictures and 100% crops.
Can't resist posting a couple
F1.4.
View attachment 120778
f1.4 at 100% with the focus on her left eye.
View attachment 120779
!00% at f2, left eye again.
View attachment 120781
Note that these may suffer a bit for being posted on line, the f1.4 shot is ok for me and the f2 shot looks sharp to me.
PS.
I just used my default sharpening on these so there may be the possibility of tweaking for those who want a sharper picture.
It's good enough to but I'll be using it as a general purpose lens so it'll get used at f1.4 to f10.Shoot at f1.4 bruv
It's good enough to but I'll be using it as a general purpose lens so it'll get used at f1.4 to f10.
Probably enough have a dedicated 35mm at each full t-stophow many 35mm lens do you have now?
Er...
Two. Honest
Voigtlander f1.4.
Sony f2.8 AF.
Minolta Rokkor f1.8 and f2.8.
Olympus Zuiko f2.8.
Canon FD f2.8.
Only 6.
I have to buy some more.
I also have a 17mm f1.8 for MFT.
Don’t know how you cope. I personally only like having one lens at each FL - feel like I’m wasting money that could be spent elsewhere otherwise. We are all different though and that’s understandable!
Sold that a7 yet?
Er...
Two. Honest
Voigtlander f1.4.
Sony f2.8 AF.
Minolta Rokkor f1.8 and f2.8.
Olympus Zuiko f2.8.
Canon FD f2.8.
Only 6.
I have to buy some more.
I also have a 17mm f1.8 for MFT.
Why?Er...
Two. Honest
Voigtlander f1.4.
Sony f2.8 AF.
Minolta Rokkor f1.8 and f2.8.
Olympus Zuiko f2.8.
Canon FD f2.8.
Only 6.
I have to buy some more.
I also have a 17mm f1.8 for MFT.
Don’t know how you cope. I personally only like having one lens at each FL - feel like I’m wasting money that could be spent elsewhere otherwise. We are all different though and that’s understandable!
Why?
Wow I wasn't even exaggerating, one each for - f1.4, f2... F/11
Do you still have the voigtlander 40mm f1.2? It's not exactly far off in terms of focal length...