The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

CV 35/1.4

Terry

New member
Is this a new lens that is being released? I know there was the f1.2 Nokton. I assume if it is new it is only offered in M mount.
 

Maggie O

Active member
Does Stephen have them in stock?

runs off to look

OK, not yet in stock, but he's taking deposits.

WANT! WANT! WANT!
 

Bob

Administrator
Staff member
I love machine translations! "RENJIFAINDAKAMERA"! :ROTFL:
Well, that is what it literally says.
Katakana phonetic spelling and all.
Other common examples in use:
Television = Teribi
earphone = earhon
Personal computer = pasakon
-bob
 
E

espressogeek

Guest
One could get a Zeiss for not much more, but its not 1.4 and its a bit longer. I loved the Zeiss 35/2 when I had it. I am very interested to see how this compares.

Is this a planar type design with two extra elements in the center? I tried to match up this design in this book. http://books.google.com/books?id=ou...5GSzQT75pyfCg&sig=A-syEi-PTJpJHOWTu841UBZrYr0
If so it should have a nice signature , at least to my eye, since I have always liked planar and tessar type lenses.
 
Last edited:

Terry

New member
Yes,
If you follow the link, there is a 40 f1.4 some people aren't crazy about the bokeh from that lens. However, the 35 looks like it has another element (see the pictures on that page). I do worry about coding their M mount lenses but perhaps they made a change to make that work better.
 

Jan Brittenson

Senior Subscriber Member
I have the 40/1.4 MC and find it rather mediocre. Very high contrast with messy bokeh. This is why I'll wait and see what the 35 looks like. If it's the same I'll probably pass. The 40 is mainly useful as a pancake for hiking and tripod/beanbag supported shooting at small aperture in very soft light IMO. Even if the 35 is the same, it's a little smaller. Probably not $559+65 smaller though.

These are all Planar derived designs - derivatives of the same basic 6-element symmetric design. This, however, has little bearing on bokeh which is more a function of how spherical aberration and coma is corrected. This is largely controlled with the two inner elements facing the aperture. (Varios often have a fat, large, central element for this purpose.) For instance, if on-axis spherical aberration is overcorrected and oblique s.a. is undercorrected, the lens will look smooth and light wide open, but more clinical when stopped down. There is an extra element in the 35/1.4 exactly where you'd want to tweak this behavior. This is exactly what's done in the Summicron 35/2 IV, except the extra element is on the rear half. (Opticially I think this makes little difference.) It may well be that it will render like the 40, however I don't think this is in any way a foregone conclusion. However, because of its similarity to the great 35/2 IV I personally feel optimistic and look forward to the reviews, hands-on's, and samples.

35/2 (IV):
 
E

espressogeek

Guest
I knew someone would have a more technical explanation of this. I don't particularly dislike the pictures 40/1.4 so if this is an improvement it would make it a winner in my book. This sort of thing is at least partially subjective as many like the leica 40/2 and I could care less for it. Competition is good and I'm glad to see new introductions for the "M" mount.
 
Top