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!

The Definitive Sony B&W Images Thread

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Looking sharp Bart. The E-mount version?
The 40/1.2 reminds me of a better version of my M-mount 35/1.2 Nokton II (the only M-mount lens I didn’t sell from my collection). Eventually I’ll have to add it... and the 50/2 Loxia bit I’m not in a rush for that. My next lens purchase will be of the telephoto variety more than likely.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
The 40/1.2 reminds me of a better version of my M-mount 35/1.2 Nokton II (the only M-mount lens I didn’t sell from my collection). Eventually I’ll have to add it... and the 50/2 Loxia bit I’m not in a rush for that. My next lens purchase will be of the telephoto variety more than likely.
Tre you mean adding the 40/1.2?
Which version? E or M?

I have a good copy of CV 10/5.6 E, as M version was not available at the time.
Also have Choppy (no petals) of CV 15/4.5 M, good copy, no corner smearing.
All my Leica M lenses from 21-50mm show corner smearing on FE cameras.
WATE 16-18-21/4 is fine on FE cameras, performs similarly to on Leica M9.
If I get the CV 40/1.2 it’s probably the M version. :facesmack:
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
Tre you mean adding the 40/1.2?
Which version? E or M?

I have a good copy of CV 10/5.6 E, as M version was not available at the time.
Also have Choppy (no petals) of CV 15/4.5 M, good copy, no corner smearing.
All my Leica M lenses from 21-50mm show corner smearing on FE cameras.
WATE 16-18-21/4 is fine on FE cameras, performs similarly to on Leica M9.
If I get the CV 40/1.2 it’s probably the M version. :facesmack:
I’d get the E-mount version more than likely. Of my M-mount lenses I owned. The CV21/1.8, CV35/1.2, ZM50/2, and Leica 90/2 were all fine. The 24 Elmar, 35 Cron, and 50 Lux all suffered. I don’t know if it was cover glass or the fact they were aspherical versions but none of them worked perfectly well wide open.
 

seb

Member
In my opinion, the 40/1.2 FE-Version is stellar and the VM-version just very good. Colours and sharpness of the VM are slightly off towards the corners.

Go for the 40/1.2 FE anyway and for the few moments you need AF, buy another lens on top. You'll lose some character of the 40/1.2 if you make the VM-compromise.

The Voigtländer Nokton 50/1.2 Asph VM and Zeiss Batis 40/2 are around the corner. Why not waiting for these?
 

iiiNelson

Well-known member
In my opinion, the 40/1.2 FE-Version is stellar and the VM-version just very good. Colours and sharpness of the VM are slightly off towards the corners.

Go for the 40/1.2 FE anyway and for the few moments you need AF, buy another lens on top. You'll lose some character of the 40/1.2 if you make the VM-compromise.

The Voigtländer Nokton 50/1.2 Asph VM and Zeiss Batis 40/2 are around the corner. Why not waiting for these?
I agree... if I still owned my M cameras then I’d probably get the M-mount version but I don’t... also generally speaking the E-mount versions usually allow closer focusing ability. Haven’t read the specs on the 40/1.2 though.
 

k-hawinkler

Well-known member
I agree... if I still owned my M cameras then I’d probably get the M-mount version but I don’t... also generally speaking the E-mount versions usually allow closer focusing ability. Haven’t read the specs on the 40/1.2 though.
The TAP can give you very close focus.
It can move the lens up to 4mm.
So prefocus the lens mechanically to MFD.
Then the TAP can focus much closer.
 
Top