Jump to content

Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f/1.2 Aspherical III VM lens announced


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Scene 4: Church Tower

CV 1.2/35 @ f/2.8

100% crop from the center

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

100% crop from the corner

Edited by raphael
Link to post
Share on other sites

Scene 4: Church Tower

ZM C-Biogon 2.8/35 @ f/2.8

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Scene 4: Church Tower

ZM C-Biogon 2.8/35 @ f/2.8

100% crop from the center

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

100% crop from the corner

  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Scene 3: Flower Bouquet (Sunstars Supplement)

CV 1.2/35 @ f/8.0

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

Edited by raphael
Link to post
Share on other sites

Conclusion

I like this lens a lot.
It's an improved version of the CV 1.2/40 with smoother bokeh and a wider field of view. It generates 12 sunbeams instead of 10.
At f/1.2 it is a bit soft and has a glow, especially at low distances. But who shoots at f/1.2 at 0.5m distance with a rangefinder?
Sharpness from f/2.8 is incredible.

For me it's a keeper. I'm quite excited to see it compared to the ZM Distagon 1.4/35 (twice the price) and the Summilux 1.3/35 FLE (five times the price).

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Panic buying

Leica M10, Voigtländer Nokton 1.2/35 V3 @ f/1.2

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 14
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks for the read

Leica M10, Voigtländer Nokton 1.2/35 V3 @ f/1.2

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 10
Link to post
Share on other sites

I just got my new Voigtlander/Cosina 35 mm Nokton f 1.2 version III from cameraquest.com, 24 hrs after ordering it ($ 1,050). I already had the version II. This new one is a real improvement: shorter (which means better clearance in the viewfinder), lighter, new lens design (9 elements in 7 groups instead of 10 elements in 7 groups int version II). Now how does it perform? To make a long answer short, better. The new optical design allows for better sharpness at wide apertures (f 1.2 and f 1.4) from edge to edge (edges were soft to say the least at those apertures with version 2). The only caveat I can see is that it looks as if there is a little more vignetting but nothing not solvable if you work digitally (most image-processing software will take care of that and for those who systematically add vignetting to their images in Lightroom—I happen to know a lot of these and they drive me crazy—you do not have to do anything).

Included images: respectively taken at f 1.2, f1.4, and f 4.

 

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/15/2020 at 10:21 AM, raphael said:

Scene 4: Church Tower

ZM C-Biogon 2.8/35 @ f/2.8

100% crop from the center

 

100% crop from the corner

Hmmm, it is an indication but comparing an f 2.8 maximum aperture lens at f 2.8 to an f 1.2 at f 1.2 ... is hmmm incidental, isn't it?

Link to post
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, bchalifour said:

Hmmm, it is an indication but comparing an f 2.8 maximum aperture lens at f 2.8 to an f 1.2 at f 1.2 ... is hmmm incidental, isn't it?

I compared the two lenses both shot at f/2.8 which should be appropriate?

Edited by raphael
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

CV 1.2/35 V3 @ f/1.2

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited by raphael
  • Like 13
Link to post
Share on other sites

On 4/15/2020 at 3:07 PM, raphael said:

Now compared to the ZM C-Biogon 2.8/35:

f/2.8

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

 

100% crop

Not the best subject or method for a comparison, but the ZM 35mm c-biogon looks much better in the cropped image than the CV 35mm f1.2 at f2.8.

Link to post
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Ouroboros said:

Not the best subject or method for a comparison, but the ZM 35mm c-biogon looks much better in the cropped image than the CV 35mm f1.2 at f2.8.

Well it is true that the Biogon seems to give more local contrast, the Voigtlander has more of a Leica or Hasselblad look from the 1980s. One of the issue of the test is that either you apparently did not have the camera on a tripod (so there could be camera shake involved) or the two lenses give different angles of vision; I would opt for the first hypothesis but please confirm or infirm it. In which case (hypothesis #1) the Voigtlander was closer to the subject than the Biogon (count the bricks on the wall (vertically) and you'll see there is a difference of one row) which may explain some of the foreground softness then due to depth of field. Too bad the Biogon does not open at f 1.2... but then it might also be at a different price. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, Ouroboros said:

Not the best subject or method for a comparison, but the ZM 35mm c-biogon looks much better in the cropped image than the CV 35mm f1.2 at f2.8.

 

9 hours ago, bchalifour said:

Well it is true that the Biogon seems to give more local contrast, the Voigtlander has more of a Leica or Hasselblad look from the 1980s. One of the issue of the test is that either you apparently did not have the camera on a tripod (so there could be camera shake involved) or the two lenses give different angles of vision; I would opt for the first hypothesis but please confirm or infirm it. In which case (hypothesis #1) the Voigtlander was closer to the subject than the Biogon (count the bricks on the wall (vertically) and you'll see there is a difference of one row) which may explain some of the foreground softness then due to depth of field. Too bad the Biogon does not open at f 1.2... but then it might also be at a different price. 

You are right, I wasn't using a tripod. I shot all images handheld, so it's likely that I mismatched the distance to subject by a few millimeters or centimeters.
This scene was part of a sharpness test, where these millimeters won't have a huge impact on. These shots were taken to prove that the CV 1.2/35 V3 is a remarkable sharp lens.

However I agree that the in-camera files of the C-Biogon look better than the CV 1.2/35 due to three reasons:
1. Higher contrast and more saturated (typical for Zeiss lenses)
2. Pronounced orange tones (warmth)
3. At f/2.8, vignetting helps to direct the focus on the center of the image

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...