Voigtlander 35mm 1.2 V3 vs 40mm 1.2

[adamwarmington]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey guys,

I need a fast 1.2 sensible wide for night street stuff. I have 35 and 40 cron's... just want that extra 1.5 stops.

Do any of you have any real world experience with these two ? I can't find a reliable comparison online. (Only between the 35mm v2 and the 40).

I've actually bought both and am going to return one, but don't have a ton of test time... so any insight is appreciated.

Thanks !

A

[sometimesmaybe]

16 hours ago, adamwarmington said:

I need a fast 1.2 sensible wide for night street stuff. I have 35 and 40 cron's... just want that extra 1.5 stops

unless you like the 40mm focal length (or you want to use it on a film CL or CLE), i would have thought 35mm will give you more flexibility to crop etc

the optical formula for the lenses are slightly different with the 35mm having an additional concave front element (i have no idea if this good or not - just a statement of fact)

 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Bikie John]

I am very comfortable with 40mm and have the Voigt 40/1.2. Earlier this year I posted a couple of shots in the M10 Monochrom Photos thread that I was quite pleased with. I don't have any experience with the 35 so can't compare directly, sorry, but I am very happy with the 40.

John

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!

[PhoToad]

+1. Happy with the 40, don't own the 35.

[Olaf_ZG]

Just to get it clear: you have both, and now you ask us which one is the best? Normally this is asked before one buys… so one needs to be returned and the dealer can’t sell it as new anymore… 

[adamwarmington]

I bought them both used

Thanks for the input

kept the 40mm

[burchyk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

curious if anyone has comments on the difference in optical quality

[sometimesmaybe]

7 hours ago, burchyk said:

curious if anyone has comments on the difference in optical quality

OP was prob the best person to do so, or at least shoot some side by side comparisons, but alas...

[Olaf_ZG]

44 minutes ago, sometimesmaybe said:

OP was prob the best person to do so, or at least shoot some side by side comparisons, but alas...

He bought quickly and he sold quickly. Quick questions remained unanswered…

[hdmesa]

On 12/9/2023 at 9:59 PM, adamwarmington said:

...Do any of you have any real world experience with these two ?...

You could look at the review of both on Fred Miranda. Have each in a separate browser tab and switch between them. Then just look through the user's images for both threads. By the time you're done with that, you'll have a good idea of which you prefer. Non-M mount versions are similar but with shorter minimum focusing distance.

35 1.2 III: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1639692/0

40 1.2: https://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1512530

I've owned both at different times, and I probably would prefer the 35 if I'm not counting the difference in focal length. I thought the 35 had better contrast and color.

[Mr.Prime]

Thanks for that link. I see they have a ‘new’ film forum to check out.