CV 35/1.2 vs CV 35/2.5

Close, but not quite. 1.2 is one half stop faster than 1.4, 2.5 is one third stop faster than 2.8 -- so that looks like 2 and one sixth stop faster -- which I'd be tempted to call 2 stops unless we knew more about the actual, rather than the nominal, relative apertures.
 
Close, but not quite. 1.2 is one half stop faster than 1.4, 2.5 is one third stop faster than 2.8 -- so that looks like 2 and one sixth stop faster -- which I'd be tempted to call 2 stops unless we knew more about the actual, rather than the nominal, relative apertures.

Yeah, sounds right. And according to a chart on this page:

Wiki Page

It also indicates two stops faster (see the 'Typical one-third-stop f-number scale')

Appreciate...
 
On the positive side for me the 1.2 takes 52mm filters. My personal standard (read I have a large stock of them).

B2 (;->
 
Here is a list of 1/6th stops:

182818334_v4FmD-O.jpg


One really should measure transmission of both lenses to be exact. But I think 2 stops difference is a safe statement, if you assume proper rounding of the numbers was done :)

The two lenses really complement each other: bokeh is equivalent, the rest is distortion vs. speed vs. size and VF obstruction.

Roland.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom