CV 40/1.2 for M announced

This was actually shot with the lens' predecessor, the 40mm f1.4 (multicoated). Though I have not had a chance to try the f1.2 yet, I have reflected that it would have to be damn good to improve on shots like this. Not blowing my own trumpet just reflecting on the fact that the f1.4 lens is darned good in my view. Look at that lovely bokeh.

Fiefy by Life in Shadows, on Flickr
 
michaelwj said:
I'm with Ko.Fe,

Unless Voigtlander are going to bring out another body with 40mm framelines then why? The only way to frame it would be with a modern digital M via liveview/EVF, in which case why the RF coupling?

There is already a 1.2/35 and a 1.1/50. I'd prefer them to try to make the 1.2/35 a bit smaller.

I know a set of people really like the 40mm focal length, but it is an orphaned focal length with no body, just like the 85mm ZM lenses. Sure you can use the 90mm frame, but why not just buy a 90mm?
Click to expand...
I dunno, the CV R3M is a pretty nice 40 mm frameline machine.
 
michaelwj said:
I'm with Ko.Fe,

Unless Voigtlander are going to bring out another body with 40mm framelines then why? The only way to frame it would be with a modern digital M via liveview/EVF, in which case why the RF coupling?

There is already a 1.2/35 and a 1.1/50. I'd prefer them to try to make the 1.2/35 a bit smaller.

I know a set of people really like the 40mm focal length, but it is an orphaned focal length with no body, just like the 85mm ZM lenses. Sure you can use the 90mm frame, but why not just buy a 90mm?
Click to expand...

I don`t know .
For years my first and only RF lens was the 40/1.4.
I`ve used it on M3, M2 and M four (still do).
I never thought that the frame lines were that precise anyway.
I think I just centered the image and took what came.
If I wanted precise framing I`d reach for an SLR .

I guess that I never fully bought into that way of working.
 
A question for the owners of this lens, is the f1.2 aperature 1/2 or 1/3 of a stop faster than the indicated f1.4 position?
 
kram said:
A question for the owners of this lens, is the f1.2 aperature 1/2 or 1/3 of a stop faster than the indicated f1.4 position?
Click to expand...

How would you tell if you had the lens?! :D Measure t-stop difference? Measure the aperture opening area? How would you do that with greater than 1/6 of a stop precision?
 
Bessa R3M - Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 Nokton lens
Fujifilm ISO 400 color negative film - Epson V600 scanner
Yokohama, Japan

I had given up on scanning film; swore I'd never do it again... well, it's a cold rainy day and here I am giving it another try.

img074.jpg


img075.jpg


img082.jpg


img083.jpg


img084.jpg


img062.jpg


It's not the gear, it's me. Someday I'll get it right.
 
Seems to me the whole point of the 40mm focal length for the post-M4/M5 bodies is to get accurate framing at distance, since the 50mm frame line in particular is undersized. So it makes sense for a 40mm to bring up the 35mm frame, standard from the factory, and not have to modify it in the field.
 
What would really make sense would be for someone to make a 60mm M lens that brings up the 50mm frame. The framelines in my M6, M6TTL, M7, and MP are a perfect match for the field covered by the 60mm macro-elmar at a distance of 15 feet or more. That way, what you see in the 50mm frameline is what you get on the film.
 
Rob-F said:
What would really make sense would be for someone to make a 60mm M lens that brings up the 50mm frame. The framelines in my M6, M6TTL, M7, and MP are a perfect match for the field covered by the 60mm macro-elmar.
Click to expand...

Great idea. Then we would have f/1.2 Noktons for 40mm, 50mm and 60mm. Why not.

Erik.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom