Voigtlander 35mm 1.4 ?

V

Vincent512

Vinny the Lens
Local time
9:52 AM
Joined
Jul 16, 2013
Messages
46
:bang:
Hi all,

I have been reading reviews of the Voigtlander 35mm 1.4 for days on end. I might have possibly read every review written in the whole universe about this lens. (joking) I own a M6 and 50mm Summicron f2 lens. Thought it might me a cool idea to buy a reasonably priced 35mm 1.4 . As I shoot a lot of photos indoors and outside during low light. I also like the small footprint the lens has.
Most of the reviews I read are on both sides of the fence. Some say the image quality is poor at best. Others say it is fantastic. (for instance the opinions of Ken Rockwell and Steve Huff) Then there is the whole SC / MC debate.

Even in posts on this forum about the lens it seems the conversation gets sidetracked and can't get a good read if this lens is a waste of money or what.:bang:

Any photo samples would be appreciated.

Thanks,
V
 
Its certainly not 'crap'. Its not got the best 'bokeh' compared to the leica's or the VC 35mm f1.2 but its sharp enough, small and fast.
Its also a bargain for what you get.

Both versions are good. just gotta choose between high (MC) or medium (SC) levels of contrast
 
The 35 VC Nokton is one of the best 35's i've seen.. It's cheap, fast, built reasonably well-ok, nice focus tab, quick to focus too.. compact.. did I mention cheap-ish?

Certainly go and get one, you'll be amazed how much you like it, unless you're spoiled with Summicron 35 or Summilux or something. :)
 
It is a great lens ( for the price) if the focus is correct. If not, it can be adjusted reasonably easy by a service technican. If you have a digital M avaliable, it is very easy to check. Just shoot a magazine page that is in an angle and zoom the image in the display screen to check the accuracy of the focus.
 
it's the lens i've used the most. a pretty good lens. tiny, light, fast. but the flare drove me nuts. if you're ok with a heavier lens, go for the 35/1.2 v2. it's a stellar lens.
 
Vincent512 said:
Looks good...would you really notice that much difference with the MC?
Click to expand...

probably not...and if need be
one could slightly crank up the contrast
MC i believe is better for color work

i'm just a glass junkie and Love to try everything :)
 
Vincent512 said:
Even in posts on this forum about the lens it seems the conversation gets sidetracked and can't get a good read if this lens is a waste of money or what.:bang:
Click to expand...
It's a small and fast lens. That alone pretty much says it cannot be free of compromise. Add the fact that it is very affordable by M mount standards - or by "any full frame f/1.4 lens that is still in production" standards - and it is pretty clear it cannot be free of compromise. That's the way it goes.

I have the SC version and it is my most used lens on the M8 and R-D1, and it would be my most used lens on film, too, if I owned two of these lenses. I actually would like to own two of them (SC or MC, I don't care), and I certainly don't think that would be waste of money. This lens is so useful, I'd like to be able to put one on each camera I carry.
 
The CV 35/1.4 was on my radar after having used Sigma's wonderful new 35/1.4 on my full frame Nikon. The CV is a great little lens, though I ultimately chose a Summilux pre-asph because of less issues with distortion and focus shift, and I like its bokeh more. There is quite a price difference between the two, and the CV is admittedly great for its cost. If 35mm isn't your favorite focal length I would get the CV, either SC or MC.
 
right on the money

right on the money

:)
furbs said:
The CV 35/1.4 was on my radar after having used Sigma's wonderful new 35/1.4 on my full frame Nikon. The CV is a great little lens, though I ultimately chose a Summilux pre-asph because of less issues with distortion and focus shift, and I like its bokeh more. There is quite a price difference between the two, and the CV is admittedly great for its cost. If 35mm isn't your favorite focal length I would get the CV, either SC or MC.
Click to expand...

I agree with your thinking. 35mm is not my favorite as a matter of fact 50mm is. I already have the summicron f2 so I figured a 35mm would be good to have in my kit and being that I'm not a wide angle guy I did not want to spend out for 35mm so I am in agreement that buying a less expensive lens for the use of low light times when I'm not using the 50mm would be best.:D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom