What else make you hate CV 35 1.4?

[Keith]

It's certainly sharp and the OOF is fine with me but what's with the barrel distortion? I'm surprised at how many lenses exhibit this ... I have plenty that do and while it's easily corrected in post it seems a lot more commmon than I ever realised!

Maggie's first pic really shows it.

 

[Colin Corneau]

I recently sold my V.35/1.2, but not because it wasn't excellent, I just had a good deal on a 'Cron and can't afford both.

I keep hearing about how heavy it is, wah wah wah...it's a tiny RF lens, still smaller than most SLR lenses. It's all relative but this is not a heavy, unwieldy lens.

 

[photogdave]

I'm a fan of this lens, at least when it hits the $200-$300 range, like the 40/1.4 did. It would make a great backup for a 35 lux or cron, and would focus well with an EVIL camera.

Now I like this photo a lot, but am not keen on the bokeh near the headboard. That part looks like someone parked their shiny bicycle up there. The rest of the photo is great though !

Thanks for the compliment! The headboard was shiny chrome and the window light was reflecting off it, so I'm not sure any lens would have handled it better.

 

[ampguy]

Keith - some advice

Keith - some advice

I've found people just don't like to talk about this issue. We can talk about it all we want in the P&S forums and elsewhere, but when it comes to this lens, it is a very taboo topic, like the fact that Uncle Fred is in jail or something.

Weird.

It's certainly sharp and the OOF is fine with me but what's with the barrel distortion? I'm surprised at how many lenses exhibit this ... I have plenty that do and while it's easily corrected in post it seems a lot more commmon than I ever realised!

Maggie's first pic really shows it.

 

[maggieo]

It's certainly sharp and the OOF is fine with me but what's with the barrel distortion? I'm surprised at how many lenses exhibit this ... I have plenty that do and while it's easily corrected in post it seems a lot more commmon than I ever realised!

Maggie's first pic really shows it.

Ted will no doubt mock me mercilessly, but I honestly don't know what you're talking about. The photo looks great to me.

edit: you know- don't tell me; I like how my photos looks and I'm not going to get anal about it this far along...

 

[popeye]

It's a tosser lens and I'll sell you mine for what I paid for it...

As someone said already, it's welded to my M8 and as Keith mentioned the distortion is easily corrected in post (LR3-brilliant!).

No hate here... wait I hate the 43mm filter thread.

 

[mathomas]

The lens does have barrel distortion. With people, you won't see it. Here's a shot of mine that exhibits it (I think I even corrected it a touch, but didn't want to go crazy with correction).

I still like the lens.

 

[Krosya]

I think I remember reading that this lens also has a focus shift issue. Does it? I dont hate this lens - its just too much of a "plain jane" to me. While maybe not posted here - I have seen many shots from it with poor bokeh. Distortion is there too. Plus to me - I can have a as sharp or sharper, as small, as fast and much cheaper lens, without all the issues of CV 35/1.4 in a CV 40/1.4. Ok - 40 is not 35, but close enough IMO.

 

[ampguy]

Hi Maggie

Hi Maggie

I wouldn't mock you at all, and it doesn't manifest in most photos. One of my favorite lenses, the Hexar AF lens (Nikkor-W based, much like the UC Hexanon) has it much worse.

Ted will no doubt mock me mercilessly, but I honestly don't know what you're talking about. The photo looks great to me.

edit: you know- don't tell me; I like how my photos looks and I'm not going to get anal about it this far along...

 

[kossi008]

As usual, barrel distortion on the CV 35/1.4 depends strongly on subject distance. Try some indoors shot at close ranges with doorframes etc. in the picture and you will know what I mean.

I still don't hate this lens, in fact I bought it to supplement my C-Biogon for low-light shooting. I opted for this one over the 35/1.2 because of its size, for travel...

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Maggie- the barrel distortion of the lens is visible on the frame of door window. A straight line that appears "bowed". Many lenses have it, the old 9-element Zoom-Nikkor 43~86 F3.5 was infamous for distortion. One of Nikon's most popular lenses anyway. A real concern is some fields such as architectural photography or scientific/technical photography. Some feel much more strongly about it than others.

 

[myM8yogi]

If the 35/1.2 is too big for you, then it's just too big. End of story.
I can understand that. I have one. I think it takes really superb images, but I do hate carrying it around my neck. In fact, I will no longer carry it is a single lens single body outfit - it is so big and heavy that it defeats the purpose of such a minimalist kit. But if I have a camera bag with me, it's always there. Amazing lens.

I did look long and hard at the CV35/1.4 before buying the 1.2, but I saw too many images from the former that had very choppy distracting bokeh. Yes, and distortion. I knew there would be plenty of times when these characteristics would not bother me, but I compromised on weight to elliminate those "wasted" photo opportunities. I can well understand how someone else might choose differently because they find backgrounds less distracting and/or their primary goal is a teeny tiny camera kit. In which case, it makes a great choice for a fast standard lens as all other members of the kit are likely to pretty slow lenses to keep size down.

As an alternative small, light, fast lens, I can recommend a 50/1.5 sonnar (current or legacy) if you are lucky enough to get one at a decent price.

But if you really want a fast 35mm that is also small... well, you have no choice in that price range - you have to get the CV35/1.4.
Just to be safe, don't sell the 1.2 to pay for it.

 

[rbsinto]

What I hate most about the CV 35 1.4 is that it's not available in a Nikon S mount version.

 

[efix]

For what it's worth, my two cents of hate for the CV 35/1.4:

- Focus shift is gruesome! You don't get an f/1.4 lens to not be able to use it at that aperture, do you?
- Bokeh: horrible! Jittery, doughnutty, highly unpleasant.
- Barrel distortion. Lots of!
- Not very nice colours.
- Not very much contrast.
- Not very sharp wide open.

Keep that 35/1.2, or send it to me, where it'll find a nice home ;-)

 

[Lss]

I think I remember reading that this lens also has a focus shift issue. Does it?

It sure does. Kicks in at the latest at f/2 and is pretty much gone by f/5.6. It's reality, but whether it will bother you is something you will only figure out by trying it.

 

[Lss]

- Focus shift is gruesome! You don't get an f/1.4 lens to not be able to use it at that aperture, do you?

Another focus shift post... But there is no focus shift at f/1.4! Focus shift is... well, focus shifting when you stop the lens down. At f/1.4 the lens should focus correctly, and my copy seems perfect in this respect.

 

[efix]

Another focus shift post... But there is no focus shift at f/1.4! Focus shift is... well, focus shifting when you stop the lens down. At f/1.4 the lens should focus correctly, and my copy seems perfect in this respect.

Have to object there, mine had backfocus from f/1.4 to f/2, and frontfocus from f/2.4 onwards - or was it the other way round? Anyway, I had to twist my rf alignment to get in-focus shots at f/1.4 so that it then was off at infinity. I don't say it's a bad lens, it might indeed be a great lens for what it is, and there are people who love it to death. I hated it and sold it again within days, got the Biogon 2/35 and was happy 🙂

 

[ferider]

I've found people just don't like to talk about this issue. We can talk about it all we want in the P&S forums and elsewhere, but when it comes to this lens, it is a very taboo topic, like the fact that Uncle Fred is in jail or something.

Weird.

Not for me anyways, Ted.

What bugs me is that it only gets mentioned for this lens, but that many of the other "cult lenses" also distort similarly but it doesn't seem to be an issue; including 35/1.2, 35/2 UC Hex, Nikkor 35/1.8 (LTM and S-Mount), 50/1.4 Summilux, etc.

Roland.

 

[Lss]

I would guess it was the other way, since this lens should exhibit backfocus when you stop it down. Your copy must have been incorrectly calibrated if it was not focusing correctly wide open, and I can understand that it can be twice as frustrating with a lens that has this sort of fairly strong focus shift. In that case the focus will seem almost random. But these are really two different issues: incorrect focusing (sharp place wide open) and focus shift (sharp plane moves when you change the aperture).

 

[eieio]

Whoo... Lots of hate and love in this lens so far.

Actually, I just won bidding on Nikkor S.C 5cm in LTM and it will be my fast lens (I know... it's not that great and it also has "Nikon glow" wide open, but I would love to see if it can give me "Sonnar" character as my tiny Rollie 35s can or not). I will just keep my 35/1.2 for a little while, try it couple more rolls. And I will decide later whether I will keep it or not.

Is there any good fast 35 lenses out there rather than 'lux 35 and this Nokton 1.2? I cannot afford the lux for now and I don't know how soon this Nokton will break my neck.