Dustin, I would just like to say that your reviews really are the most informative out there. Some reviewers focus so much on the technicalities that they miss to evaluate something that perhaps can't be evaluated: the charm of a lens. I like that you cover both the technical and non technical side of things in your reviews, especially on a lens like this that is intended to be used as a tool to create art.
This lens is inspired by the mighty Leica Noctilux 50 f/1 of the past. After almost 50 years, the optical performance is much improved by the aspherical design, but Voigtlander managed to preserve the dreamy look and peculiar glow of the original. Quite an achievement.
I bought the Voigtländer Nokton 50mm 1.0 Aspherical Lens for Sony Cameras, it is an excellent Lens for low light indoor and outdoor at night time, using this Lens at aperture 1.0 without the need to push the ISO is a pleasure, if you like black & white photos, this Lens will deliver beautiful photo image, I can recommend this Lens.
Where this lens really shines is when you shoot it in black and white. I like to switch the camera to a B&W profile so I'm seeing it through the viewfinder. That, of course takes care of the significant color fringing, but also seems to make those wide open shots more contrasty. It has a very vintage/analog, almost medium format look that is really great. Just for fun, I shot this lens on a star field under dark skies. As expected, wide open it was terrible with significant coma even all the way to almost the center of the frame and purple fringing that overwhelmed the image, but the very center of the frame is surprisingly sharp for the aperture. However, by f2 the image wasn't bad and sharpness increases significantly, but still pretty bad coma and fringing. By 2.8 it's actually not bad at all. At 3.2, really good sharpness, some coma still, and that purple fringing is still hanging around although much more under control. Obviously not an astro lens, but I find this is a good test to clearly see how these attributes are playing out. At f3.2 everything is sharp but what becomes apparent is that there is a slight radial pattern toward the center in each of the corners (not de-centering) that suggests that Voigtlander hasn't optimized this lens for the Sony sensor stack thickness. I love the look of this lens wide open as it creates such a unique look that I've not seen in other lenses (as I mentioned above, especially in black and white) and it's sharp enough wide open to be usable. However, the Voigt 50mm apo lanthar also has a really nice rendering wide open (not the same, but for an APO lens, really nice and unique in it's own way) but is much more versatile for a fraction of the price. I think price is the big hurdle for the F1 Nokton. I got mine used and even then, it's a bit hard to justify compared to other options. If this were a $1k lens, it would be a no brainer for anyone wanting something different.
"It has a very vintage/analog, almost medium format look that is really great." That's what I love about this lens; it has dual personalities. Wide open it's just as you described, though sharper than the vintage lenses it emulates. Stopped down it becomes razor sharp like a modern lens.
Chuckled a little at notion of ’Voidlander’. 😄 Although not interested in the lens per se, I always watch these anyway, as I do enjoy the professional and forthright presentation.
I was very curious about this cosina voigtlander lens and also to see the modern version of their fast aperture lenses. Whereas the company policy is to create niche lenses that compete with Leica & Zeiss, now the context has changed a lot. There is a plethora of 50mm lenses for the FE mount and the Sigma 1.2 lens though heavier is cheaper, weather sealed, far less CA - with 13 rounded blades - better micro contrast, closer mfd and the possibility of AF & DMF. Dreamlike rendition can be found on a lot of good vintage glass. In the SLR days fast 50s were given as kit lenses and it was one of the easiest focal lengths to design. I have tested 100s of fast 50s and some I keep as my painting lenses - including the earlier german voigtlander skopar. This was before the company was bought by cosina. Personally I find their APO 50mm f2 and their earlier 65mm half macro brought more on the lens table. In the area of build, the sigma design of both their art lenses & their contemporary lenses is special. Many Chinese companies are improving their build quality. The question is within this context where would this lens be placed.
Dustin, you reviewed the Voigtlander 50mm f/2 APO and that lens as well as their 35mm Apo have the ability to de-click the aperture. Those lenses are also vastly better than this lens that you’re reviewing in this video. I own the two lens above and they’re phenomenal and I can’t recommend them enough!
Have you used this lens? Again, horses and courses But the apo in 35 or 50 can't get the dreamy look with lovely bokeh and fall off or low light performance this can, however stopped to 2.0 this can be just as sharp with low loca like the 50 apo. To me the noct is two lenses In one.
@@tristenvanmaanen6124 I have not used the new Voigtlander 50mm f/1. However the reviews that I’ve read indicate the lens isn’t so great at f/1. I also have the Sony 50mm f/1.4 which fits my needs well.
This has become my go to lens for the last couple of months. F1 is an extreme effect that can work for some photos, but I typically use it at F1.4 most of the time, and F5.6 and F8 for further views. The distinctive look is what’s really sets it apart from the other GM lenses that look utterly clinical in comparison. Personally I love it, but it is bulky, so do consider the F1.2 alternative.
Yes, Voightländer is Zeiss-like in build and some other aspects but I suggest that the general aim of Zeiss (on a Nikon it’s Otus or Milvus) is to render IQ as near as possible to the human eye. Zeiss is markedly different and I’m gambling that it’ll do well even when Nikon bring out a 60mp sensor! So eg colours are flat but micro contrast great. Perhaps Zeiss almost always needs ND filters to create effect? Voightländer is rather about 3-D pop and bokeh? Anyway a very welcome review of a Gen 2 lens.
I'm not sure I agree with all of this. I actually find the rendering of a lot of Voigtlander lenses very similar to Zeiss, which does make some sense as they are both using the same factory and optical glass.
@@DustinAbbottTWI yes, I understand this and of course the, say, Otus range for Nikon DX is getting old since your excellent reviews. However this glass ensures that a hell of a lot of parallel rays hit a FF sensor, despite fuzzy adapters to FX or to other FF. Who needs to adapt a MF lens, which is surely unwieldy when compared to a “small” Zeiss WA? So I’m gambling that especially wide angle Zeiss primes will deliver the same IQ to say, a Nikon Z future 60mp sensor. This glass as you know, lasts a lifetime! Please do not feel that you need to reply. I’m just a Zeiss fanboy but I can’t help feeling that you should relaunch Zeiss across the brands, assuming that your business model allows for it.That would perhaps sharpen your profile and I for one would be immensely grateful.
Do you think it would make sense to buy the Voigtlander NOKTON 50mm F/1 Aspherical VM (Leica M mount) since I already have the LM-EA7 adapter for my A7R4, to save money & have auto focus? Do you think I would get the same image quality?
This is actually a new design, so I'm not sure the two lenses are the same optically (I haven't tested the other). You may need to ask Voigtlander that question.
how are the images different from the Voigtlander 50mm F1.2 lens ? there's quite a difference in price, but between F1 and F1.2, is there a lot of difference in IQ ?
Is this worth double the money over the 50mm f1.2 or the 40mm f1.2 (ignoring the focal length difference)? Other than the larger aperture what does this lens offer in your opinion compared to those cheaper and lighter alternatives? Also, from what I can tell fringing seems to be worse compared to those two.
I think the 50/1.2 is a better buy. The reverse field-curvature (unfortunately not tested by Dustin here) on this 50/1 means that the bokeh on the 1.2 is actually the same in the edges when both are wide open.
I hear the 1.2 are just as sharp, but I find this lens very usable at F/1.0 and shoot it mostly at that aperture on my Nikon ZF it was worth the extra cash in that regard.
What is the difference between APO Lanther and Nokton? I own a 50mm f2 APO Lanther E mount for specially Milkyway photography. How does Nokton perform in that scenario?
Nowhere near as good as the 50mm apo. By 2.8-3.2 its usable but still nowhere near the 50mm APO on stars. The 50mm APO also has the advantage of a perfectly round aperture at f/2.8 so there are no diffraction spikes on large stars. It's also sharper across the frame and has no color fringing, which the Nokton still has in some degree even at f/3.2.
@@astrotennessee I have 20mm Sony G and 50mm Voigtlander APO Lanther... what should i buy next? Sony 24mm GM or Sigma/Viltrox 27/28mm or should I go for Sony 35mm GM or Voigtlander 40mm?
@@ashishsinojia3793 Sony 24mm 1.4 is a great rendering lens for daylight, but if you've picky about astro images, it has a lot of coma and purple fringing. The 20mm G and 50APO is a nice pairing. I don't know that you really need anything between that. I like to have an ultrawide and the 14mm 1.8 GM is an amazing lens. I recently sold mine for the Sigma 15mm 1.4 diagonal fisheye because what it does is so different from other lenses. If you want something in the 35-40mm range, the Sigma 40mm ART is still king. I think it's probably the best astro lens ever made.
APO lenses are fantastic, but you can't realistically expect an APO 50mm F1 lens for less than 2000$. The presence of chromatic abberations here should not be viewed as a defect. This is a low element count lens that is intended to allow better transmittance of light, allowing for vibrant colors, great general contrast and fidelity. An APO lens will offer greater sharpness, at the cost of the factors mentioned above. At F1, it would also need to have many more elements to correct the "defects", which would lead to an increse in size, weight and price. Voigtlander already have APO lenses which are F2. This is a nice compromise that allows them to keep their philosophy in lens designing which is based on a low lement count set of lenses, made of leaded glass, that is perfectly corrected yet doesn't compromise much on character.
I understand where you're coming from, but the Nokton lenses are for a very different audience that loves the look of them...which is evidence from the comments on the video.
Interesting. For character I'd go for the Laowa Argus 45mm f0.95. At 50mm exactly I'd go for the Sony G-Master f1.2, which is essentially the same price.
@@flitetym Character. Not everyone wants a clinical lens. Don’t forget that photography is a blend between art and science. Some folks really lean into the art side
@@flitetym While the Sony lens is great for its intended use, this lens will give to the images a quality that the Sony will not, even with post processing.
@@ralphsaad8637 actually, that is my question, can post processing emulate the Voigtlander rendering ? Fuji has their film emulations which I assume would be due to post processing techniques from the camera CPU.
@veritas932 I don't know fujifilm cameras, but I do often see beautiful images taken with a fuji using these emulations that look really convincing. I would argue that the combination of these emulations + a Voigtlander or Zeiss lens would make for an even better result.
I can't see what you are claiming to see, which would need a comparison from two lenses of the exact same subject in the same light, but if you want unique greens then you could just adjust that HSL slider.
@@Bayonet1809 You are wrong friend. No amount of editing can truly replicate data that is not captured to begin with. I am a Canon shooter and I own Canon and Tamron lenses mostly, with 1 voigtlander lens. I can confidently say that the images I produce with my Voigtlander can't be touched by even the most expensive Canon lenses. Lenses made by Leica, Ziess and Voiglander are based on a philosophy that is no longer commercially advertised unfortunately, due to youtube being scavanged by spec sheet nutties. These lenses are designed to create art, while other manufacturers are fighting themselves in the sharpness race. The likes of Voigtlander know the special sauce that makes images pop, which is a combination of high quality glass certainly, but also low amounts of glass for better transmittance of light. Take the Canon RF 135MM F1.8. It has 17 elements, as much as a zoom. This leads to images looking flat in RAW files, with poor contrast, colors and rendering. Data is lost everytime it passes through a glass element inevitably, though abberations are eliminated. If that's your cup of tea the so be it, but I challenge you to rent even for a day a special lens like this and see for yourself how radically different your images will look.
This lens isn't for everyone, but you'll see from the comments that there's a pretty strong group of photographers who absolutely love lenses like this.
IMO this is not a f/1.0 lens. Your thorough review shows how bad the flaws are with this lens at that aperture. The loCA and color fringing is BAD and the sharpness and contrast are quite bad also wide open. The lens demands a high price of $1,900 supposedly for being a f/1.0 and at that price it SHOULD perform pretty darn well to justify the price. But if you have to stop down to 1.4 or more to achieve good performance what’s the justification for paying that much? If I wanted a Voigtländer I would just buy a slower, cheaper f/1.4 Voigtländer that performs well wide open and save a lot of money. This one is just not a good value.
This is an f/1 lens. You might not judge it usable at f/1, but it is still f/1. Yes, the fringing is bad, and the contrast a little low, but the sharpness, even right into the extreme corners is quite good. I challenge you to find a better performing f/1 (or f/0.95) lens that isn't the behemoth Noct Nikkor. This lens even outperforms the admittedly old-in-the-tooth, but still very expensive, Leica f/0.95 Noctilux. Voigtlander don't make a 50/1.4, so I am unsure what you are comparing this to. They currently make a 50/1.5, and a 50/1.2, but neither performs up to your standards wide open. For maximum contrast both need stopping down to f/2 (for the centre) or f/4 (for the corners).
@@Bayonet1809 Yes, I meant f/1.2 for the other Voigtländers but I stand by my comment. This lens is way overpriced for the amount of flaws it produces at 1.0. I can certainly buy other lenses also besides Voigtländer for a lot less that are 1.4, 1.8, or 2.0 that perform very well wide open without the obvious fringing, low contrast and low sharpness of this lens even in the center wide open. So in my opinion, for the performance you’d expect from a Voigtländer it doesn’t reach those levels at 1.0 and is not worth a $1,900 price tag.
Guys look! An idiot that thinks every lens should sell for $40 despite the optical challenge that a lens may provide! It’s an f/1.0 lens numb nuts. There isn’t anything better for less than this price. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. Maybe you like shitty f/0.95 Chinese lenses that are much worse. 🤷🏾♂️
@@glennn.3464 You're paying here for specific look, high quality control and comfort of use. In Fuji X system I could agree that you can get very nice results with twice as cheaper 35mm f/1.2 compared to the 35mm f/0.9, but they're still different lenses, with different bokeh rendering, level of sharpness and contrast.
@@KingFiercer_zip We’re all entitled to pay whatever we want for whatever qualities we feel a lens possesses. I personally would never pay that much for a lens that I know I would never want to shoot at below f/1.4. Much of the benefit of this lens is the fast aperture but I wouldn’t be using at near f/1.0 so no way would I pay that much. You may feel differently but I would rather spend much less on another lens, be it a OEM, Voigtländer, Sigma, Tamron, Viltrox etc., that can perform at least as good or even better at 1.4 and most have AF as well. I can see how others may like certain "qualities" of this lens but for me this lens is far too expensive to accept what I feel are significant tradeoffs with sharpness, contrast, and heavy fringing. Good build quality means a lot to me as well but not if it’s accompanied by those things. Build quality is nice but it won’t get you quality photos if the optical performance is lacking where I feel it definitely is with this lens.
![Twenty One Pilots - The Line (from Arcane Season 2) [Official Audio]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/XCz7WUotXs8/mqdefault.jpg)
Dustin, I would just like to say that your reviews really are the most informative out there. Some reviewers focus so much on the technicalities that they miss to evaluate something that perhaps can't be evaluated: the charm of a lens. I like that you cover both the technical and non technical side of things in your reviews, especially on a lens like this that is intended to be used as a tool to create art.
I love this feedback, and that is exactly the tension that I'm looking for.
So glad you got around to reviewing this.
This lens is inspired by the mighty Leica Noctilux 50 f/1 of the past. After almost 50 years, the optical performance is much improved by the aspherical design, but Voigtlander managed to preserve the dreamy look and peculiar glow of the original. Quite an achievement.
Definitely.
This lens is an absolutely magnificant match for the Nikon Zf.
You’re my favorite reviewer on photography lens gear. I have purchased a couple of lenses on your reviews and enjoy them.
I bought the Voigtländer Nokton 50mm 1.0 Aspherical Lens for Sony Cameras, it is an excellent Lens for low light indoor and outdoor at night time, using this Lens at aperture 1.0 without the need to push the ISO is a pleasure, if you like black & white photos, this Lens will deliver beautiful photo image, I can recommend this Lens.
It's a sweet lens.
Where this lens really shines is when you shoot it in black and white. I like to switch the camera to a B&W profile so I'm seeing it through the viewfinder. That, of course takes care of the significant color fringing, but also seems to make those wide open shots more contrasty. It has a very vintage/analog, almost medium format look that is really great. Just for fun, I shot this lens on a star field under dark skies. As expected, wide open it was terrible with significant coma even all the way to almost the center of the frame and purple fringing that overwhelmed the image, but the very center of the frame is surprisingly sharp for the aperture. However, by f2 the image wasn't bad and sharpness increases significantly, but still pretty bad coma and fringing. By 2.8 it's actually not bad at all. At 3.2, really good sharpness, some coma still, and that purple fringing is still hanging around although much more under control. Obviously not an astro lens, but I find this is a good test to clearly see how these attributes are playing out. At f3.2 everything is sharp but what becomes apparent is that there is a slight radial pattern toward the center in each of the corners (not de-centering) that suggests that Voigtlander hasn't optimized this lens for the Sony sensor stack thickness. I love the look of this lens wide open as it creates such a unique look that I've not seen in other lenses (as I mentioned above, especially in black and white) and it's sharp enough wide open to be usable. However, the Voigt 50mm apo lanthar also has a really nice rendering wide open (not the same, but for an APO lens, really nice and unique in it's own way) but is much more versatile for a fraction of the price. I think price is the big hurdle for the F1 Nokton. I got mine used and even then, it's a bit hard to justify compared to other options. If this were a $1k lens, it would be a no brainer for anyone wanting something different.
Very interesting feedback.
"It has a very vintage/analog, almost medium format look that is really great."
That's what I love about this lens; it has dual personalities. Wide open it's just as you described, though sharper than the vintage lenses it emulates. Stopped down it becomes razor sharp like a modern lens.
Chuckled a little at notion of ’Voidlander’. 😄 Although not interested in the lens per se, I always watch these anyway, as I do enjoy the professional and forthright presentation.
I was very curious about this cosina voigtlander lens and also to see the modern version of their fast aperture lenses. Whereas the company policy is to create niche lenses that compete with Leica & Zeiss, now the context has changed a lot. There is a plethora of 50mm lenses for the FE mount and the Sigma 1.2 lens though heavier is cheaper, weather sealed, far less CA - with 13 rounded blades - better micro contrast, closer mfd and the possibility of AF & DMF. Dreamlike rendition can be found on a lot of good vintage glass. In the SLR days fast 50s were given as kit lenses and it was one of the easiest focal lengths to design. I have tested 100s of fast 50s and some I keep as my painting lenses - including the earlier german voigtlander skopar. This was before the company was bought by cosina. Personally I find their APO 50mm f2 and their earlier 65mm half macro brought more on the lens table. In the area of build, the sigma design of both their art lenses & their contemporary lenses is special. Many Chinese companies are improving their build quality. The question is within this context where would this lens be placed.
Dustin, you reviewed the Voigtlander 50mm f/2 APO and that lens as well as their 35mm Apo have the ability to de-click the aperture. Those lenses are also vastly better than this lens that you’re reviewing in this video. I own the two lens above and they’re phenomenal and I can’t recommend them enough!
Have you used this lens? Again, horses and courses But the apo in 35 or 50 can't get the dreamy look with lovely bokeh and fall off or low light performance this can, however stopped to 2.0 this can be just as sharp with low loca like the 50 apo. To me the noct is two lenses In one.
@@tristenvanmaanen6124 I have not used the new Voigtlander 50mm f/1. However the reviews that I’ve read indicate the lens isn’t so great at f/1. I also have the Sony 50mm f/1.4 which fits my needs well.
Beautiful pictures and video work!
It will be very nice to know how it compares to the Voigtländer Nokton 50mm 1.2
This has become my go to lens for the last couple of months. F1 is an extreme effect that can work for some photos, but I typically use it at F1.4 most of the time, and F5.6 and F8 for further views. The distinctive look is what’s really sets it apart from the other GM lenses that look utterly clinical in comparison. Personally I love it, but it is bulky, so do consider the F1.2 alternative.
That's a fair take.
Yes, Voightländer is Zeiss-like in build and some other aspects but I suggest that the general aim of Zeiss (on a Nikon it’s Otus or Milvus) is to render IQ as near as possible to the human eye. Zeiss is markedly different and I’m gambling that it’ll do well even when Nikon bring out a 60mp sensor!
So eg colours are flat but micro contrast great. Perhaps Zeiss almost always needs ND filters to create effect? Voightländer is rather about 3-D pop and bokeh? Anyway a very welcome review of a Gen 2 lens.
I'm not sure I agree with all of this. I actually find the rendering of a lot of Voigtlander lenses very similar to Zeiss, which does make some sense as they are both using the same factory and optical glass.
@@DustinAbbottTWI yes, I understand this and of course the, say, Otus range for Nikon DX is getting old since your excellent reviews.
However this glass ensures that a hell of a lot of parallel rays hit a FF sensor, despite fuzzy adapters to FX or to other FF. Who needs to adapt a MF lens, which is surely unwieldy when compared to a “small” Zeiss WA? So I’m gambling that especially wide angle Zeiss primes will deliver the same IQ to say, a Nikon Z future 60mp sensor. This glass as you know, lasts a lifetime! Please do not feel that you need to reply. I’m just a Zeiss fanboy but I can’t help feeling that you should relaunch Zeiss across the brands, assuming that your business model allows for it.That would perhaps sharpen your profile and I for one would be immensely grateful.
Is that Cosina ?@@DustinAbbottTWI
@@robertcudlipp3426, of course.
Do you think it would make sense to buy the Voigtlander NOKTON 50mm F/1 Aspherical VM (Leica M mount) since I already have the LM-EA7 adapter for my A7R4, to save money & have auto focus? Do you think I would get the same image quality?
This is actually a new design, so I'm not sure the two lenses are the same optically (I haven't tested the other). You may need to ask Voigtlander that question.
how are the images different from the Voigtlander 50mm F1.2 lens ? there's quite a difference in price, but between F1 and F1.2, is there a lot of difference in IQ ?
I've reviewed the 40mm F1.2, but not the 50mm F1.2, so I can't really respond to that.
Is this worth double the money over the 50mm f1.2 or the 40mm f1.2 (ignoring the focal length difference)? Other than the larger aperture what does this lens offer in your opinion compared to those cheaper and lighter alternatives? Also, from what I can tell fringing seems to be worse compared to those two.
I think the 50/1.2 is a better buy. The reverse field-curvature (unfortunately not tested by Dustin here) on this 50/1 means that the bokeh on the 1.2 is actually the same in the edges when both are wide open.
The maximum-aperture on this (50mm) is 50% greater than that of the 40mm f/1.2 (33mm).
I hear the 1.2 are just as sharp, but I find this lens very usable at F/1.0 and shoot it mostly at that aperture on my Nikon ZF it was worth the extra cash in that regard.
What is the difference between APO Lanther and Nokton? I own a 50mm f2 APO Lanther E mount for specially Milkyway photography. How does Nokton perform in that scenario?
Nowhere near as good as the 50mm apo. By 2.8-3.2 its usable but still nowhere near the 50mm APO on stars. The 50mm APO also has the advantage of a perfectly round aperture at f/2.8 so there are no diffraction spikes on large stars. It's also sharper across the frame and has no color fringing, which the Nokton still has in some degree even at f/3.2.
@@astrotennessee Thanks for the detailed reply. Clear skies! ♥️
@@astrotennessee I have 20mm Sony G and 50mm Voigtlander APO Lanther... what should i buy next? Sony 24mm GM or Sigma/Viltrox 27/28mm or should I go for Sony 35mm GM or Voigtlander 40mm?
@@ashishsinojia3793 Sony 24mm 1.4 is a great rendering lens for daylight, but if you've picky about astro images, it has a lot of coma and purple fringing. The 20mm G and 50APO is a nice pairing. I don't know that you really need anything between that. I like to have an ultrawide and the 14mm 1.8 GM is an amazing lens. I recently sold mine for the Sigma 15mm 1.4 diagonal fisheye because what it does is so different from other lenses.
If you want something in the 35-40mm range, the Sigma 40mm ART is still king. I think it's probably the best astro lens ever made.
Where are the portraits?
Portraits cannot always be magically summoned. You have to have a subject.
At that price, it should have been an APO lens. Voightlander APO Lanthars are fantastic.
APO lenses are fantastic, but you can't realistically expect an APO 50mm F1 lens for less than 2000$. The presence of chromatic abberations here should not be viewed as a defect. This is a low element count lens that is intended to allow better transmittance of light, allowing for vibrant colors, great general contrast and fidelity.
An APO lens will offer greater sharpness, at the cost of the factors mentioned above. At F1, it would also need to have many more elements to correct the "defects", which would lead to an increse in size, weight and price. Voigtlander already have APO lenses which are F2. This is a nice compromise that allows them to keep their philosophy in lens designing which is based on a low lement count set of lenses, made of leaded glass, that is perfectly corrected yet doesn't compromise much on character.
I understand where you're coming from, but the Nokton lenses are for a very different audience that loves the look of them...which is evidence from the comments on the video.
I don’t need it I don’t need it I don’t need it, it didn’t work I do need it!!
Interesting. For character I'd go for the Laowa Argus 45mm f0.95. At 50mm exactly I'd go for the Sony G-Master f1.2, which is essentially the same price.
I’m confused: Why would anyone choose this lens over the Sony? This, friends, is what marketing people call “a hard sell.”
@@flitetym Character. Not everyone wants a clinical lens. Don’t forget that photography is a blend between art and science. Some folks really lean into the art side
@@flitetym While the Sony lens is great for its intended use, this lens will give to the images a quality that the Sony will not, even with post processing.
@@ralphsaad8637 actually, that is my question, can post processing emulate the Voigtlander rendering ? Fuji has their film emulations which I assume would be due to post processing techniques from the camera CPU.
@veritas932 I don't know fujifilm cameras, but I do often see beautiful images taken with a fuji using these emulations that look really convincing. I would argue that the combination of these emulations + a Voigtlander or Zeiss lens would make for an even better result.
I agree with the looks, there is something about this lens, and many of the ones from Zeiss. The greens for example are unique. Very beautiful images.
I can't see what you are claiming to see, which would need a comparison from two lenses of the exact same subject in the same light, but if you want unique greens then you could just adjust that HSL slider.
@@Bayonet1809 You are wrong friend. No amount of editing can truly replicate data that is not captured to begin with. I am a Canon shooter and I own Canon and Tamron lenses mostly, with 1 voigtlander lens. I can confidently say that the images I produce with my Voigtlander can't be touched by even the most expensive Canon lenses. Lenses made by Leica, Ziess and Voiglander are based on a philosophy that is no longer commercially advertised unfortunately, due to youtube being scavanged by spec sheet nutties. These lenses are designed to create art, while other manufacturers are fighting themselves in the sharpness race. The likes of Voigtlander know the special sauce that makes images pop, which is a combination of high quality glass certainly, but also low amounts of glass for better transmittance of light. Take the Canon RF 135MM F1.8. It has 17 elements, as much as a zoom. This leads to images looking flat in RAW files, with poor contrast, colors and rendering. Data is lost everytime it passes through a glass element inevitably, though abberations are eliminated. If that's your cup of tea the so be it, but I challenge you to rent even for a day a special lens like this and see for yourself how radically different your images will look.
@@ralphsaad8637exactly this 👆👆!!! Have you tested the RF 50 1.2 ? And if so, whats your opinion?
$2,000 MF lens with no WR, what a great deal :)))
Worth every cent for me as a light weight street and event lens. Plus it is just fun to slow down and manually focus.
This lens isn't for everyone, but you'll see from the comments that there's a pretty strong group of photographers who absolutely love lenses like this.
IMO this is not a f/1.0 lens. Your thorough review shows how bad the flaws are with this lens at that aperture. The loCA and color fringing is BAD and the sharpness and contrast are quite bad also wide open. The lens demands a high price of $1,900 supposedly for being a f/1.0 and at that price it SHOULD perform pretty darn well to justify the price. But if you have to stop down to 1.4 or more to achieve good performance what’s the justification for paying that much? If I wanted a Voigtländer I would just buy a slower, cheaper f/1.4 Voigtländer that performs well wide open and save a lot of money. This one is just not a good value.
This is an f/1 lens. You might not judge it usable at f/1, but it is still f/1.
Yes, the fringing is bad, and the contrast a little low, but the sharpness, even right into the extreme corners is quite good. I challenge you to find a better performing f/1 (or f/0.95) lens that isn't the behemoth Noct Nikkor. This lens even outperforms the admittedly old-in-the-tooth, but still very expensive, Leica f/0.95 Noctilux.
Voigtlander don't make a 50/1.4, so I am unsure what you are comparing this to. They currently make a 50/1.5, and a 50/1.2, but neither performs up to your standards wide open. For maximum contrast both need stopping down to f/2 (for the centre) or f/4 (for the corners).
@@Bayonet1809 Yes, I meant f/1.2 for the other Voigtländers but I stand by my comment. This lens is way overpriced for the amount of flaws it produces at 1.0. I can certainly buy other lenses also besides Voigtländer for a lot less that are 1.4, 1.8, or 2.0 that perform very well wide open without the obvious fringing, low contrast and low sharpness of this lens even in the center wide open. So in my opinion, for the performance you’d expect from a Voigtländer it doesn’t reach those levels at 1.0 and is not worth a $1,900 price tag.
Guys look! An idiot that thinks every lens should sell for $40 despite the optical challenge that a lens may provide!
It’s an f/1.0 lens numb nuts. There isn’t anything better for less than this price. If you don’t like it, don’t buy it. Maybe you like shitty f/0.95 Chinese lenses that are much worse. 🤷🏾♂️
@@glennn.3464 You're paying here for specific look, high quality control and comfort of use. In Fuji X system I could agree that you can get very nice results with twice as cheaper 35mm f/1.2 compared to the 35mm f/0.9, but they're still different lenses, with different bokeh rendering, level of sharpness and contrast.
@@KingFiercer_zip We’re all entitled to pay whatever we want for whatever qualities we feel a lens possesses. I personally would never pay that much for a lens that I know I would never want to shoot at below f/1.4. Much of the benefit of this lens is the fast aperture but I wouldn’t be using at near f/1.0 so no way would I pay that much. You may feel differently but I would rather spend much less on another lens, be it a OEM, Voigtländer, Sigma, Tamron, Viltrox etc., that can perform at least as good or even better at 1.4 and most have AF as well. I can see how others may like certain "qualities" of this lens but for me this lens is far too expensive to accept what I feel are significant tradeoffs with sharpness, contrast, and heavy fringing. Good build quality means a lot to me as well but not if it’s accompanied by those things. Build quality is nice but it won’t get you quality photos if the optical performance is lacking where I feel it definitely is with this lens.