Voigtländer for me has been a big let down. I really wanted the 35mm1.2 but after seeing hundereds of photographs with it, not one single photograph gave me any lust of buying one. Why can't someone make a small MF version with the great optics of xf 35mm1.4. Of all 35 mm MF lenses I've tried my version of 7artisans 35mm1.2 mark2 is still the best. I was Lucky to get a great copy.
It's really annoying, because the electronic coupling is a big selling point in itself, but for that price I was expecting similar quality to voigtlander lenses on other systems 😕
@@gredipus_rex no electronic coupling and also very large as mentioned above. Imo Fuji need to release some manual focus versions of their XF line, the 35mm would be a great candidate for it
You forget to mention that the Voigt also auto-magnifies your shots when turning the focus ring. I love that feature. And if you shoot on an X-Pro3, it automatically moves/resizes your image rectangle in OVF mode. These are big pluses for some. But don't buy the Voigt purely for sharpness, as this is only one aspect of image quality (albeit an important one for many).
@@rakoksy agree, the 23mm 1.2 is quite sharp but sharpens up considerably from about f2. I have them all and the 35mm 1.2 is no sharper than my 7artisans 35mm 1.2. The Voigt 35mm f2 APO however is ultra-sharp...
You have to generate the 1:1 previews for all files. If you look you can see that everytime the pictures are different the "embedded preview" is displayed at one, if they are the same it is displayed for both files. so basically you are using embedded preview jpgs instead of the actual files. this also is the problem with the size. the raws have a bigger resolution than the previews.
@@Iamtongue I said this already. It happens from the get go, but you'll need to understand the subject first and then find scenes that will really highlight the issue. It is likely the f1.2-f2 'pop' is more down to the field curvature than anything else, its when you stop down you get disappointing results with things like where you focus ok, right next to it cruddy, then oddities like corners looking great but not on the focal plane you focused on lol, its a weird issue. So that makes the nokton a kinda 'one trick pony', pleasing wide openish shots only, not a very good 'walkaround' or do it all lens.
Something’s odd about the wide-open Voigtlander shots, all three of my lenses from them are much sharper wide-open. One of the most interesting examples I’ve noticed is I have the 58mm 1.4 F-mount Voigtlander and it’s actually sharper at basically every aperture as compared to my $1,700 Nikon 58mm 1.4. Of course the Nikon lens has AF… but still the Voigtlander lens really does take special photos.
I dunno man… the Voigtlander looked significantly better in the studio test from f2.8 up in sharpness and contrast and the leaf photo looked significantly better to me in how it rendered colour. The exif data contacts sound really useful too! I almost never shoot anything below f2.8… so I’m going to order the Voigtlander lens now for sure!
@@Iamtongue that’s it - make your own judgment. My two cents are that your images of Lisa the other day were really really excellent, more than sharp enough but also rendering beautifully too- almost reminiscent of the older fujinon lenses like the 35mm 1.4. But make up your own mind, because it’s also how the lens feels to use as well etc… it’s really personal & subjective and that’s fine.
Your voigtlander shot was just off focus a little. Focus peaking isn't precise. It detects contrast so it was showing the white text on black background as "in focus" but the focal point was a few mm behind the card. You can tell because the dust and lint on your card holder was in focus.
Its harder to focus close up with the voigt. Thats why theres a difference. Plus you can't always get the focus the same due to the human factor. I think over all the vioght is the sharper lense, but it requires a delicate touch to nail close up focus.
For the amount the charge and the way they marketed themselves, you would expect them to produce zeiss like quality but it struggles againsg lenses which cost 1/4th it. One can but the tt artisan 23 and 7 artisan 35 for 1/2 the cost of one voight 23
Buyer's remorse. Perhaps you were expecting too much from the Voight especially with that overblown price. But take heart because it got a high resale value.
that was the fujfiilm xh2s and the viltrox 13mm f1.4, i think you are refering to the color grading, which was done in dehancer. I was just playing around with the film stock emulations that they have and i added a little grain on top.
The TTArtisan 23mm f/1.4 has HUGE field curvature issues around the corners, that's the reason why the pen in the right corner is in focus. It happened EXACTLY the same thing as you're describing: corners being in focus when they should be out of focus. And better not talk about extreme corners blurriness... 🤦🤦 That's the reason why I sold it, IMHO it's a lens that should not be sold due to these issues...
Interesting I’ve been hearing a lot about the field curvature issue being on the the voigtlander but in this testing I saw no such thing in this video… Is there an intensity on how Field curvature should look? I got a couple ppl asking me about it for the voigtlander but I didn’t know what I was looking for 😂
@@Iamtongue usually what you find is that when you get close to the borders, the sharpness declines (compared to the center) . That's perfectly normal , but it's an indicator of "how well" a lens it's made (especially with wide angle lenses which are the ones more prone to field curvature) Field curvature is more noticeable in open diaphragms (f/1.4 - f/2.8) and tends to be less of an issue as you stop down the lens.
first image with the voigt just made the impression to be focused wrong. but overall this is not a real life test of the two. how do they react in low light situations etc. for the money most of the TT lenses are ok i have the 25 mm one payed 60 euros and for this money it finds it use when the light situation is good. for the rest I use vintage lenses 1.4 and 1.2 much cheaper and with a unique character… 😅
@@Iamtongue Focus peaking only goes by what the sensor sees and makes out of it. Focus peaking effects how you see the live image so you can only just by what the peaking highlights show. But because it only looks for contrast in general, it may display highlights even when it's not in focus. When focus peaking fails you can only rely on your eyes to make the call.
@@Iamtongue Focus peaking only goes by what the sensor sees and makes out of it. Focus peaking effects how you see the live image so you can only just by what the peaking highlights show. But because it only looks for contrast in general, it may display highlights even when it's not in focus. When focus peaking fails you can only rely on your eyes to make the call.
People expect the TT to suck or the CV to be magic… ..they are neither. If you know what to do with the right subject they can both deliver. What it is worth is completely subjective. The CV has the added benefit of the electronics. You buy neither for clinical sharpness and perfection. The TT is hard to disappoint, the CV being more expensive can easily disappoint. Last but not least MF isn’t for everyone and not for every occasion, it will disappoint if you don’t work on your technique and use it when a AF lens would be the better choice. With Fujifilm it is even a more difficult choice. Between the CV 23/35mm 1.2 and (old) XF 23/35mm 1.4 most are better off getting the Fuji lenses. If you are really eager for the manual focus and CV character start looking. I like CV, I have many of their F mount lenses 28, 40, 55, 58 and 90mm. For Z mount the 40/1.2. For Fuji the 35/1.2 - also the XF 35/1.4 and TT 35/1.4. Long story short if you want to mess around with manual focus, play around with your AF lens in Mf mode first, if unsure, get a cheap chinese MF lens, like the TT, or an old MF with adapter, if you really like that start buying the more expensive manual focus lenses from CV etc (like Leica M mount).
The voigtländer isn’t as “sharp” because the focusing distance is rated for full frame systems and not actual crop. Just a slight annoyance. Now you have to convert the focusing distance in your head to get more sharper images wide open for the Voigtländer.
@@Iamtongue hmm, the only work around is to try to convert the “film based” DoF (depth of field) scaling to Fujifilm’s native “pixel basis” DoF. It seems this was an oversight on the behalf of Voigtländer but a lot people are upset at Fujifilm for having a digital focusing format for their digital cameras 😵💫😵 Big time annoying but I’ve read some workarounds on DP Review’s forums.
Wait, are you implying that people use the markings on the lens to determine where they are focusing? I couldn't possibly imagine relying on that if that's what you are referring to. Focus peaking and magnification in the viewfinder is how one focusses accurately -- it's not some workaround.
Why You made resolution test at close distance? (or at least its looks like close distance). Lenses usually are tuned, to have best resolution at medium or long focusing distance. Did You check for example crazy field curvature of TTArtisan? How are they work against strong light source? And finally, did You know APSC 23/1.2 lens, with such organic and pleasing rendering like voigtlander 23/1.2? :) this lens is like using artistic paintbrush. Images taken by this voigtlander are reach, in some way very vintage like. Completely different than XF 23/1.4 LM WR, which is super corrected, super sharp at every aperture with always creamy bokeh, and.. boring ;) look from new Fuji 23/1.4 is basically the same as every modern FF 35/2.0 prime. Nothing special. Voigtlander in other hand, has at least its own optical signature. You may like it or not, but you can't tell that this lens rendering is like every other ;) home made brick wall tests will not showcase it, sorry. Check out newest thread in dpreview forum about VL 23/1.2 in fuji section, so you will see what I mean
Just buy Fujifilm lenses you cant go wrong, and stop worrying about 300% pixel peeping. I would never pay that much money for a third party lens no matter who made it, and the cheaper lenses are just that, cheap.
yo, you saved me tons of money with this video... I will watch and like all your videos, you earned it.
dawwe man you're way too kind! Thanks so mcuh!
Voigtländer for me has been a big let down. I really wanted the 35mm1.2 but after seeing hundereds of photographs with it, not one single photograph gave me any lust of buying one. Why can't someone make a small MF version with the great optics of xf 35mm1.4. Of all 35 mm MF lenses I've tried my version of 7artisans 35mm1.2 mark2 is still the best. I was Lucky to get a great copy.
Ya i haven’t seen other shots from other RUclipsrs that Gets me excited either
It's really annoying, because the electronic coupling is a big selling point in itself, but for that price I was expecting similar quality to voigtlander lenses on other systems 😕
Mitakon 35mm is phenomenal at wide open
@@gredipus_rex yes but it's 3 times bigger and heavier than the 7artisans 35mm1.2 mark2
@@gredipus_rex no electronic coupling and also very large as mentioned above. Imo Fuji need to release some manual focus versions of their XF line, the 35mm would be a great candidate for it
You forget to mention that the Voigt also auto-magnifies your shots when turning the focus ring. I love that feature. And if you shoot on an X-Pro3, it automatically moves/resizes your image rectangle in OVF mode. These are big pluses for some. But don't buy the Voigt purely for sharpness, as this is only one aspect of image quality (albeit an important one for many).
Wait the voigtlander auto magnifies? I need to pay attention to this. I did not pay attention to that feature at all. Thanks
@@Iamtongue yep! Turn on auto magnify in the settings
23 1.2 is enough sharp, quite sharp from f4, 35 1.2 less
@@rakoksy agree, the 23mm 1.2 is quite sharp but sharpens up considerably from about f2. I have them all and the 35mm 1.2 is no sharper than my 7artisans 35mm 1.2. The Voigt 35mm f2 APO however is ultra-sharp...
You have to generate the 1:1 previews for all files. If you look you can see that everytime the pictures are different the "embedded preview" is displayed at one, if they are the same it is displayed for both files. so basically you are using embedded preview jpgs instead of the actual files. this also is the problem with the size. the raws have a bigger resolution than the previews.
Ohhh okay that’s good to know
Field curvature is massive on the Nokton had to return mine.
Ohhh at what aperture did you notice it? I’m going to test this out..
@@Iamtongue I said this already. It happens from the get go, but you'll need to understand the subject first and then find scenes that will really highlight the issue. It is likely the f1.2-f2 'pop' is more down to the field curvature than anything else, its when you stop down you get disappointing results with things like where you focus ok, right next to it cruddy, then oddities like corners looking great but not on the focal plane you focused on lol, its a weird issue. So that makes the nokton a kinda 'one trick pony', pleasing wide openish shots only, not a very good 'walkaround' or do it all lens.
Something’s odd about the wide-open Voigtlander shots, all three of my lenses from them are much sharper wide-open. One of the most interesting examples I’ve noticed is I have the 58mm 1.4 F-mount Voigtlander and it’s actually sharper at basically every aperture as compared to my $1,700 Nikon 58mm 1.4. Of course the Nikon lens has AF… but still the Voigtlander lens really does take special photos.
I have both. The Voigtlander stays on my XPro 3 and the TTartisan stays in its box. enough said
I dunno man… the Voigtlander looked significantly better in the studio test from f2.8 up in sharpness and contrast and the leaf photo looked significantly better to me in how it rendered colour. The exif data contacts sound really useful too! I almost never shoot anything below f2.8… so I’m going to order the Voigtlander lens now for sure!
Well that’s good news. Everything I’ve heard about it hasn’t been the greatest. But I’ll refrain until I give a final conclusion on it.
@@Iamtongue that’s it - make your own judgment. My two cents are that your images of Lisa the other day were really really excellent, more than sharp enough but also rendering beautifully too- almost reminiscent of the older fujinon lenses like the 35mm 1.4. But make up your own mind, because it’s also how the lens feels to use as well etc… it’s really personal & subjective and that’s fine.
Nice comparison bro!
Thanks andrei
Thank you, saved my money :)
glad I could help!
Your voigtlander shot was just off focus a little. Focus peaking isn't precise. It detects contrast so it was showing the white text on black background as "in focus" but the focal point was a few mm behind the card. You can tell because the dust and lint on your card holder was in focus.
Thanks for the heads up
Its harder to focus close up with the voigt. Thats why theres a difference. Plus you can't always get the focus the same due to the human factor. I think over all the vioght is the sharper lense, but it requires a delicate touch to nail close up focus.
that could be it.
5:30 It's called field curvature
For the amount the charge and the way they marketed themselves, you would expect them to produce zeiss like quality but it struggles againsg lenses which cost 1/4th it. One can but the tt artisan 23 and 7 artisan 35 for 1/2 the cost of one voight 23
Yup, i dont think the nokton is worth it.
Are you shooting at ISO 8 million, Tongue? (The beginning part. What camera was that on?)
if you're talking about the grain, that was added using dehancer lol...
Buyer's remorse. Perhaps you were expecting too much from the Voight especially with that overblown price. But take heart because it got a high resale value.
ya i sold it.
What body and lens did you use for the first video? The texture and color of the video are so Beautiful
that was the fujfiilm xh2s and the viltrox 13mm f1.4, i think you are refering to the color grading, which was done in dehancer. I was just playing around with the film stock emulations that they have and i added a little grain on top.
The TTArtisan 23mm f/1.4 has HUGE field curvature issues around the corners, that's the reason why the pen in the right corner is in focus.
It happened EXACTLY the same thing as you're describing: corners being in focus when they should be out of focus. And better not talk about extreme corners blurriness... 🤦🤦
That's the reason why I sold it, IMHO it's a lens that should not be sold due to these issues...
Interesting I’ve been hearing a lot about the field curvature issue being on the the voigtlander but in this testing I saw no such thing in this video… Is there an intensity on how Field curvature should look? I got a couple ppl asking me about it for the voigtlander but I didn’t know what I was looking for 😂
@@Iamtongue usually what you find is that when you get close to the borders, the sharpness declines (compared to the center) . That's perfectly normal , but it's an indicator of "how well" a lens it's made (especially with wide angle lenses which are the ones more prone to field curvature)
Field curvature is more noticeable in open diaphragms (f/1.4 - f/2.8) and tends to be less of an issue as you stop down the lens.
first image with the voigt just made the impression to be focused wrong. but overall this is not a real life test of the two. how do they react in low light situations etc. for the money most of the TT lenses are ok i have the 25 mm one payed 60 euros and for this money it finds it use when the light situation is good. for the rest I use vintage lenses 1.4 and 1.2 much cheaper and with a unique character… 😅
Voigtlander is good in low light. I haven't tried the TTartisans in low light.
Don't trust focus peaking for critical focus.
So what are you supposed to do in this situation?
@@Iamtongue Focus peaking only goes by what the sensor sees and makes out of it. Focus peaking effects how you see the live image so you can only just by what the peaking highlights show. But because it only looks for contrast in general, it may display highlights even when it's not in focus.
When focus peaking fails you can only rely on your eyes to make the call.
@@Iamtongue Focus peaking only goes by what the sensor sees and makes out of it. Focus peaking effects how you see the live image so you can only just by what the peaking highlights show. But because it only looks for contrast in general, it may display highlights even when it's not in focus.
When focus peaking fails you can only rely on your eyes to make the call.
@@Iamtongue Well apparently the camera and lens makers are selling us useless crap, so throw them away 🗑
People expect the TT to suck or the CV to be magic…
..they are neither.
If you know what to do with the right subject they can both deliver.
What it is worth is completely subjective.
The CV has the added benefit of the electronics.
You buy neither for clinical sharpness and perfection.
The TT is hard to disappoint, the CV being more expensive can easily disappoint.
Last but not least MF isn’t for everyone and not for every occasion, it will disappoint if you don’t work on your technique and use it when a AF lens would be the better choice. With Fujifilm it is even a more difficult choice. Between the CV 23/35mm 1.2 and (old) XF 23/35mm 1.4 most are better off getting the Fuji lenses. If you are really eager for the manual focus and CV character start looking.
I like CV, I have many of their F mount lenses 28, 40, 55, 58 and 90mm. For Z mount the 40/1.2. For Fuji the 35/1.2 - also the XF 35/1.4 and TT 35/1.4. Long story short if you want to mess around with manual focus, play around with your AF lens in Mf mode first, if unsure, get a cheap chinese MF lens, like the TT, or an old MF with adapter, if you really like that start buying the more expensive manual focus lenses from CV etc (like Leica M mount).
The voigtländer isn’t as “sharp” because the focusing distance is rated for full frame systems and not actual crop. Just a slight annoyance.
Now you have to convert the focusing distance in your head to get more sharper images wide open for the Voigtländer.
Really.. what’s the formula to do that?
@@Iamtongue hmm, the only work around is to try to convert the “film based” DoF (depth of field) scaling to Fujifilm’s native “pixel basis” DoF. It seems this was an oversight on the behalf of Voigtländer but a lot people are upset at Fujifilm for having a digital focusing format for their digital cameras 😵💫😵
Big time annoying but I’ve read some workarounds on DP Review’s forums.
@@dunkkid23 interesting.. I can’t just use focus peaking and eye ball it? 😅
@@Iamtongue that’s the only workaround at the moment!
Wait, are you implying that people use the markings on the lens to determine where they are focusing? I couldn't possibly imagine relying on that if that's what you are referring to. Focus peaking and magnification in the viewfinder is how one focusses accurately -- it's not some workaround.
For me, I really don't like the appearance of TTArtisan...
With lens you get what you pay
Why You made resolution test at close distance? (or at least its looks like close distance). Lenses usually are tuned, to have best resolution at medium or long focusing distance. Did You check for example crazy field curvature of TTArtisan? How are they work against strong light source? And finally, did You know APSC 23/1.2 lens, with such organic and pleasing rendering like voigtlander 23/1.2? :) this lens is like using artistic paintbrush. Images taken by this voigtlander are reach, in some way very vintage like. Completely different than XF 23/1.4 LM WR, which is super corrected, super sharp at every aperture with always creamy bokeh, and.. boring ;) look from new Fuji 23/1.4 is basically the same as every modern FF 35/2.0 prime. Nothing special. Voigtlander in other hand, has at least its own optical signature. You may like it or not, but you can't tell that this lens rendering is like every other ;) home made brick wall tests will not showcase it, sorry. Check out newest thread in dpreview forum about VL 23/1.2 in fuji section, so you will see what I mean
ok
@@Iamtongue lol
if i were u, i would sell them both and stick to the old 23/1.4 R, even for character reason. The voig is only a cosina.
Is that a bad thing if it’s a Cosina I don’t understand
What the hell is going on?
What are you talking about
@@Iamtongue he just wanted to know what the hell is going on
@@andrew.turner ya same lol
Just buy Fujifilm lenses you cant go wrong, and stop worrying about 300% pixel peeping. I would never pay that much money for a third party lens no matter who made it, and the cheaper lenses are just that, cheap.
ok
That lens isn’t better than the Voigtlander lens not even close that misinformation
Not misinformation. It’s differences of opinion.
@@Iamtongue I wish I could upload my print from my Nikon z5
@@lorseyjones4807 does the voigtlander you own suffer from a field curvature?
@@Iamtongue no it doesn’t
@@lorseyjones4807 interesting 🤔