04-26-2011, 10:22 PM
> 12mm f5.6 Heliar Voigtlander Aspherical I or II
The optical design is the same. The mk II is takes filters and has a native M mount. Be aware of the border "coloration" issue as mentioned in the review.
> 35mm f 1.4 Nokton voigtlander classic SC
The Sony 35/1.8DT could also be an option ... without the nice build quality of course.
> 50mm f 2 Hexanon-M or Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F2
Markus likes his Hexanon I think (on Leica M). The Heliar is a little over-hyped regarding its capabilities it seems.
There is, of course, the el-cheapo Sony 50/1.8 which is optically just as good (albeit mechanically rather dismal).
> Contax G 90/2.8 or Canon FD 85mm f1.8 SSC or Olympus OM ZUIKO AUTO-T 100mm F2.8
The Contax G adapters have a rather cumbersome focusing ring - optically they're great it seems.
As far as the FD and OM are concerned - they are rather big compared to the viewfinder optics.
Again, you'd have a next-to-native Sony 85/2.8.
The new Voigtlander 75/1.8 may also be nice.
The optical design is the same. The mk II is takes filters and has a native M mount. Be aware of the border "coloration" issue as mentioned in the review.
> 35mm f 1.4 Nokton voigtlander classic SC
The Sony 35/1.8DT could also be an option ... without the nice build quality of course.
> 50mm f 2 Hexanon-M or Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F2
Markus likes his Hexanon I think (on Leica M). The Heliar is a little over-hyped regarding its capabilities it seems.
There is, of course, the el-cheapo Sony 50/1.8 which is optically just as good (albeit mechanically rather dismal).
> Contax G 90/2.8 or Canon FD 85mm f1.8 SSC or Olympus OM ZUIKO AUTO-T 100mm F2.8
The Contax G adapters have a rather cumbersome focusing ring - optically they're great it seems.
As far as the FD and OM are concerned - they are rather big compared to the viewfinder optics.
Again, you'd have a next-to-native Sony 85/2.8.
The new Voigtlander 75/1.8 may also be nice.