[Guly88]

Hi, I'm going to buy a NEX-5 and I'd like to add some of these objectives



12mm f5.6 Heliar Voigtlander Aspherical I or II

35mm f 1.4 Nokton voigtlander classic SC

50mm f 2 Hexanon-M or Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F2

Contax G 90/2.8 or Canon FD 85mm f1.8 SSC or Olympus OM ZUIKO AUTO-T 100mm F2.8



...what would it be your choice? is there anyone who has actually used some of them with the NEX and that can tell me something about it?

It would be just great, Thanks



Giulia

[Klaus]

> 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.

[Guly88]

> 50mm f 2 Hexanon-M or Voigtlander Heliar Classic 50mm F2



The Heliar is a little over-hyped regarding its capabilities it seems.



[/quote]



...the 50 mm f2 classic Heliar is a little overrated, but still good or it is actually nothing special?...



PS: thank you so much for all the advices <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> ...one last thing, I have been offered to buy the voigtlander 40mm 1.4 for a good price 250 euro and I was wondering which were the differences between this and the 35mm...they seems pretty the same to me, especially on the NEX, am I wrong? ( I have just read about some complaining on the bokeh of this objective <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> )

[outofrangefinder]

[quote name='Guly88' timestamp='1303880956' post='7921']



PS: thank you so much for all the advices <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> ...one last thing, I have been offered to buy the voigtlander 40mm 1.4 for a good price 250 euro and I was wondering which were the differences between this and the 35mm...they seems pretty the same to me, especially on the NEX, am I wrong? ( I have just read about some complaining on the bokeh of this objective <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> )

[/quote]



I own the nokton 35mm 1:1,4 and the 40mm 1:1,4 as well and I use them on both a nex 5 and on an Epson R-D1. The 40mm performs better on both systems, regarding every parameter. At the mentioned price, I'd buy it without second thought. It is a very good lens which works well with the nex. The 35mm performs better on the nex than on the Epson, ironically, because it is subject to massive focus shift when stopping down - which makes correct focusing on the rangefinder a guesswork, whereas this is a non-issue on the nex, because you have live view. That said, there seems to be great variation among the 35mm. If you read rangefinder/leica forums, you'll always find some guys fighting over this lens, whether it has the focus problem or not. Overall, I'd keep in mind that the long minimal focusing distance of rangefinder lenses makes them less useful in some situations, eg when shooting details of plants, etc..

[Guly88]

[quote name='outofrangefinder' timestamp='1303886782' post='7922']

I own the nokton 35mm 1:1,4 and the 40mm 1:1,4 as well and I use them on both a nex 5 and on an Epson R-D1. The 40mm performs better on both systems, regarding every parameter. At the mentioned price, I'd buy it without second thought. It is a very good lens which works well with the nex. The 35mm performs better on the nex than on the Epson, ironically, because it is subject to massive focus shift when stopping down - which makes correct focusing on the rangefinder a guesswork, whereas this is a non-issue on the nex, because you have live view. That said, there seems to be great variation among the 35mm. If you read rangefinder/leica forums, you'll always find some guys fighting over this lens, whether it has the focus problem or not. Overall, I'd keep in mind that the long minimal focusing distance of rangefinder lenses makes them less useful in some situations, eg when shooting details of plants, etc..

[/quote]



Thanks, I think I'm going to follow your advice...even if it makes a little more useless the eventuality of buying a 50mm M-Hexanon, 40mm is a little bit closer to the 50mm then the 35mm...but I'd love too much to have this M-Hexanon, so if I find one for a good price, I will buy it anyway.



PS: "project NEX lenses" update ^^ ...by now these are nothing more than wishes



- 12mm f5.6 super-wide heliar voigtlander

- 21mm f2.8 contax G Zeizz Biogon ( would I be far from the reality thinking to use the 21mm as a 35mm equivalent on the NEX? I mean between 32 and 35 there is no great differences, or is there?)

- 35mm or, more likely 40mm, classic Nokton f1.4

- 50mm Konica M-Hexanon f2

- 90mm f2.8 contax G Zeiss Sonnar





@ outofrangefinder

What do you think about this lens too? Voigtlander 35mm f/2.5 Lens

[outofrangefinder]

[quote name='Guly88' timestamp='1303894359' post='7925']







@ outofrangefinder

What do you think about this lens too? Voigtlander 35mm f/2.5 Lens

[/quote]





I had one of those, but I traded it in for the 35mm 1:1,4 Nokton, because it was damaged, somehow. The right part of the picture was consistently out of focus - a quality control problem, obviously. I was unlucky, as the lens normally has a good reputation among users. Make sure you can give it back/trade it in, if you buy one. Otherwise, it was well made and - above all - small, so it would be a good match to a Nex.

[Guly88]

[quote name='outofrangefinder' timestamp='1303886782' post='7922']

I own the nokton 35mm 1:1,4 and the 40mm 1:1,4 as well and I use them on both a nex 5 and on an Epson R-D1. The 40mm performs better on both systems, regarding every parameter. At the mentioned price, I'd buy it without second thought. It is a very good lens which works well with the nex. The 35mm performs better on the nex than on the Epson, ironically, because it is subject to massive focus shift when stopping down - which makes correct focusing on the rangefinder a guesswork, whereas this is a non-issue on the nex, because you have live view. That said, there seems to be great variation among the 35mm. If you read rangefinder/leica forums, you'll always find some guys fighting over this lens, whether it has the focus problem or not. Overall, I'd keep in mind that the long minimal focusing distance of rangefinder lenses makes them less useful in some situations, eg when shooting details of plants, etc..

[/quote]



...I have been told that the 40mm - which is 60mm eq on the NEX - would be kind of odd to use as a fixed lens, because you'd have to stay quite far when the subject is a group of people and quite close to do a portrait, it doesn't fit to inside photography because it's too long, with macro or still-life wouldn't fit too because you have not enough optic enlargement and panoramic photos would be impossible.



...what do u think about that? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='Guly88' timestamp='1303997982' post='7947']

...I have been told that the 40mm - which is 60mm eq on the NEX - would be kind of odd to use as a fixed lens, because you'd have to stay quite far when the subject is a group of people and quite close to do a portrait, it doesn't fit to inside photography because it's too long, with macro or still-life wouldn't fit too because you have not enough optic enlargement and panoramic photos would be impossible.



...what do u think about that? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[/quote]

Of course, it is less wide than a wide lens. And less tele than a tele lens. So all that is kind of true.



However, it might just be a focal length you will really like. That is personal.



I use my 35mm f2 quite often on my Canon APS-C. With the Canon APS-C crop factor (1.6x) that is very close to 40mm on NEX!



And that makes both (35mm on Canon, 40mm on NEX) very close to standard focal length, the most versatile one.



I use it for panoramic photos (stitching multiple shots):







For moderate wide angle (stitching 2 images):



As "normal" lens:





And as close up (semi-macro) lens with 12mm extension tube:







Just to illustrate how versatile a focal length it actually can be. Wide gets wide/panoramic by shooting multiple images with it, and close ups are done with an extension tube added between it and the camera. I would not mind it as a fixed lens at all. Although I might want to add a 24mm lens to it, for street photography and indoors snapshots of people.

[Guly88]

wow! <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' /> Thank you, you have just brighted up my day...these are great captures!

[Klaus]

[quote name='Guly88' timestamp='1303997982' post='7947']

...I have been told that the 40mm - which is 60mm eq on the NEX - would be kind of odd to use as a fixed lens, because you'd have to stay quite far when the subject is a group of people and quite close to do a portrait, it doesn't fit to inside photography because it's too long, with macro or still-life wouldn't fit too because you have not enough optic enlargement and panoramic photos would be impossible.



...what do u think about that? <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/sad.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

[/quote]



If I could just take one prime lens I would probably go for a 35mm (full format). This translates to something around 24mm then on the NEX. e.g. The Skopar 21mm is supposed to be very sharp and equiv. to about 32mm.



40mm are indeed a little odd on APS-C. It's somewhere in-between everything.