Love this.
It really looks as though I need to get a retro lens
Just a note, guys: this one's not a retro lens. I mean, not in the way that it's an old, vintage lens. This lens was introduced about 10 years ago only.@Boffin - Retro is fun.
That's exactly what it is and that's exactly what I love about it.@35mm - How does the 40mm compare to the 55mm or a 35mm? I looked up the weight and price on that thing it seems like a solid everything everyday kind of lens.
Thanks. 👍Love this.
That's exactly what it is and that's exactly what I love about it.
What's more - and I've said this already elsewhere - the 40mm are proving to be even closer to my field of view than any other lens I've ever used. I love it for that, too.
About comparing it to the Nikkors, it is sharper than both wide-open (and also sharper than the 55 at f/1.4) and it also shows less CA. The corners, though, are a different matter.
Apart from that, it has its own character (like described above and as you can see from the images). I can't say that I like it more or less than the Nikkors, but I do like that it is simply different.
Yes, yes and yes.My thing is 35mm doesn't feel wide or close enough and sometimes 50/55mm is just a bit too close to grab context. Bokeh and isolation seem solid enough on the 40mm as well, and it seems more optically solid than the Voigtlander 35/1.4
I see nothing wrong with that.At this rate I'm just going to copy your setup entirely
That's what happens when you're used to 20mm and decide to bring a 28.Gutted you didn't get the tops of those.
I very much dig the composition on that last one. 👍
Thanks, guys. The shadows did all the work for me. 👍Nice stuff.
👍Good job on the soft tones 👍
That thought has crossed my mind as well.So when you gonna change your name to 40mm?
ISO 6400.What is the ISO on that most recent shot? Seems the EXIF is missing on Flickr and I'm a touch curious.
ISO 6400.
I did not.Did you apply any grain? Just feels a bit grainer than many samples I've seen. Maybe I'm just a bit too optimistic.