Conclusion
Pros
- Extremely compact lens for the focal length and aperture
- Super solid all-metal construction
- Absolutely fantastic feeling focus and aperture rings
- Reasonably sharp wide open across most of the frame at most focus distances
- Very good sharpness across almost the entire frame stopped down
- Lovely color and contrast
- Good performance against flare
- Beautiful sunstars
- Lens aberrations and unique bokeh create a classic look
- Reasonably priced for such a fast wide-angle
Cons
- Heavy spherical aberration, especially at close focus distances
- Very soft at wide apertures when focused between 0.3 and 0.5m
- Extreme corners always retain some softness at any aperture
- Pronounced vignetting that never truly goes away
- Minor longitudinal CA
- Some purple fringing at high contrast edges at wide apertures
- Heavy coma at wide apertures
- Focus shift upon stopping down requires focusing at working aperture
- Barrel distortion at closer focus distances
- Bokeh that is quite busy wide open, and never is super creamy
As you can see from my pros and cons list above, this is not a perfect lens, but it’s also not a bad lens, and many of the cons actually figure into one of the pros – and that is the creation of that glowy classic look at f/1.4, with bokeh that you’ll either love or hate. It’s a lens that I can’t universally recommend, as many will find its negatives to be major dealbreakers. Yet, I do think that most people should really give it a look, as many do love that classic look at f/1.4. It’s also extremely solidly constructed, has wonderful manual focus feel, is downright tiny for a 35mm f/1.4 (and frankly it’s small for any lens), and doesn’t really break the bank at a retail price of $799.
Only you can determine whether you like the way this lens draws, or if you hate it. But for my use, I really like the look I can get from this lens. Wide open it gives a very unique look, and stopped down it provides lovely tonality and good sharpness over the entire frame, save for the extreme corners. Sharpness is pretty good at f/1.4, but does have a little softness due to spherical aberration, and stopping down is a must when focused near the lens’ minimum focus distance.
If you do want a more modern rendering lens, be prepared to both spend more and carry around a larger lens. One of the nice alternatives is Voigtländer’s own 40mm f/1.2, which is $300 more expensive, about twice the length and twice the weight, but is still fairly compact for such a lens, and while it’s a slightly longer focal length, from samples I’ve seen it’s also much better corrected and is a more modern optic. Otherwise, you’re stuck with the giant 35mm f/1.4 lenses, or the also less than perfect, but also quite pricey (and slower) Loxia 35mm f/2. In fact, the Loxia and the Voigtländer share a fair bit in how they draw, with nervous bokeh wide open. The Loxia is a touch sharper, a little bigger and a lot more expensive at $1,299, and its relationship to price was why I didn’t really feel it was worth a purchase when I reviewed that lens. However, the Voigtländer’s $500 lower price and full stop faster aperture make it a lot easier to overlook flaws and embrace the drawing style.
Personally, I really like the lens, and have added it to my bag. I’ve really enjoyed shooting with it. If you like the look, it’s well worth a purchase. If you want a more modern rendering lens, then look elsewhere.
Image Samples
Click on an image to enlarge.
Thank you very much I like the rendering of this lens I found it similar to my Voigtlander nokton 40mm f/1.4 M that I like a lot, do you have any experience with the Nokton 40mm f/1.4 M and if yes did you find any similarities between both. Thanks again
I had the 40/1.4 M for about two years, around 7 years ago, but at the time I was using it on m4/3, so I have no real thoughts on it from a FF comparison. However, it too had a similar handling of bokeh, but perhaps even a bit more wild at f/1.4. Similar spherical aberration as well, though the M mount lenses only focused to 0.7m, so I had no experience with closer focus.
Are you planning to test the Voigtlander 40mm f1.2 too?
I do eventually plan on reviewing it. By all accounts, it’s a really good lens, so I’d love to give it a whirl.
Great review and beautiful images as always.
Wow, those shots stopped down a little really reveal an annoying bokeh, complete with busy corners. The people shots wide open look great, and I’d say that’d be the only reason to consider this lens. The shots of buildings with objects in close focus in the foreground are also revealing. The out-of-focus buildings behind almost look cartoonish. This definitely would not be a lens I would use. Thanks for the very informative review!
Thanks Jordan for another wonderful review. I have the voigtlander 17.5/0.95 for m43 and really loves how the lens renders in portrait shots. Based on your experience, do you think this voigtlander 35/2 for full frame draws similarly compared to its m43 sibling?