Originally posted by jeffshaddix Nice comparison. In these shots I'd say the 31 has the lead in contrast and sharpness.
Side note: Is high contrast really better for those of us who shoot raw and apply PP? Sure it may mean less time working on it, but the dynamic range is likely reduced in the 31 shot versus the 50, meaning in the end we have less to work with for PP...I'd certainly hate to use the 31 for a while only to find out the my highlights are blown on a regular basis (compared to the 50 for example).
That's an interesting point about contrast.
I remember reading about the Voigtlander 40/1.4 for M mount, a lens introduced in 2004, and how they had two versions--a Single Coated and a Multi Coated version. The Single Coated was preferred by B&W photographers, because it preserved more detail in the shadows. Multi-coated optics tend to have more punch.
I also used two versions of the Helios 40, and the newer one had multi-coated optics. For some cases, I preferred the older model. Which is too bad, because it was gone by the time I got the newer one!
The good news is that the DR is so good on these new cameras that we can regain those blown highlights and those crunched blacks.