Okay...Okay...sorry for the title. It's terrible. It's a gimmick and nothing more. What we actually have here is a comparison between a Voigtlander 58mm f/1.4+speedbooster (=41mm f/1) with a Canon FD 85mm f/1.2 converted to EF mount, shot at both f/1.2 and at f/2. The Voigtlander should be roughly equivalent to the brand new Voigtlander 42.5mm f/.95--even down to its unique cats eye bokeh (this is still a Voigtlander after all...) Some caveats: Non-scientific No tripod Different metering 3:2 vs. 4:3 Slightly different angle of view (41mm is 82mm equivalent) All I'm really interested in here is making observations about the character of the two lenses and I thought you might be interested. Canon 85mm [email protected] That's not bad at all. The bokeh is a little different, but the amount of blur is the same (as expected). The Canon 85mm has the advantage of already being stopped down by 1.5 stops, so it has significantly less coma than the Voigtlander, which is wide open. The Canon is also sharper with less CA, too (again, its stopped down)...and it has the advantage of an aspherical element, so there's very little "glow" compared to the Voigtlander. So what do you gain at f/1.2? Mostly just bigger circles...but not really that much bigger, I'd say. I think for the most part, the Voigtlander lenses go a long ways in giving us the narrow DOF quite nicely. And I'm looking forward to an EF mount speedbooster to put my 85mm f/1.2 on so that I have a 60mm f/.9.