Nokton 35/1.4 -- underrated? [Archive]

armanius

03-26-2012, 15:50

When people discuss fast 35's, it seems like the Nokton 35/1.4 Classic is either forgotten or an after thought. Instead, the discussion is generally focused on the Summilux, Summicron, Biogon, and the Nokton 35/1.2. Even the Skopar 35/2.5 gets more love than the Classic.

The Classic was actually my first M lens. But over the last two years, I started neglecting it. And as of lately, I've been wanting to supplement or replace it with another 35. After all, it's soft wide open, has focus shift problems, and it's just a Summilux wanna-be!

I picked up a Biogon three weeks ago and loved it. But I had to give up the Biogon (and 3 other lenses) to get a 50 Lux. I ended up finally dusting the Classic and taking it out for a spin last weekend. After using it again, I found myself falling in love with its qualities once more. Is it sharp wide open? Sharp enough for an amateur like me. Does it suffer from focus shift? Probably, but I'm shooting it wide open anyway. But most importantly, it has character! The out of focus rendering is actually very pleasant (to my eyes anyway).

Here are a few of the photos that I took during that spin. Nothing artistically enlightening. But it does show that unique character that the Classic has. All shot side open (if I remember correctly). Some cropping and PP in LR4, particularly for exposure. Downsampled to 1024 pixels.

http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/files/1/0/4/7/3/nokton_35_at_empire_cafe-6.jpg (http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=16535&c=5&userid=10473)

http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/files/1/0/4/7/3/nokton_35_at_empire_cafe-5.jpg (http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=16534&c=5&userid=10473)

http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/files/1/0/4/7/3/nokton_35_at_empire_cafe-4.jpg (http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=16533&c=5&userid=10473)

http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/files/1/0/4/7/3/nokton_35_at_empire_cafe-3.jpg (http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=16532&c=5&userid=10473)

http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/files/1/0/4/7/3/nokton_35_at_empire_cafe-2.jpg (http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=16531&c=5&userid=10473)

http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/files/1/0/4/7/3/nokton_35_at_empire_cafe-1.jpg (http://forum.getdpi.com/gallery/showimage.php?i=16530&c=5&userid=10473)

ps: Thanks for indulging my rationalization.

pps: But in spite of the rationalization, I ordered a Biogon-C anyway!!! :)

Thanks for dropping by!

back alley

03-26-2012, 16:17

it's a very good lens that has been picked apart since it's release.

mooge

03-26-2012, 16:52

I think it's a pretty awesome little lens.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7067/6823793640_66f2df52fe_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/50557030@N02/6823793640/)

JayM

03-26-2012, 17:30

Yeah, it's an awesome lens. Circular flare is the only downside to me. The 28mm f/2 they make is great too. The hood for the 35 is pretty nice, but I'm not sure how functional it is as far as preventing flare. That and it detracts from it's tiny excellence.

I really appreciate that Voigtlander makes those two lenses in particular since there's no alternative to them that isn't exorbitantly priced.

mooge

03-26-2012, 17:38

circular flare- I bought a cheapo 43mm screw-in vented hood and since I got it I've had none. which kinda sucks because I like the circular flare.

I'll probably get the proper hood when I destroy this one.

Tom A

03-26-2012, 18:13

I have a multitude of 35's - ranging from f1.2 to 3.5 - and the most used one is my Nokton Classic 35f1.4 SC. It is good, really good. I am not worried about the circular flare - haven't really encountered it - even after 1000's of rolls with mine (I have two - just in case). It does exactly what it is supposed to do in black/white and film. Gives me pictures that I like. I have the 35f1.4 Summilux ( alate on in the 3.4xx xxx range) and I prefer the Nokton 35f1.4 any day.

Tom A

03-26-2012, 18:18

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2379/2286549610_22996dc3b4_c.jpg

Nokton 35f1.4 SC @ f1.4 and 1/60s. Kodak XX and Adox developer.

kdemas

03-26-2012, 18:30

I have the 35f1.4 Summilux ( alate on in the 3.4xx xxx range) and I prefer the Nokton 35f1.4 any day.

Tom,

If you need someone to babysit your 'Lux I'll be happy to volunteer ;)

Tom A

03-26-2012, 18:32

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6033/6276565017_809c0fabe3_c.jpg

New York. last October. Arista 400 Premium, Adox MQ developer. M2 and Nokton 35f1.4 SC.
There are details in the dark shadows to the right - but I wanted the window and the guy well defined so I let them go black.
Flare! What Flare!
I suspect that most of the problems with the 35f14 Nokton is user error more than anything inherent in the lens design. It was designed to be a reasonably priced alternative to the later version of the Summilux 35f1.4 pre-asph. It is a better lens, both optically and ergonomically.

maddoc

03-26-2012, 18:33

I can live with the flaws of my 35mm Summilux-M pre-ASPH (coma & circular shaped flare) but the barrel-distortion of the CV 35/1.4 .... :eek:

JayM

03-26-2012, 18:39

I can live with the flaws of my 35mm Summilux-M pre-ASPH (coma & circular shaped flare) but the barrel-distortion of the CV 35/1.4 .... :eek:

Nokton has coma too :o

kdemas

03-26-2012, 18:42

I can live with the flaws of my 35mm Summilux-M pre-ASPH (coma & circular shaped flare) but the barrel-distortion of the CV 35/1.4 .... :eek:

That's my issue. Love the size and the build quality is nice but the distortion is pretty noticeable.

That said, it all depends on what you shoot. For many it's not a big deal.

kzphoto

03-26-2012, 18:44

I like the little Nokton. I had the pleasure of shooting one for a few days (thanks Darren!) and I really enjoyed the lens. I couldn't seem to get the focus really sharp at f/1.4, but everywhere else the lens was great!

Here's a few samples:
First shot @ f/1.4 (I think I took this around 6:30 AM!)

2nd shot @ f/1.4 as well

Both shots on Portra 160, shot at ASA 100

mooge

03-26-2012, 19:16

I can live with the flaws of my 35mm Summilux-M pre-ASPH (coma & circular shaped flare) but the barrel-distortion of the CV 35/1.4 .... :eek:

I can live with the barrel distortion of the Nokton (it's not that bad, really)... but the 1m minimum focus distance of the Summilux... :confused:

maddoc

03-26-2012, 19:21

I can live with the barrel distortion of the Nokton (it's not that bad, really)... but the 1m minimum focus distance of the Summilux... :confused:

1m minimum focus distance can be a deal-breaker sometimes but I usually use this lens set to around 1 - 2m and also the googled M3 version (vs 1 ?) focuses down to 0.65m (but not sure about this ...)

Jobin

03-26-2012, 19:27

My only lens.

swoop

03-26-2012, 19:32

Eery so often I consider picking up this lens.

Lss

03-26-2012, 20:44

The 35/1.4 Nokton SC is the lens that pretty much lives on my M8. Sometimes I think I should get another one to use on my other cameras.

roundg

03-26-2012, 21:16

It's good enough and best value for money, like most of other CV lens.

armanius

03-26-2012, 21:21

Nice to see so many fellow 35/1.4 owners happy with it! Here are three of my favorites photos with it. This first one was published in a California travel magazine. My one and only published photo.

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4048/4561454651_916fb9afbb_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/armanius/4561454651/)
Griswold's Sausalito vacation on bike!! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/armanius/4561454651/) by Armanius (http://www.flickr.com/people/armanius/), on Flickr

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4017/4567158487_dd86c62373_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/armanius/4567158487/)
Quick shot with minimal focus (http://www.flickr.com/photos/armanius/4567158487/) by Armanius (http://www.flickr.com/people/armanius/), on Flickr

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4066/4582014185_a561960754_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/armanius/4582014185/)
Nice clothes make her happy! (http://www.flickr.com/photos/armanius/4582014185/) by Armanius (http://www.flickr.com/people/armanius/), on Flickr

ferider

03-26-2012, 21:54

I can live with the flaws of my 35mm Summilux-M pre-ASPH (coma & circular shaped flare) but the barrel-distortion of the CV 35/1.4 .... :eek:

Interesting Gabor. Distortion never seemed to bother you when using the Noctilux...

jarski

03-26-2012, 22:05

Interesting Gabor. Distortion never seemed to bother you when using the Noctilux...

maybe because theres so little of it :)

maddoc

03-26-2012, 22:08

Interesting Gabor. Distortion never seemed to bother you when using the Noctilux...

It is less obvious when using the Noctilux, hardly remarkable with the Noctilux except I start looking for it.

ferider

03-26-2012, 22:14

Actually both 1.0 Noctilux and 50 pre asph Summilux distort more than the Nokton. The Nokton's distortion is less obvious when you actually use it.

maddoc

03-26-2012, 22:41

Actually both 1.0 Noctilux and 50 pre asph Summilux distort more than the Nokton. The Nokton's distortion is less obvious when you actually use it.

Ken Rockwell recommends +2.0 for both, 50/1.0 Noctilux & CV 35/1.4, to correct for distortion in Photoshop for 3m distance and 2.2 for the Noctilux at 10m (to compensate for the different fov for both focal length).

valdas

03-26-2012, 22:43

Ken Rockwell recommends +2.0 for both, 50/1.0 Noctilux & CV 35/1.4, to correct for distortion in Photoshop for 3m distance and 2.2 for the Noctilux at 10m (to compensate for the different fov for both focal length).

Ken Rockwell... anybody still trust that guy?

maddoc

03-26-2012, 22:49

Ken Rockwell... anybody still trust that guy?

Why would he have to cheat about his recommendations for correction values for lens distortion ? :confused:

valdas

03-26-2012, 23:23

Why would he have to cheat about his recommendations for correction values for lens distortion ? :confused:

Just read what he writes about Voigtländer 35mm f/1.4 NOKTON Classic - "This Voigtländer lens is significantly softer at large apertures than LEICA's first SUMMILUX 35mm f/1.4 (1960-1995), which is LEICA's softest modern 35mm lens".

I had both lenses and wide open Lux was much softer. And all tests and reviews I have read also confirms this (and KR just states the opposite to the obvious).

Just one example:
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2009/12/02/the-voigtlander-nokton-35-1-4-mc-lens-review/

In fact, I traded my old Summilux for some other gear and kept the Nokton.

jarski

03-26-2012, 23:29

IIRC its the focus shift that gives bad reputation for Nokton. but of course Leica lenses have worse focus shift problems as well, when compared CV lenses ;)

yanidel

03-26-2012, 23:40

I did use it for a time and it was a good performer. Nevertheless, I shoot a lot wide open and anytimes a subject was not in the center, it resulted too soft to my taste. This was my main bug with it. Also, I prefer the smoother bokeh and stronger contrast of the Summilux Asph but this is personal taste.

I easily deal with focus shift on my Lux, so it can be done on the CV too.

Joosep

03-27-2012, 03:25

In love with my S.C. Favourite lens for walking.

http://joosep.net/Portfolio/rf20/000016.jpg
Find it sharp where I want it to be. @1.4

http://joosep.net/Portfolio/rf19/000032.jpg

http://joosep.net/Portfolio/rf17/000018.jpg
The colors... mmmm

ferider

03-27-2012, 06:40

This is a recent shot with the MC 35/1.4, perspective/distortion uncorrected, focus on the door:

http://ferider.smugmug.com/Picture-a-Week/2012/0212-B/i-75L7L2t/0/O/70-TMY-Scan-120228-0014.jpg

This is an older one that I shot for testing distortion and that convinced me that the lens is a keeper:

http://ferider.smugmug.com/Picture-a-Week/One-Year-Two-Lenses/November-09-A/gg-Scan-091120-0014/719680970_2kSUW-O.jpg

Yes, one can see slight distortion in some situations, but there are so many lenses where distortion is similar or worse, and nobody cares .... Including, for instance, the 35/1.2, or the new 28 Perar, the Leica lenses mentioned above, etc. BTW, even the 35/1.4 Asph has distortion of similar magnitude (I've only tried v1).

Did you ever compare to your Nikon F mount lenses, including 35/2 and 35/1.4 ? Now there are some heavily distorting lenses .... (I have the 35/2).

For some reason the 35/1.4 Nokton is the only one where slight distortion seems to matter on the intertubes ... "Internet Rufmord" if you ask me :) And don't get me started on "Focus Shift" or "softness". Whoever complains about this should first get an RF collimation on his/her Leica, then we can talk. Yes, the 35/1.4 is soft in the corners wide open, but so is my pre-asph Summicron, stop for stop, they are so comparable, that you cann't distinguish them even when pixel peeping.

And nothing against the pre-asph 35 Summilux in your hands, it seems to work for you. For me, however, it would be unusable in most situations at f1.4 due to "glow", I much rather have a slightly distorting lens that I can correct for in photoshop, but that focuses down to 0.7m without prominent veiling flare.

And just for fun, another recent 1.4 Nokton beach shot (I've shown this before)

http://ferider.smugmug.com/Picture-a-Week/2012/0212-B/i-2Qf8hMs/0/XL/69-TMY-Scan-120228-0008-XL.jpg

And an older Bokeh shot (with worst case background):

http://ferider.smugmug.com/Picture-a-Week/One-Year-Two-Lenses/July-09-C/Arista100-21/620173406_Ks8JS-O.jpg

Try that with the pre-asph Summilux, and there will be coma "butterflies" all over the place.

The 1.4 Nokton is very, very good for my purposes. And it's not really a matter of price for me, I use the Nokton in this combo now:

http://ferider.smugmug.com/Technical/Kits/Leica-M/i-pC67SgL/0/O/P1010141.jpg

People call the Nokton "affordable", but IMO, a US 500 lens is not cheap for most any photographer out there, except for the very few people who are used to the insane current Leica lens prices.

The 35/1.4 Nokton for me is the perfect partner to "Big Bertha", in particular wrt bokeh and distortion. Sometimes, when I use M3 only, I pair Bertha with the 40/1.4. Where I consider the 35/1.4 good, the 40/1.4 is outstanding, very sharp and rectilinear.

Roland.

regularchickens

03-27-2012, 06:51

I bought one a few months ago, and it's the only 35 I need now. It tends to take the role of internet whipping-boy when people discuss M-mount 35s, especially when the topic is mirrorless digital bodies. The cult of sharpness looks down on it, but it's a gorgeous, character-ful lens.

I shot this series with it (SC version): http://trevorwilsonphoto.com/work/2012/02/18/erica-saturday-february/

http://trevorwilsonphoto.com/work/wp-content/uploads/2012/02/ej-01.jpg (http://trevorwilsonphoto.com/work/2012/02/18/erica-saturday-february/)

shadowfox

03-27-2012, 08:28

I too, have often considered getting this lens to replace my Ultron, but I seem to notice "jittery" out-of-focus background in a lot of shots from this lens (exactly as the samples in this thread shows).

I don't like those. So my Ultron stays.

porktaco

03-27-2012, 08:58

i had one and sold it a while back. at the time, i thought it was a pretty good lens. since then, i've come to appreciate all the comments about busy bokeh. i might buy a 40/1.4 but i don't think i'd re-buy the 35.

scottwallick

03-27-2012, 09:57

I wanted to like this lens, but the one I had exhibited extreme barrel distortion. To the extent I felt that the lens (at least my copy) was defective.

pobe

03-27-2012, 11:09

It's basically the only lens I use since I got it. Haven't tried any other 35s but it's certainly good enough for me. :)

armanius

03-27-2012, 12:00

Nice pics there Ferider, Joosep and RegularChickens.

@Ferider. You do have a point that $500 isn't cheap at all. But so many of us have been partially de-sensitized at the insane Leica prices that $500 seems cheap!

Keep the photos coming folks!

hjbyeo

04-03-2012, 21:39

It front focuses at 1.4 at times. Probably a user fault than anything else. It's my most used focal length on my RD1s.

Some say the Boke isn't good enough, but I wasn't complaining. ;-)

What I like about it? - Size and it's a f1.4! Reasonably priced.

Close up ...
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7007/6748315787_1294071689_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/hjbyeo/6748315787/)

On film ...
http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4002/4550502450_064b7df3cf_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/hjbyeo/4550502450/)

Lflex

04-03-2012, 22:15

At times I wonder if people are talking about the same lens. The minor distortion I see wide open is nothing (if you come from most other systems than leica). If you pair it with the compact size (by any standard - and especially for a 1.4) and it's reasonable price, it is actutally a bargain in its own right - even if it is not cheap.
Underrated? I don't know and don't really care. I like the one I have and it is not for sale. When CV discontinues this lens, we will probably see a change to a more positive view of this model - as appears to be the case for all of their discontinued lenses.

coelacanth

04-03-2012, 22:21

Few shots with 35/1.4 SC on M8.2.

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6031/6346986024_76e7da562d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/guruguru/6346986024/)
First Catch of the Season (http://www.flickr.com/photos/guruguru/6346986024/) by Suguru Nishioka (http://www.flickr.com/people/guruguru/), on Flickr

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6035/6262030707_e9417fb554_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/guruguru/6262030707/)
Aim good. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/guruguru/6262030707/) by Suguru Nishioka (http://www.flickr.com/people/guruguru/), on Flickr

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6081/6140163805_e58b7e6ce9_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/guruguru/6140163805/)
"Web Site" (http://www.flickr.com/photos/guruguru/6140163805/) by Suguru Nishioka (http://www.flickr.com/people/guruguru/), on Flickr

Lss

04-03-2012, 23:51

The minor distortion I see wide open is nothing (if you come from most other systems than leica).
The distortion is not there only wide open. I see it pretty clearly in many of my photos, but it bothers me in only a few (and frankly, if those were otherwise better photos, I would not mind the distortion). It is my most used lens.

Anyway, when you look at lenses for a certain system (Leica M in this case), you mostly compare against lenses for the same system. For the Leica M system, the 35/1.4 is considerably cheaper than pretty much anything else. Which is pretty suspicious when it is actually a tiny, 1.4 lens that appear well-built. There must be something wrong with the lens - what exactly, why is it cheaper? I think it is mostly in this context that we talk about its weaknesses. And sure, it is not perfect. Pay more and you get no distortion and no focus shift with the Zeiss 35/2 (as well as getting a significantly bulkier lens and losing a stop), and so on.

The problem is that in Internet chatter the weaknesses get blown out of proportion.

benji77

04-04-2012, 00:15

This is my one and only 35mm lens, and I admit that I rarely use it due to its focal range. Its a joy to use, due to its speed and fantastic size.

I doubt I'll sell it off, for its good enough for a 'serious hobbyist' like myself.

http://benaw.zenfolio.com/img/s11/v28/p725063697-3.jpg

http://benaw.zenfolio.com/img/s11/v31/p558030296-3.jpg

jychoe

04-04-2012, 00:34

I have mine being shipped to me right now :) it says I should be getting mine about tomorrow. For a student like me, nokton seems like one of the best options.. seriously... It does not feel cheap when the tiny little thing costs more than my month's rent...

lcpr

04-04-2012, 01:30

raytoei@gmail.com

04-04-2012, 01:39

http://retro2.ms11.net/BSD-006.jpg

on the epson r-d1, wide open

hjbyeo

04-04-2012, 02:01

Wow the boke in the first shot is mental! It's really distracting but I like it.

I am glad you like it. Get 1 quick!

helenhill

08-02-2012, 13:54

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8004/7694647544_c79d09257d_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/helenartemishill/7694647544/)
This Ones for Tom A...couldn't Resist ;) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/helenartemishill/7694647544/) by helenhill_HH (http://www.flickr.com/people/helenartemishill/), on Flickr

helenhill

08-02-2012, 14:32

Big BANG for the Buck...the Nokton Classic
[/URL]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8023/7657285262_da014e8733_b.jpg (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/helenartemishill/7657285262/]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8023/7657285262_da014e8733_b.jpg%20a%20City%20that%20ne ver%20sleeps...%20by%20helenhill_HH,%20on%20Flickr ) a City that never sleeps... (http://www.flickr.com/photos/helenartemishill/7657285262/) by helenhill_HH (http://www.flickr.com/people/helenartemishill/), on Flickr

back alley

08-02-2012, 14:33

helen, do you like the 35 better than the 40 you had?

JayM

08-02-2012, 15:20

Good lens for Fomapan 100. Never was super psyched on it with Tri-X/HP5+ but have been really enjoying it since trying a new film.

gavinlg

08-02-2012, 15:45

Seems to have no more distortion than my Contax 35mm f2 G planar... Bet it's sharper at f2 too.

aleksanderpolo

08-02-2012, 15:48

The Planar is sharper, at all aperture, I tried them side by side. :)

Both suffer from brethens that are more loved. (45/2 and 35/1.2)

pobe

08-21-2012, 03:31

I have sort of changed my mind since posting here... The distortion rarely shows up but when it does I find it quite disturbing.

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7258/7715474708_b87d2c2a95_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/pobe/7715474708/)

Would this picture be better without the distortion? Don't know, but it bugs me like crazy. I know it's easy to correct with software but I wet print my shots (scanning is just for preview and web posting) so I really want straight lines.

I'm going to try a summilux pre-asph for a while and see how that works out. :)

useless generation

08-21-2012, 04:00

i have the SC version and i love the results. I love how the OOF areas are almost similar to a noctilux sometimes. A few recent shots. Tri-X @1600 in Rodinal

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m91qgyTPV31qadajco1_1280.jpg

http://25.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_m91p7h5tyd1qadajco1_r1_1280.jpg

helenhill

08-21-2012, 05:06

Useless Generation: Great Gritty street shots..Love em !

CrisR

08-21-2012, 12:02

one of my favourite lenses!

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8020/7248948126_1d28797095_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/crisrose/7248948126/)
Spuds (http://www.flickr.com/photos/crisrose/7248948126/) by Cris Rose (http://www.flickr.com/people/crisrose/), on Flickr

thegman

08-21-2012, 12:11

The 35mm f/1.4 Nokton was my first RF lens. I thought it was great, and only sold it in a fit of buying/selling. In reality, I had no reason to sell it. Small, fast, sharp enough for me, and very nicely built.

helenhill

08-21-2012, 16:20

Wonderful Cris !
Must Agree...I too very Much like the classic Nokton
http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7258/7504921666_1420408ffb_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/helenartemishill/7504921666/)
You are now my Prisoner...Happy 4th ;) (http://www.flickr.com/photos/helenartemishill/7504921666/) by helenhill_HH (http://www.flickr.com/people/helenartemishill/), on Flickr

helenhill

08-21-2012, 16:22

[/URL]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8290/7812177888_b581fe8e89_b.jpg (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/[url=http://www.flickr.com/photos/helenartemishill/7812177888/]http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8290/7812177888_b581fe8e89_b.jpg%20Untitled%20by%20hele nhill_HH,%20on%20Flickr)

hamish_gill

10-13-2012, 10:46

... favourite lens for my RFs ... so much so ive come here to find something similar in a 50 (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?p=1987065#post1987065)

Hope its ok to post these images is two threads ... thought this a good place for these images ... Taken on the rd1s

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6043/7015121699_98b6648b53_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/hamishgill/7015121699/)
Connie in Boston Tea Party (http://www.flickr.com/photos/hamishgill/7015121699/) by Hamish_Gill (http://www.flickr.com/people/hamishgill/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7129/7664218558_217984fc19_c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/hamishgill/7664218558/)
Connie 1st Bday (http://www.flickr.com/photos/hamishgill/7664218558/) by Hamish_Gill (http://www.flickr.com/people/hamishgill/), on Flickr

CrisR

10-13-2012, 11:08

Since getting my 50/2 Planar, the 35/1.4 feels quite soft indeed wide open, but thusly it feel more like a wider pair for my 50/1.1 Nokton - nice when you want those softer portraits. Still one of my favourite lenses.

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5332/7416705562_9834909511_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/crisrose/7416705562/)
Dunny 2012 Quick Edits / Chibi Shibby (http://www.flickr.com/photos/crisrose/7416705562/) by Cris Rose (http://www.flickr.com/people/crisrose/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7215/7188263878_bd205ec0f2_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/crisrose/7188263878/)
Sweet Smile (http://www.flickr.com/photos/crisrose/7188263878/) by Cris Rose (http://www.flickr.com/people/crisrose/), on Flickr

http://farm8.staticflickr.com/7195/6991136529_3a81a7fe3c_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/crisrose/6991136529/)
Street Ready (http://www.flickr.com/photos/crisrose/6991136529/) by Cris Rose (http://www.flickr.com/people/crisrose/), on Flickr

CrisR

10-13-2012, 11:23

I'm looking at the Biogon 25mm f2.8 atm to get a Planar-like sharpness wide open with a 35mm FOV on my M8. I love the sharpness.

However, my 35/1.4 and 50/1.1 Noktons are a soft, smooth, bokeh-tastic duo that are awesome for the look they give, when wanted - stop down to f5.6 or f8 and the 35mm sharpens up beautifully!

Everyone has a look they go for, i feel lucky that i can turn to different primes for their own strengths :)

RedLion

10-13-2012, 19:04

Nokton 35mm F1.4:
Distortion
Horrible Bokeh
Focus shift.

Nokton 35mm F1.2
Minimal distortion
Great Bokeh
No focus shift.

crispy12

10-13-2012, 19:45

The distortion can be very obvious, I never noticed it till someone pointed it out and now I see it all the time. But for the price and speed, can't complain! It's also very tiny which I like a lot.

It's my most used lens on the M8. 2nd most used on my M6 after 50 1.5.

Tom A

10-13-2012, 20:46

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8468/8084147780_c2e45c6b4d_c.jpg

What barrel distorsion? Nokton 35f1.4 SC on a MP.

Tom A

10-13-2012, 20:52

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8183/8084147520_966a98c1a9_c.jpg

Another shot with the Nokton 35f1.4 SC. This time stopped down to f16.Slight curve on the left hand side - but certainly not disturbingly so. It is one of the best 35's that I have (and I have many - including Zeiss/Leica/Canon/Nikon) - it does exactly what it is supposed to do - work in just about any light condition, no flare, sharp and compact.

sparrow6224

10-13-2012, 21:06

I'm with Tom. I use the 35/1.4 SC constantly and I ain't never seen no distortion. Also, bokeh? I'm not one who believes bokeh is all that important most of the time (jangly OOF patches of light or distinct light sources are to be watched out for, but otherwise, F8 and be there baby....) Anyway here's some 35/1.4 bokeh; I'm no connoisseur of this stuff so instruct me what's so bad about it? Obviously second is more problematic than the first, but it don't bother me none...)

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5112/5862175755_f9b7a1e133_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/commodiusvicus/5862175755/)
white bokeh (http://www.flickr.com/photos/commodiusvicus/5862175755/) by balsosnell58mm (http://www.flickr.com/people/commodiusvicus/), on Flickr

and

http://farm3.staticflickr.com/2754/5862175551_b71f624e74_z.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/commodiusvicus/5862175551/)
dark lily (http://www.flickr.com/photos/commodiusvicus/5862175551/) by balsosnell58mm (http://www.flickr.com/people/commodiusvicus/), on Flickr

sparrow6224

10-13-2012, 21:08

I guess what I mean about the second, above, is the bokeh problem is more the bad decision of the photographer not the lens's fault. No lens would eradicate that problem, I don't think. But again, I'm willing to take instruction on the matter. Eager, in fact.

shadowgun

10-13-2012, 22:17

No it's not an under-rated lens at all. Just other lenses are over-rated.

hamish_gill

10-13-2012, 22:39

What people don't like about the bokeh from this lens (as I understand it) is its hard edges from point light sources ... Circles with brighter circumferences than centres bascically. You can see it in the photo I posted of my daughter on her birthday. Top left hand corner.
This also has the effect you can see in the same image where large areas of oof can have distracting edginess especially where there are areas of high contrast eg where the curtain goes over the window. A lens with "good" bokeh would soften that transition. Like more people than I expected ... These are the things I like this lens for!
I perhaps would think twice before taking a photo that had a lot of our of focus backlit foliage ... But even then the result might still be pretty, just not conventionally good!
As it goes, I should add that my images have had a touch of pp the lens isn't as "bad" as I have made it look...

Lss

10-13-2012, 23:57

I'm with Tom. I use the 35/1.4 SC constantly and I ain't never seen no distortion.
Well, it's there. This lens gets a bad reputation about it mostly because RF lenses are generally such good performers in terms of having minimal distortion. Many people happily use (SLR) zooms that often behave much worse than the 35/1.4. I see some distortion in Tom's photos, I certainly see it in many of my own, don't see any in yours due to the content.

At one point, being spoiled by some other RF lenses, I was seriously considering replacing this lens with one that doesn't have such heavy distortion. But it doesn't bother me anymore, although I always see it in my own pictures. Now, I would just like to have a few hundred extra to buy another one. This is too good a lens to need to switch between bodies. :cool:

leicashot

10-14-2012, 01:17

Useless Generation: Great Gritty street shots..Love em !

Agreed, love the first one especially

sparrow6224

10-15-2012, 01:38

Useless -- we should all be so useless. I love those shots. Meant to say so earlier.

sparrow6224

10-15-2012, 01:44

Hamish -- yes I can see what you're talking about; even more so in a couple of Cris Rose's pictures. And yet -- I've been looking carefully and critically at photographs since 1980 or so, far longer than I've been trying to take any -- this is not what matters to me aesthetically. I believe I've seen six or seven photographs in my life in which the smoothness of the out-of-focus area was significant enough for me to say that it adds profoundly to the beauty of the photograph. And mazel tov for those occasions. Taking a great or a good photograph does not rely on bokeh quality in my view. On the other hand I'm a stickler for many things in many other aesthetic enterprises so I should merely bow and say nothing to the "bad bokeh" charge.

hamish_gill

10-15-2012, 12:43

There seem to be two factions when it comes to bokeh...
One side have a distaste or anything other than the most smooth silky etc ...
The other just don't find it a factor in image aesthetic...
I am inbetween the two I do think it plays a factor in the quality of a photo, but that part is not only a positive part if it is smooth and "creamy". It can be aesthetically pleasing if its swirly, hard edged, incorrectly coloured ... Whatever!
Aesthetic is aesthetic ... If somthing looks good it looks good... bad, bad.
For the sort of subject matter I shoot I often find an unusual bokeh pleasing! It can be such a large portion of an image then why not worry about it? Why not choose a lens that renders 60%(?) of your image in a way that appeals to you?
But dont get me wrong I'm not saying everyone should have this pov ... I know many photogs who don't think or care for what's not in focus ... After all, it's out of focus so it doesn't matter ... Right?
Different strokes for different folks! I guess that's why threads like this show such polar point of views! Really what it comes down to are different prioities and ultimately different perspectives on aesthetic.
That's how I see it anyway

denizg7

10-15-2012, 13:19

When I first bought it I hated it 3 times in a row..

Not fair to the camera but Adaroma or whatever it's named kept selling me used ones as new... they had 15 specks of dust , saliva marks , grease on the optics and cosmetic condition had some scratches. Went for a used summilux pre asph at 1500 usd , liked it needed a repair , went back to nokton from bh photo loved it.

the thing that changed my mind most was there is a post here where the guy shows a direct comparision between summilux pre asph and nokton 1.4 sc and the bokeh actually seems nicer its at a balcony bw

JayM

10-15-2012, 13:21

Might have just landed a new job! Please keep not liking this lens so I can get mine back for ~400.

Thanks :angel:

MIkhail

10-15-2012, 14:13

Mail Room.

http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc251/mikesht_photo/New107076-2.jpg

Kodak Elite Chrome 100.

MIkhail

10-15-2012, 18:11

http://i215.photobucket.com/albums/cc251/mikesht_photo/New107639.jpg

Golden Hour

smk

10-15-2012, 18:52

I agree it's an interesting lens, but at the end it didn't work for me, couldn't get over the coma it displayed wide open.

Savvas

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5128/5357415149_5b46d6824a.jpg

haempe

10-16-2012, 09:36

I agree it's an interesting lens, but at the end it didn't work for me, couldn't get over the coma it displayed wide open.

Savvas
That is true. The coma is disturbing sometimes.

http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/attachment.php?attachmentid=92863&d=1350408757

Lflex

10-16-2012, 22:25

I agree it's an interesting lens, but at the end it didn't work for me, couldn't get over the coma it displayed wide open.

Which 35/1.4 did you get instead?

smk

10-17-2012, 03:43

Which 35/1.4 did you get instead?

None, for low light I use a 50/1.4 instead. Stunning lens.

helenhill

10-17-2012, 03:48

MIkhail : Wow, the Nokton did Splendid for such difficult Light
Just Lovely & such a Glow

zvos1

11-23-2012, 16:58

Just bought this wonderful lens, all I can say is that it has given my M8 new life.

MIkhail

11-23-2012, 17:34

MIkhail : Wow, the Nokton did Splendid for such difficult Light
Just Lovely & such a Glow

Thank you.
I sold it later for Biogon 35/2.8 ... not even so much because I needed money, but rather because I did not want to fiddle with two 35 lenses, and I am not a collector.
It is wonderful little lens, and can produce nice glow. It does have barrel distortions, that's true. 75% time it did not matter, but for those 25% I got Biogon. It is sharper than Nokton but I found that in many instances where people's faces involved, I don't want this super sharpness and would prefer Nokton. Anyway, I would not hesitate recommending it, with reservations for some barrel distortions.

useless generation

12-10-2012, 15:41

Couple more in color

http://25.media.tumblr.com/76066d7930e70171be3c143fc3d39c86/tumblr_meu9ue0hzS1qadajco1_1280.jpg

http://24.media.tumblr.com/293d8a4eb1cd0596040123e3198b51d7/tumblr_meu95dxyjx1qadajco1_1280.jpg

http://24.media.tumblr.com/11e7219c8307e827e1b0ad272e9ea599/tumblr_meu940PhBt1qadajco1_1280.jpg

http://25.media.tumblr.com/eeda0886598200c2dcdcb232232b28fb/tumblr_meu8zhmvZY1qadajco1_1280.jpg

maggieo

12-10-2012, 17:03

It's easily my most-used lens and it acted as my "fast 50" on my M8. I found it to be a great all-around lens, too. Here's a few favorite shots from it:

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6031/5903466207_9c7deea68b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/5903466207/)
Flying Lantern Launch, July 04, 2011 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/5903466207/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6095/6222322994_bd178a8871_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/6222322994/)
At the Summit, Yellowstone National Park, WY, October 07, 2011 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/6222322994/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4148/5016529886_f623dd132a_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/5016529886/)
Popcorn, September, 2010 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/5016529886/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4081/4927863049_6a46dcaec3_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/4927863049/)
Closing Up, Nouvelle Eve, Omaha, NE, August, 2010 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/4927863049/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

http://farm5.staticflickr.com/4094/4909608810_0601c43a04_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/4909608810/)
Meeting The Tapir, August, 2010 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/4909608810/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6098/6288982647_b10fdb60ae_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/6288982647/)
Kelp Forest, Monterey Bay Aquarium, Monterey, CA, October 13, 2011 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/6288982647/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6060/6292303536_05667fc4e9_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/6292303536/)
Photo Mola mola, Monterey Bay Aquarium, Monterey, CA, October 13, 2011 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/6292303536/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3651/3401912639_730442121b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/3401912639/)
Jar Jar Binks In Carbonite, ILM, San Francisco CA, March, 2009 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/3401912639/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3186/2994419138_b8c91f12bc_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/2994419138/)
Green Boat, November, 2008 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/2994419138/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

CrisR

12-13-2012, 13:31

In very low light, at night, on M8

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8211/8270846556_051ba48b19_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/crisrose/8270846556/)
The Lone Cameraman (http://www.flickr.com/photos/crisrose/8270846556/) by Cris Rose (http://www.flickr.com/people/crisrose/), on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8061/8270847108_82e33af0e0_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/crisrose/8270847108/)
Not Xmas Shopping (http://www.flickr.com/photos/crisrose/8270847108/) by Cris Rose (http://www.flickr.com/people/crisrose/), on Flickr

maggieo

12-22-2012, 09:14

It's the perfect lens for this picture:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8079/8295566735_c9c2989bce_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8295566735/)
A Very Tabby Christmas, December 21, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8295566735/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

Rangefinderfreak

12-22-2012, 09:54

thegman

12-22-2012, 09:57

The Nokton 35mm f/1.4 was my first ever lens. It was fantastic, sharp, tiny, fast, and lovely to use with that little focus tab. I sold it to get a used Summicron, basically because it said "Leica" on it. Really should have just kept the Nokton, I can't think of a bad word to say about it really.

Michalm

12-22-2012, 10:36

Someone swap your Nokton for my Skopar , BTW nice shots Crisr!

Snowbuzz

12-22-2012, 11:32

I use the older 35mm F1.7 Ultron. Really nice lens too.

maggieo

12-22-2012, 12:22

The Ultron is a fantastic lens, maybe even better than anything shy of the 1.2 Nokton. But it's 1-metre minimum focus is a bummer.

Here's some more from the Nokton Classic 35/1.4 MC:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8211/8297288239_f1ac4633ba_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8297288239/)
Bunk Mates, December 21, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8297288239/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8219/8297284069_0cd14eb6de_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8297284069/)
Michael on iPad, December 21, 201 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8297284069/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8219/8298330658_47277e144c_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8298330658/)
Jackson Is a Christmas Cat, December 21, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8298330658/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

Snowbuzz

12-22-2012, 12:31

Yup, that minimal focus distance. I'm glad somebody else likes the lens! I just looove your cats, btw; esp. the tiger-striped one.

maggieo

12-22-2012, 12:37

Yup, that minimal focus distance. I'm glad somebody else likes the lens! I just looove your cats, btw; esp. the tiger-striped one.

Thanks! I've actually got two tiger-stripes, the brown boy and the orange girl.

Tom33

12-22-2012, 13:17

maggieo

12-22-2012, 13:44

Thanks, Tom! The orange cat is my girl, Amelia Pond!

Snowbuzz

12-23-2012, 05:53

I'll kidnap the brown tiger-striped one then :).

fotomeow

12-23-2012, 08:57

My experience with Nokton Classic 35mm 1,4: I traded it against the 35mm :1,2 because of the bulk. I wanted something that fits in the pocket with my M4 rapidwinder body.
About the sharpness etc: I have a priviledge of being in a very good relations with local importer of Voigtländer and could ask them to open the packages of five different noktons. I had my M8 on tripod and have to say: There is a notable difference with the calibration between the 5 lenses. Because of the blow up function of the M8 I coul pick up the best one...
I think Tom´s Nokton Classic was hand picked at the factory. Mine is just as good !
Our leica service guy says, it is relatively simple to adjust the calibration on most of Voigtländer lenses, compared to leitz lenses. They have to be sent to factory...
My experience with Vogtländer is that they are very good, when you get a good one ! A simple test would be to have a printed page positioned slightly in angle. draw a strong line about halfway and focus to that. then with a good loupe or magnification on screen check that the lens focuses dead on, if not... have it fixed !

I've read similar reports, consistent with my own experience. It was a great match for my RD1s, minimum focus was spot on.
However, on my M6, close focus was way off. It takes some practice, but it is possible to get good bokeh after some trial and error
with distance and f values. It did get very good grain results with faster films stepped down. I got the SC version, but it was still s/w
contrasty compared to the 1960s lenses that have that classic low-medium contrast look. I think the characteristics of the 35/1.7 Ultron
beats the Nokton, but the Ultron has reportedly serious maintenance and "falling apart" issues. I ultimately went with a Lux preAsph v2
b/c I could afford it (before the prices skyrocketed) and I for the "glow" which I love.

helenhill

12-26-2012, 03:48

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8211/8309619437_886fe34b0b_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/erichill418/8309619437/)

maggieo

12-29-2012, 14:05

I went for a walk with the M9-P, the 35/1.4 Nokton Classic MC and a circular polarizer today:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8215/8322766861_5ce27a3617_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8322766861/)
Squirrel, Trendwood Park, December 29, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8322766861/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8364/8322764101_1d0758f6e9_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8322764101/)
Ballpark, December 29, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8322764101/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8219/8323821280_a215e2d4ef_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8323821280/)
Mid-Century Modern, December 29, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8323821280/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8076/8323818158_9ce0a60df3_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8323818158/)
Trendwood Park, December 29, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8323818158/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8496/8323812736_755c38a388_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8323812736/)
Trendwood Park, December 29, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8323812736/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

raphaelaaron

12-29-2012, 14:53

I wish I hadn't sold it. :bang:

http://farm6.staticflickr.com/5005/5230091050_b98b282a59_z.jpg

ayazdani

12-31-2012, 06:48

Definitely my go to lens these days. Ergonomics of this lens are excellent. Ultimately, it's the slight imperfections that draw me to this lens though.
M7, Acros in Rodinal 1+50, 35/1.4 SC
http://farm7.staticflickr.com/6084/6052980696_146df3b377_o.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/yazdaniphotography/6052980696/)

stitchohana

12-31-2012, 16:37

my first lens on the M9.

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8501/8293412233_7874d52c7c.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/stitchohana/8293412233/)
Tokyo Dreaming Exhibition (http://www.flickr.com/photos/stitchohana/8293412233/) by stitchohana (http://www.flickr.com/people/stitchohana/), on Flickr

maggieo

01-01-2013, 14:00

Nokton Classic 35/1.4:

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8364/8335691596_518c8820da_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8335691596/)
Bartop Hootenanny, December 29, 2012 (http://www.flickr.com/photos/mediawench/8335691596/) by Maggie Osterberg (http://www.flickr.com/people/mediawench/), on Flickr

Sylvester

01-09-2013, 19:44

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8355/8365603333_bbcaebc7f5_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/osilly/8365603333/)
I just love that shot (http://www.flickr.com/photos/osilly/8365603333/) par ChatSylvestre (http://www.flickr.com/people/osilly/), sur Flickr

Sylvester

01-10-2013, 02:28

Portra 400 @ 1600
http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8514/8366654464_cb61431ceb_b.jpg (http://www.flickr.com/photos/osilly/8366654464/)
Guitarist (http://www.flickr.com/photos/osilly/8366654464/) par ChatSylvestre (http://www.flickr.com/people/osilly/), sur Flickr

SlappyPeterson

01-10-2013, 05:48

http://farm9.staticflickr.com/8233/8364184999_61fa1c79e5_z.jpg

OurManInTangier

01-10-2013, 10:54

useless generation

01-10-2013, 11:36

OurManInTangier

01-10-2013, 11:55

It's a great lens to use. It's small, the focus tab is great. I like the out of focus areas! It's sharp and at 1.4 it looks dreamy. Sure it has a little distortion but nothing that you can't fix in PP. It's made for taking photos not pictures of brick walls.

Thankfully I'm done taking pictures of walls, I was never much good at it:) My Nikon 24-70f2.8 is a great workhorse lens but distortion free it most certainly isn't, but then you can use lens effects to your advantage too. Either way, I'm looking forward to trying it out.

P.S. I also like the picture of the lady (looking like she's) struggling in the wind.

helenhill

01-10-2013, 21:04

Ok you lot, your pictures and general positivity towards this lens have just forced me into buying one. I will find you, all of you, if I'm disappointed.;):D

Just getting back into film having sold up all my digi gear and needed a lens as my only RF lens, Canon 50/1.4, looks like it may have given up on me. Inexplicably excited about this:cool:

Fantastic News... Yay Simon !
you have Fallen to the Siren's Call
I love mine...it has that 35 pre lux 'look' only sharper at 1.4
It's my ONLY lens for my M4 ;)
I can see why in Japan this lens has cult status ...A gem indeed

Please post some of Your Fabulous Work with that Lens here
I'm sure you'll turn some heads and possibly Convert some of the dis believers. :eek:

Vincent.G

01-14-2013, 15:53

Thankfully I'm done taking pictures of walls, I was never much good at it:) My Nikon 24-70f2.8 is a great workhorse lens but distortion free it most certainly isn't, but then you can use lens effects to your advantage too. Either way, I'm looking forward to trying it out.

P.S. I also like the picture of the lady (looking like she's) struggling in the wind.

Simon's work is my FAVOURITE in the RFF gallery.
I am looking forward to seeing what that lil' nokton does in YOUR hands!

BTW this lens is very good.
The 35 lux preasph costs 4-5 times the lil' nokton.
But I don't think the 35 lux preasph is 4-5 times better.
I will be very happy with the 35 nokton classic SC.
It's the lens I sold away foolishly not once... but twice... because it doesn't have "Leica" on it! :bang:
I bought one again! :eek: