Nokton 40/1.4 vs Summicron-C 40/2

[dmchadderton]

Sorry if you've read this before on one of the other forums, but I thought I'd ask a slightly wider audience ...

Has anyone got any experience with the lenses above? I have a nice Nokton 40/1.4MC which I have altered to default to the 35mm vf frameline, but have been offered (not immediately accessible for testing though) a very nice example of a Summicron-C 40/2 for 260ukp.

The 'cron 40/2 looks a perfect match for my M7 and could be an ideal standard lens for me (seems very small too).

Thoughts (and/or examples) anyone?

__
Dave

[jja]

Can't help you with your question, but if you check the classifieds, Benjamin Marks is selling a 40/2 Summicron for $260, U.S.

[Brian Sweeney]

I do not have a Nokton. The Summicron 40mm F2 is very sharp, and small. I use it on the CL and on the M3. If you do buy a Summicron we at RFF will look forward to a "Shoot-Out" between the two. The question has been asked many times, but not answered by someone who has both.

And the one for sale here is a very good price. Consider it, or use it as leverage against the offer made to you.

[richard_l]

I've heard that the Nocton is not only bigger, faster, newer, and better for impressing the chicks, but it also has better resolution and contrast than the Cron. I ain't got neither, but I do use the Rokkor version of the Cron as the standard lens on my M3. So far it just seems like a 40mm version of my 50mm Cron (latest version), but I don't have the test equipment to prove its inferiority. I just take pictures with it, and they look damn good.

[Beniliam]

Perhaps my opinion is only anecdotal. I dont use the Cron, but when I travel to Barcelona, Taffer, let to me prove his Cron. Im astonished when I saw the large of the focus route . Make me slow to focus quickly. My Elmar is very smooth, but the Cron, was a bit hard to move.

I see too, like Richard, some post of the Cron Vs Nokton, but in the Epson RD1, and for my eyes, the Nokton is better in all, except maybe the bokeh in 1.4 - 2 that is a bit harsh. Remember that the APS-C sensor is different to the film, and probabbly the results are differents.

[Frank Granovski]

Rapidwinder Tom told me the Nokton 40/1.4 is an excellent lens. I have the 'cron-c and find it to be a fantastic lens. Many shooters also swear that the Minolta 40mm F2 is just as good or better than the Leica. :bang:

[furcafe]

FWIW, I don't have the Summicron, but do have the 40/2 M-Rokkor (version for the Minolta CLE) & the 40/1.4 Nokton (multi-coated version). Personally, I don't find the M-Rokkor/Summicron to be *significantly* smaller/lighter than the Nokton, but that's just my own perception. As to performance, I think the Nokton is @ least as good as the M-Rokkor @ f/2 (probably better because of its more recent design & materials) & has the advantage of f/1.4. I know that other users have complained about the Nokton's boke, but I don't find it to be unpleasant @ all, although the M-Rokkor's boke is very smooth.

Some of my shots using these lenses (currently biased in # towards the Nokton, as it's newer & I haven't uploaded much before late-2003 to Flickr):

Rokkor: http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/minolta402mrokkorc198083/

Nokton: http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/cosinavoigtlander4014nokton/

I don't know whether there is any significant optical difference between the M-Rokkor & the Summicron. Per jja's post, I think 260 UK pounds for the Summicron is on the high side.

[FrankS]

I think 260 UK pounds for the Summicron is on the high side.

Way high. $260USD is more like it. There's one selling here currently for that much.

[ywenz]

Rokkor: http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/minolta402mrokkorc198083/

Nokton: http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/cosinavoigtlander4014nokton/



maybe the Rokkor owner is just an inferior photographer compared to Nokton guy, because the Noktons look much better.. albeit, pixel peeping at these resolutions is fairly pointless(pun get it?)

[richard_l]

I don't know whether there is any significant optical difference between the M-Rokkor & the Summicron.There is no optical difference whatsoever between the two except that the Rokkor is multicoated.

[furcafe]

Yes, I have learned a few things since I bought the M-Rokkor many years ago . . .

maybe the Rokkor owner is just an inferior photographer compared to Nokton guy, because the Noktons look much better.. albeit, pixel peeping at these resolutions is fairly pointless(pun get it?)

[Benjamin Marks]

After my sale, I will have a 40/1.4 and a 40/2, I'd be happy to post some compart-pictures, if someone will e-mail me a reminder. FWIW, I have found them both to be capable lenses. I think the 40 Summicron is generally underrated by Leica enthusiasts and is a GREAT way to play with a quality piece of glass for not too much money. I won't be parting with my other one. :)

[Beniliam]

Yes, I have learned a few things since I bought the M-Rokkor many years ago . . .

This is the important thing Furcafe. Learn, learn, and be conscious of your evolution ;)

[Palaeoboy]

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2004/12/03/466.html

As mentioned on Photnet to Don here is a comparison that other on this forum may like to see as well. It compares both single and multicoated Noktons and the Summicron and CLE Rokkors. Its in Japanese but you can easily figure out which pics go with what lens. Pay particular attention to the temple shots with the big red lantern out front. Check the roof tiles the writing on the oblisk on the left and the chicken wire round the statues in the middle. Its clear from f2 to 4 that the Nokton is the sharper lens on all counts. I have four M mount 40mm lenses but not the SC Nokton. I have the 2 Rokkors, Summicron and MC Nokton and my comparisons reveal the same as this Japanese test. Some do always say that the CLE Rokkor and the Summircon yield identical results but as revealed in the Japanese test the Rokkor shots are always warmer than the Summicrons. All are great lenses but the Nokton is on top optically. That being said I find myself using the Summicron more often due to its smaller size and that the Nokton can be too high in contrast to my liking sometimes. Maybe the SC version Nokton may be in order.

[Huck Finn]

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2004/12/03/466.html

I find myself using the Summicron more often due to its smaller size.

Could you elaborate on this comment Palaeoboy. I have considered the Nokton specifically because of its compact size. At 29.7 mm, I believe that it is even shorter than the Summicron. Of course, I may be wrong.

I know that the Nokton is a much wider lens (55 mm) than the Summicron. I s this what your are referring to & how does this affect handling/ergonomics. Or are you referring to issues of size relative to the hood?

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks,
Huck

[Palaeoboy]

Hi Huck.

The Summicron-C is only 23.5mm long. I think that makes it the smallest of all Summicrons(?). So its smaller in all dimensions than the Nokton including weight. The Summicon has a flush aperture ring and the front tapers slightly from the the rear,while the Nokton with is larger glass has a flared aperture ring make it noticably larger and more visible in the viewfinder. Where the full compactness comes in if you want to take hood with you. The Summicon has a unique flat clip on lens cap that clips into the rubber hood. This hood and cap together are as thick as the Noktons lens cap is alone. If you want to take a hood for the Nokton its a much larger vented job. Its is a great hood but it does make the lens considerably larger if you choose to use it. The odd series 5.5 filters have a secondary advantage (although alot of people hate them) is that if you want to add a permanent UV filter the size doesnt increase at all, its contained within the hood. Add one to the Nokton and its becomes thicker again. Since my main M Mount cameras are CL's and CLE's the Nokton makes them alot chunkier when you have one mounted. (The CL looks quite mean with a Nokton mounted like it really means business! LOL) One thing i find is that when the Summicron cap is mounted its really solid like the lens has its own little shield. The Noktons cap feel loose and feels like it could easily be knocked off.

If your choosing between them it could be difficult, I collect 40mm lenses so dont mind owning more than one. If you need 1.4 then there is no other choice and its a good lens to be sure. If you take alot of shots in flarey conditions, again the Nokton. According to the Japanese test posted above the singe coated Nokton flares less than the Multicoated Rokkor. So its not all in the coatings! If you want the sharpest 40 then again its the Nokton. If your using it on a CL and didnt need 1.4 then the Summicron is the way to go as its definately the more compact package. If you can let me know what camera and other lenses you wanted to use it with? That may influence me one way or another as to which to choose in your case.

[Huck Finn]

Thanks, Joel, for such a complete answer! :) I knew that the Summicron was compact, but I didn't realize that it was THAT small. 23.5 mm is impressive. Amazing that the SC flares less than the MC.

I have the Rollei 35 RF with the 40 Sonnar & have been tempted to get the Nokton for times when I need the extra speed. I love the Sonnar; it's a great lens & pretty compact in its own right (28.5 mm without the hood). I don't want to replace it, but the Nokton has been tempting. I may start my own little 40 mm collection. ;)

In terms of other lenses, I have the 50 Summicron, CV 75 Color-Heliar, & the CV 28 Color-Skopar. I've been lusting for the ZI for the past year & may add a lens - prabably the 35 Biogon - when I pick that up, so I have to pace myself.

Huck

[Gabriel M.A.]

These may help you too; although the Photo.net forums (forae?) are caustic, you may find *some* answers informative:

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00BuC7

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00BMBM

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00AOXk

[Palaeoboy]

Huck, THe SC flares less than the Multicoated CLE Rokkor in case you misread what I wrote. The MC Nokton flares least of them all.

If you have the Sonnar already I would go with the Nokton MC. It will also fit well on the size of the Rollei RF. If you decide to sell the sonnar let me know. I only have that lens in a Rollei 35s would be nice to have an M/LTM version as well.

[Huck Finn]

Yes, Joel, I did misread your post . . . ah, the woes of speed reading. Thanks for pointing out the error of my ways. I guess that modern coatings - even on the SC - are better than those that were used 25 years ago. Funny, but CV coatings are one of the things that Erwin said could be improved on their lenses in general.

I did offer the Rollei kit for sale to help finance the ZI but had no takers. (See classifieds.) I probably priced it too high - which shows, I guess, that I didn't really want to sell it. I'd hate to part with the Sonnar & would only sell it with the camera or if the camera sold separately, so that I no longer had 40 framelines. The 35RF with Sonnar & CV 75/2.5 really makes a nice compact travel kit.

Thanks again for your tips.

Huck

[Huck Finn]

Joel, I should ask you whether you have any comments on the much discussed bokeh qualities of the 40 Nokton.

Huck

[Huck Finn]

Bump. - Huck Finn

[Palaeoboy]

Oh Dear the big "B" question. I was asked this question before on another forum and was almost linched for answering! Bokeh is a very subjective thing. Do I believe the bokeh is better or worse on the Nokton? No neither is better or worse but they are different. I often see bad Nokton bokeh shots taken at 1.4 generally with some concentrated light source in the back ground. This of course is the bad bokeh receipe no matter what lens you used. I will have to put it like this, yes they do have a different character to their bokeh but neither is better or worse. I think this is not a case of Leica vs Voigtlander bokeh but rather older lens design vs modern lens design. I think that if the 40mm Summarit in the Minilux went to 1.4 that it would probably have similar character to its bokeh and at f4 I think you would be hard pressed to pick which lens took what picture. Modern lenses are corrected more than older ones. My opinion is that the better corrected and generally sharper modern lenses with emphasis on correcting for aberations in focus may not (to some peoples eyes) have as smooth a transition to out of focus as the earlier lenses with less correction.

I personally find I dont mind the bokeh of either, BUT it does bother me to mix and match lenses of different character when using them together that day. This generally involves multiple sets of lenses. For example if im using the 40mm Summicron I will generally use a 90mm Elmar-C and a Version 3 Elmarit 28 as I find the overall character in these 3 lenses of similar Vintage. If im using the Nokton then I use the 28 f3.5 and 90 f3.5 Voigtlander lenses because their overall character is similar with respect to contrast etc. I dont think it bothers most so I think its one of my pet quirks that I notice when I mix and match lenses of different vintage. Even too extreme sometimes. For example when I first purchased a CLE 40mm Rokkor I noticed that although it has a similar character to the 40mm Summicron it was slightly higher in contrast and has a warmer tone. By chance I was offered a Rokkor 28mm and found it too has a matching warm tone to the Rokkor 40mm. (If you look at that Japanese test you will see that warmer tone I refer too) So that meant a 3rd set DAMN! Im actually scared of getting the 40mm Sonnar in case its slightly different character may force me to get a 4th Zeiss set! Its madness! I have 3 Pelican cases that I move the camera bodies from one set to the next depending on which 40mm I want to use. I think most people arent so compulsive that they can mix and match lenses without nitpicking the way I do. The differences are all very subtle but one you know its there you cant help notice it every time. An eclectic mix of lenses never bothered me before it just deveoped when I started comparing 40mm lenses and I could no longer attribute the character change to different focal lengths. Lesson here is dont start buying the same focal length just because its fun as it has a domino effect!! Overall though, I think that modern Leica, Voightlander and Konica lenses can be mixed without noticible character shifts (Not sure about new Zeiss lenses as I havent tried them) So to, by and large the earlier Leica and Minolta lenses can be mixed as most wouldnt pick the slight contrast/tone changes without incredibly close inspection. In the end the reason I asked you which lenses you had as I consider the other lenses you own important in matching to the 40.

[Huck Finn]

Great story, Joel! :D

I appreciate your point about the Nokton bokeh at f/1.4. Too often I've seen people compare the Nokton & Summicron & refer to the bokeh of each wide open. Well, not a fair comparison. and of course the light source is another major factor. Thanks for pointing out the nuances.

Thanks for the rest of your reply as well. Now that you've sensitized me to the differences in these lens lines, you'll have me running out to but the Rollei 80 Planar to match with my 40 Sonnar in addition to buying the Nokton to go with my 2 CV lenses. And of course when I buy the ZI I'll not only have to buy the 35 as my all-around lens, but I'll have to get a 25 & 85 to go with it . Uh oh, did I say the ZM 85. No way, too rich for my blood. Even the Rollei 80 was too pricey for me - & it's half the cost of the ZM 85. Ugh!

Cheers,
Huck

[Flyfisher Tom]

Joel,

On the off chance you have these shots available ... it would be helpful to see the 40VC versus 40 cron, 40 rokkor all at F2. I agree that bokeh is highly subjective. That said, a comparison of the lenses on the SAME photographic subject at the SAME f-stop would be the easiest way to settle the "B" question in the minds and eyes of the beholder ;-) Thanks

[Beniliam]

Im very interesting in the rendition of this lens at wider apertures. In my mind, have been time with the idea of making a reportage of the night in Madrid. Its very compact lens for 1.4, and its more cheaper than the 35 mm Nokton, that is heavy and big... I belive its great lens, but, my questions are: the aperture 1.4 is sufficient for take photos in the street, hand held, without flash, without tripod, but when high iso sensitive (1600-3200)... or is necesary to buy more faster lens (middle point more the other Nokton...). I dont have a ´good pulse´...

I see many examples at full aperture... Probabbly at 1.4, and 2... is harsh compared the old look of the Leica lens. But its very possible that this was like other member said, for the new corrections of the lens... I like the smooth bokeh, but the lens was only used in bad light situations, is too very important the flare resistance... maybe more... I like the SC version... but... what do you thing.

Dave, Im sorry if I boycott your post, isnt my intention :)

I love the 40 mm perspective... more even that the 50... The majority of my photos was taken by a 50 mm lens, I loved the 50 mm perspective, but... if Leica showed in her cameras the 40 mm framelines, probabbly the thing would be change.

[taffer]

Beni, start drinking coffee and you'll get from 1/2 to 1 extra stop ;)

And there IS one Leica with nice 40mm framelines... and I'm not (CL ! CL ! CL! ) telling which one...

[Beniliam]

Yes Oscar. Its other idea, but I havent got money for one camera and one lens... I need a rapid lens, no other great body... Im not a collector, ojala tambien pudiera! And the CL ´only´ meter hasta 1600

[Frank Granovski]

I can't compare my 40mm 'cron-c's bokeh with those other 2, but I can say that my 'cron's bokeh is magical. I've never seen such nice bokeh coupled with this level of sharpness, though my 45mm Zeiss comes close in terms of bokeh.

Question: will my 'cron-c perform just as well on a Bessa R3A? :confused:

[Beniliam]

will my 'cron-c perform just as well on a Bessa R3A?

Why not Frank... There are people that uses the CL lens in M´s, and the Bessa R3A have M mount. Probably you enjoy more with the composition of the photo, because is very nice the viewfinder of the R3A. And the perform, I dont think that affect in nothing the election of the camera...

[Frank Granovski]

Thanks. I'm ".." (this) close to buying a Bessa. The black one. Some of my CL's shutter speeds don't work right.

[Beniliam]

Yes, the Bessas have at leats guarantee. I prefer one new camera with guarantee that and older "myth" camera without guarantee. Here in Spain, there arent have many repair shops of cameras... And its difficult find one site with good service, not very expensive, and near to home...

[summaron]

Joel & Beniliam,
I shoot at night with (my rff namesake) the 2.8 35mm Summaron & the rigid 50mm Summicron on a M3 and the 40mm 2.8 Sonnar on a Rollei SE at 1/5 or 1/10 sec on 800 Portra and 200 Kodachrome and, mix and match, get pretty good results. The 2.8 Summaron is simply incapable any bad behavior as far as rendering direct lightsources such as out of focus tail lights, traffic signal lights, neon signs. All these old lenses seem capable of very fine rendering of color hues.

I am tempted to leap into the future and buy a 40mm Nokton, but in examples posted on various websites, it seems that background objects look very restless, like a opened pandora's box of odd shapes. A part of me says, but look at Gustav Mahler, what great music he made from all those screaching Witches Sabbath sounds in his symphonies (especially the 3rd). And what freedom you'll have to shoot almost anywhere at all.

So I go back and forth between the subtle but slowish M-version Sonnar and the crisp but slightly rude Nokton.

[Palaeoboy]

Hi Tom, I am compiling some stuff comparing a number of 40mm lenses including some in 70's fixed lens compacts. When I get that all together I will post a link. Im months behind, every time I think Im ontop of it I add another camera/lens and change things around. Take a look at the Japanese comparison of four 40mm lenses there is a whole variety of examples there and various apertures. I posted a link earlier in the thread.

[Biggles]

I have no experience with modern Voigtlander, but I've been dragging a 40mm Summicron around for a couple of months. Just made my first black & white prints of its pictures last night. A few impressions...

The lens is very, very stubby. It has a focusing tab or lever, but no other gripping surface for focusing whatsoever. Not the easiest lens to focus quickly from hands off; one first has to find the damned lever, wherever it may be from the last shot or prise de vue.

On my CL, it's next to perfect for carrying around all day or evening. Whole camera even fits into a café racer jacket pocket, with the lens on it.

As for its optics...

I've mostly shot it at f8 and f11, though I clearly remember a specific picture I took at f5.6, a snap of a friend sitting across a café table. I printed that picture last night. The bokeh is pretty smooth; nothing jarring about it. The real surprise, though, was how crazy-sharp the in-focus areas of that picture turned out. I mean, it's just nuts.

Showed the picture to a camera shop manager at my photo club; he's owned, rented, borrowed or used everything ever made at some point. His words: "That's not sharp. No, that's f###ing sharp."

I'm a fan of Fuji Neopan films, and I really like how this lens and Neopan seem to work together. Simultaneously crisp and warm; imagine a whole-wheat Carr's table water cracker. Tasty pictures.

Summing up: kinda hard to focus quickly, but the pictures you do get will be starting off right.