just got 35/1.4 SC!!!

lubitel · 07-21-2008

Just got the the 35mm Nokton 1.4 , I am so excited!

can't wait to use it. It's a beautiful little lens, about half the size of 35 Ultron. Easy to focus with a tab and even easier to change f-stops with these little "handles". I hope this will become my go-everywhere 35 lens. Small and fast, what else could I ask for? will post some samples when ready.

back alley · 07-21-2008

congrats, it's a nice lens.

joe

froyd · 07-21-2008

Congratulations... I'm thinking of selling my Ultron and switch to the 35 1.4 SC.

Looking forward to your first roll and impressions.

kshapero · 07-21-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by froyd

Congratulations... I'm thinking of selling my Ultron and switch to the 35 1.4 SC.

Looking forward to your first roll and impressions.

I did just that, only I got the MC. I am on a 2 week vacation and only took one lens. Like a shnuk I only took my C Sonnar and left the CV 35/1.4 behind. Drat!!

Florian1234 · 07-22-2008

I'm thinking about that lens, too. Saving already, since it gives a great bokeh and also good sharpness IMHO.

back alley · 07-21-2008

i have some shots from that lens on my flickr account.

lubitel · 07-21-2008

Your photos look great! Good inspiration for tomorrow, thanks.

kxl · 07-21-2008

Congrats - nice lens. I have one as well, and it's a nice complement to its larger sibling, the 35mm/1.2. Each has its unique character -- I prefer the Nokton on my R-D1S, but I prefer the SC with B&W film.

sockeyed · 07-21-2008

I've had one (SC) for about a month or so, and have really been enjoying it in both BW and colour. It's a very impressive little lens.

This one is taken using an M2 on HP5+. The sun is in the frame, so the flare is understandable (and pretty well controlled, IMO):

A few more here

raid · 07-22-2008

Enjoy this lens; I am content with the lenses that I have. The Summicron 35/2 has to do.

hon910 · 07-25-2008

Hi, I would like to ask.... please comment on the difference between the SC & MC version? Because i am also saving some $$$ to get one but couldn't decide which version?

Thank you in advance

boy_lah · 07-25-2008

Same boat here. I just got my m7 and originally had hoped to pickup a used 35 1.4 but instead bought a 1.2 nokton when one came up. thought why not since i needed something for my wedding this weeding.

My research points me towards the SC better for B&W film, whilst the MC has better flare control but more suitable for colour. So if priority is B&W film - go for SC. For digital or mixed colour/B&W, MC better.

Given the size of the Nokton, I will be curious to see the results people get with the 1.4...i may still get one to replace/complement the Nokton.

regards.

dcsang · 07-25-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by boy_lah

Same boat here. I just got my m7 and originally had hoped to pickup a used 35 1.4 but instead bought a 1.2 nokton when one came up. thought why not since i needed something for my wedding this weeding.

My research points me towards the SC better for B&W film, whilst the MC has better flare control but more suitable for colour. So if priority is B&W film - go for SC. For digital or mixed colour/B&W, MC better.

Given the size of the Nokton, I will be curious to see the results people get with the 1.4...i may still get one to replace/complement the Nokton.

regards.

Having used the Nokton 1.2 on the M7 I can tell you that I certainly miss that lens - any "size" issue is made up for the great speed that the lens gives.

It is, imho, ridiculously sharp wide open and the OOF areas are rendered magically.

As always, YMMV

Cheers,
Dave

Tom A · 07-25-2008

On Flickr there is a site dedicated to the Voigtlander Nokton 35mm f1.4. Lots of examples shot with it.
I have the SC version, but that is because I shoot only bl/w film. The difference is subtle - mainly less blocked shadows.

sockeyed · 07-25-2008

I've used the 40mm f/1.4 SC extensively and picked up the 35mm f/1.4 SC about 6 weeks ago. The SC lenses render very nicely in colour, in my opinion. There's a very nice quality to the colours - vivid without any harshness.

CV 40mm f/1.4 SC:

CV 35mm f/1.4 SC:

deepwhite · 07-28-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by sockeyed

CV 35mm f/1.4 SC:

Hi sockeyed,

Last week my friend showed me his CV 35/1.4 SC shots. He was really disappointed with it, since the photos were all too light in color.

I was so shocked when I saw your color shots with the same lens! Can you tell me what film you used? Of course it might be that my friend was shooting at scenes with not enough light in the first place, but still I think there's something very different.

Thanks in advance.

sockeyed · 07-28-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by deepwhite

Hi sockeyed,

Last week my friend showed me his CV 35/1.4 SC shots. He was really disappointed with it, since the photos were all too light in color.

I was so shocked when I saw your color shots with the same lens! Can you tell me what film you used? Of course it might be that my friend was shooting at scenes with not enough light in the first place, but still I think there's something very different.

Thanks in advance.

These two images were shot on Fuji NPZ (now ProZ 800), rated at ISO500. Your friend should try shooting some more film in different conditions - it seems he might have exposure or development problems.

deepwhite · 07-28-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by sockeyed

These two images were shot on Fuji NPZ (now ProZ 800), rated at ISO500. Your friend should try shooting some more film in different conditions - it seems he might have exposure or development problems.

Thanks. I'll tell him.

shadowfox · 07-25-2008

Half the size of the Ultron and faster, how did they manage this?

What are they "sacrificing"? something has to give.

varjag · 07-28-2008

Quote:

Originally Posted by shadowfox

What are they "sacrificing"? something has to give.

They copied Leitz design this time instead of trying to invent their own again

sockeyed · 07-25-2008

People will probably say "good bokeh" and "lack of distortion". Yet after using these lenses, I really don't see any apparent shortcomings, particularly given the price point. The Ziess Biogon 35mm f/2 will probably perform better, but is 50%+ more expensive, a stop slower and notably larger. The only other option for a 35mm f/1.4 is the Summilux ASPH, at 6-7x the price.

lubitel · 07-27-2008

so.. finally got my first film developed and scanned (kodak CN 400BW). here are some examples shot at 1.4. There certainly is some vignetting at this aperture. I have another 3 rolls that are being developed and I did a little comparison test today with ultron 35, curious to see how they differ at 1.7 or 2.0

lubitel · 07-27-2008

and the traditional shot in the mirror with a new lens

nzeeman · 07-27-2008

i like the look of this lens. it is great on film camreas in my opinion. cant wait to see other rolls...

lubitel · 07-28-2008

My first reaction after seeing the photos was: damn, the corners are pretty dark, wide open, but that seems to also depend on the lighting. Some photos have strong vignetting others only slight (like the selfportrait). Otherwise I really like the lens so far, will have to see the other rolls to see how it performs in other situations. I hope that at 2.0 it is just as good as the Ultron.