Nokton 35mm f1.4 ... SC or MC?

[Keith]

Originally Posted by helenhill

My only recommendation is to TRY IT...be it in Borrowing someone's or plain out purchase it
(shoot & develop same day, if Unhappy ,,,return it to store)

I was prejudiced for quite sometime because of internet jibber and the occasional 'bad' photo
but any lens for that matter
can have a bad photos under its belt depending on the circumstance

I recently added the 35 color skopar... love 35's !!!
have not tried it yet but LOVE what I see here on RFf with it ...in particular Simon Saw sunlight & Daan's Photos

Best of Luck in Deciding & Hunting

I have the C sonnar as my M mount 50mm and we all know how good that lens is! I'd like it's 35mm companion to be close.

[Lss]

The 35/1.4 (SC) is my most-used lens, and I want another one just so I don't need to switch the lens between bodies. There is no similar deal in M mount, except perhaps the 40/1.4.

[the_jim]

[IMG] img203 by jamesfischer, on Flickr[/IMG]

This is a totally throw away image but it illustrates what I like about the SC Nokton:

1. At f/5.6 the OOF area is very pleasant (I realize this a so-what point as most lenses look good at 5.6), but here is a good amount of subject separation and the jazziness has disappeared.

2. It's sharp, but not surgical.

3. The mid-tones don't get pushed one way or another. My 35/2 Biogon makes images with very deep blacks and bright whites. This lens rests in the middle and keeps highlights (like those on the side of her face) from being clipped.

If your're thinking about it, pull the trigger. If you don't like the lens, hold on to it for a bit and flip it for more cash. Can't go wrong.

[Jaans]

Originally Posted by the_jim

img203 by jamesfischer, on Flickr

This is a totally throw away image but it illustrates what I like about the SC Nokton:

1. At f/5.6 the OOF area is very pleasant (I realize this a so-what point as most lenses look good at 5.6), but here is a good amount of subject separation and the jazziness has disappeared.

2. It's sharp, but not surgical.

3. The mid-tones don't get pushed one way or another. My 35/2 Biogon makes images with very deep blacks and bright whites. This lens rests in the middle and keeps highlights (like those on the side of her face) from being clipped.

If you're thinking about it, pull the trigger. If you don't like the lens, hold on to it for a bit and flip it for more cash. Can't go wrong.

Concerning point #3 - I couldn't agree more with you. Last year I think it was, I was criticised for saying that the Biogon's inherent contrast is too strong for shooting on a sunny day. This is especially the case when there are zones at the opposite end of the spectrum.

I think that the Biogon is an excellent cloudy day lens - it will deliver good contrast without the need to over develop. However, on a sunny day with strong shadows, I would prefer a 40mm summicron.

[Keith]

There's been some excellent points made about the Nokton in this thread ... and also about the Biogon.

As much as I worry about the OOF of the Nokton 1.4 it's occured to me that if I'm shooting in a situation wide open where that craziness may be a distraction I have the option of using the 1.2 which as we all know is pure cream in this area.

I'm also tending to shoot less wide open these days when I'm in good light and the 1.4 seems excellent at smaller apertures to my eye.

[fotomeow]

i went with the SC over the MC, and was glad that I did. The SC isnt even that "low contrast". Maybe normal contrast by today's modern contrasty lens patterns.
I would characterize the SC more as "medium contrast" and the MC as "higher contrast", which is more consistent with new lenses these days (SLR, sSLR, P&Ss, etc).

i only sold the SC after I had procured a preAsph 35 Lux.

[sanmich]

Originally Posted by Keith

My 1.2 Nokton has plenty of barrel distortion and so do a lot of my zuikos ... it's annoying but correctable in post luckily.

I had an M mount 35mm f2 hexanon a year or so ago that I sold. Bad move ... that was a faultless lens IMO.

That's what I heard, that the 1.2 and 1.4 have comparable distortion...

If you really miss your Hexanon-M, there is one for sale in the classified right now (From Japan)

Now of course, in your place, I would wait a little to see if the "big news" from Zeiss include a fast ZM 35mm.

[crispy12]

I have the MC 35 Nokton and it's my most used lens on my M8 and M6. Very fast and also very compact. Haven't had any problems with flare so far (I use the hood). I can't comment on MC vs SC as I only tried one, but I also post process my images in LR and have a feeling that a simple levels adjustment has a much bigger impact than the lens coating.

[Tom A]

A shot from a couple of weeks ago in Lubeck, Germany. Nokton 35mm f1.4 SC on a MP and with Arista Premium 400. processed in Td 201 (a two bath developer). There is some field distortion, mainly from not holding the camera level - not from any optical flaws.

[Keith]

Originally Posted by Tom A

A shot from a couple of weeks ago in Lubeck, Germany. Nokton 35mm f1.4 SC on a MP and with Arista Premium 400. processed in Td 201 (a two bath developer). There is some field distortion, mainly from not holding the camera level - not from any optical flaws.

Nice Tom ... did you chooose the SC for a specific reason?

(I've already been to the bartender's site and worked out which button to click on ... but which lens?)

[Keith]

Originally Posted by patrickjames

Keith, I rarely ever get involved in these threads, but I am wondering why you don't just use the Summaron? Are you itching to get another lens?

I have been using a Biogon for the last few years and it is an amazing lens if you are thinking about one, but recently I explored getting a Nokton since it is smaller and I was thinking- how much quality would I realistically give up? After all it is a modern lens. After looking, the answer is a lot. The Nokton is a dog. I really can't see anything to like about it. Just look at the flare examples above. Some people might call that character but I would call it a disaster.

The Summarons are just behind the Biogons and the Summicrons in my book. I think it is one of the best lenses out there and until recently, tremendously undervalued. It might not be sexy, but slap it on your M2 and go make some images. It was made for it.

Hi Patrick,

I have used that Summaron and it is a great lens but at f3.5 it's limiting and I do like slower emulsion films. I have a job at the end of the month where I've decided to use film (tri-X) and my M2 and a 35mm lens. It's over two days in a gallery under dim artificial light so the Summaron certainly wont cut it and my 35 1.2 makes the M2 feel very unbalanced IMO and considering I'm going to have the camera in my hands for a couple of days this is important that I feel very comfortable with it.

I'm glad you feel so strongly about the 1.4 Nokton (being a dog) because I was looking for polarised opinions one way or the other and you provided one.

So I'm back to thinking about the Biogon. Cost doesn't really matter too much because if it comes to the crunch I'll sell the f1.2 Nokton ... after all I haven't used it since I got rid of my M8 nearly two years ago!

[Brian Legge]

So what if the VC is compared at f/2 and on, as many talk about issues while open which are resolved stopping down slightly?

I found a decent deal on a VC 35/1.4 locally and jumped on it. It instantly became my default lens as I loved the small size and speed when I needed it.

I haven't used a ZM lens so I don't have a basis for comparison. I do know that the VC barrel distortion can be noticeable - I have a habit of shooting architectural shots every now an then - but the shots still work. The Biogon f/2 would probably be the next best lens but giving up that much speed when shooting film (particularly here in Seattle where it can be dark much of the year) hurts.

That said, if the Zeiss lens was the same size as the VC and a 1.4, I'd probably pay double the VCs going price for it.

[gavinlg]

Originally Posted by patrickjames

but recently I explored getting a Nokton since it is smaller and I was thinking- how much quality would I realistically give up? After all it is a modern lens. After looking, the answer is a lot. The Nokton is a dog. I really can't see anything to like about it. Just look at the flare examples above. Some people might call that character but I would call it a disaster.

Without wanting to sound too accusatory, have you actually used the lens before? People in this thread are saying that if you close down the lens one stop you can completely avoid the shown flare, and that's still faster than a biogon will be wide open. Secondly, reviews like this really make me wonder how much better the biogon actually is:

http://www.myrightasset.com/35mm%20c...%201/index.htm

For starters, the nokton seems to be slightly softer in the center, but almost matches the biogon in the corners. It seems that at f2 the nokton is at least as smooth as the biogon in out of focus blur, if not smoother sometimes, and the lens is obviously half the price and half the size of the biogon.

[gavinlg]

I'll add this link too as it compares the 1.4 nokton with the f2 asph summicron - at full size I would struggle to tell the difference between the two personally:

http://www.myrightasset.com/35mm%20c...art2/index.htm

I would grab the nokton and treat it as an f1.8-f2 lens unless you really need the extra speed f1.4 provides.

[Lss]

Originally Posted by patrickjames

The Nokton is a dog.

So, my M8 is a dog and my Nokton is a dog. I think I need a leash to replace the strap.

[helenhill]

there is nothing Doggie-esque about the Classic Nokton to my Eye

[helenhill]

Originally Posted by Lss

So, my M8 is a dog and my Nokton is a dog. I think I need a leash to replace the strap.

haha, Quite Funny Lss...Me likes that !

[Keith]

As much as refering to the Nokton as a dog is a little extreme that's Patrick's opinion and he's entitled to it ... no one has to agree! In the time this lens has been available there's been reports of strange flaring, back focus, unusual OOF areas depending on the background and barrel distortion. It may not be a dog but it does have a few fleas!

If I could get a lens that performs like my late serial 35mm f2 Zuiko in M mount I'd be content .... and that was a lot less than a new Nokton! I'm also reminded of how good my ZF Distagon is in 35mm ... no quirks in that lens either!

[gavinlg]

Originally Posted by Keith

I'm also reminded of how good my ZF Distagon is in 35mm ... no quirks in that lens either!

Had a fair bit of distortion in my ZE copy though!

[helenhill]

Originally Posted by Keith

As much as refering to the Nokton as a dog is a little extreme that's Patrick's opinion and he's entitled to it ... no one has to agree!
It may not be a dog but it does have a few fleas!

If I could get a lens that performs like my late serial 35mm f2 Zuiko in M mount I'd be content .... and that was a lot less than a new Nokton! I'm also reminded of how good my ZF Distagon is in 35mm ... no quirks in that lens either!

I Certainly AGREE , One has a right to express One's Opinion...
but Dog is a tad Extreme

I think 'Glass' today is far superior to Most People's shooting capabilities
there also tends to be a Touch of Vanity with Gear and unfortunately Voigtlander
in a lot of Eyes is considered sub quality

Keith: looked at some of your recent posts with the Zuiko glass...Wonderfully Crisp, Beautifully Sharp
Me thinks probably an f2 lens is more what YOU want and You can shoot that at Night easily ...I do with crons

Nough said ...Best to All

[Keith]

Originally Posted by gavinlg

Had a fair bit of distortion in my ZE copy though!

That's weird ... you'd have to wonder how much variation there is from lens to lens.

In the QUT gallery everything is big squares and lots of straight lines ... never had to apply any correction. I did when I was using the 1.2 Nokton on the M8 in there!

[gavinlg]

Originally Posted by Keith

That's weird ... you'd have to wonder how much variation there is from lens to lens.

In the QUT gallery everything is big squares and lots of straight lines ... never had to apply any correction. I did when I was using the 1.2 Nokton on the M8 in there!

I'm embarrassed to say I did a brick wall test when I first got it. Never showed in the real world though, as with most flaws in lenses.

[funkydog]

Originally Posted by Keith

It may not be a dog but it does have a few fleas!

Character! That's what makes it unique. Flawless optical and mechanical performance is .. boring. Like the Toyota that takes me to work. It's there, it works, I use it, I put it away, I appreciate that it's reliable but I don't think about it.

[helenhill]

Oh hey Patrick Hello
I have no ill feelings towards YOU... nor am I Arguing
I only question your term 'Dog' for a lens which seems rather an awkward word & extreme in perception
You Certainly do have a right to your opinion

as for a lens I think the only way One will know is to TRY IT...
I know I have had misconceptions about things
and learn through Trial & Error...in particular with Glass

Yes the summaron is Grand but I find almost EVERY Lens I have shot with is...each lens has its Strengths & Weaknesses
its just whether or Not You want to work with it and learn how to maneveur

i was NOT calling YOU per se a lens snob but using that in terms of a general perception one sees on threads

as for the Lux I must AGREE ...have had Both...a Love ?Hate relationship when using wide open

had both summarons 2.8 & 3.5 ...great lenses...nothing really to complain about except maybe 3.5 at night and the old aperture ring that you have a hard time turning its so TINY... who can complain about the 2.8 probably crisper and more beautiful than the pre asph cron though I am NOT sure its for Keith ...a tad too slow for his indoor needs...probably f2 is the if not more open

as for posting more shots of the nokton I have only a few since I have been bouncing between that & the ver5 cron and a Contax T2
oh well... Best to YOU Patrick - H

[gavinlg]

Patrick I genuinely wasn't trying to be inflammatory, I was just interested as to wether your comments on the lens were based on personal use, or from internet research/what you've seen.