Cv 35/2.5 color skopar or 35/1.4 nokton

Chrisrw · 12-01-2012

Having just received a beautiful yet slow heliar 50/3.5, I am debating trading in my 35/2.5 color skopar for a faster nokton 35/1.4 lens. Are there significant image quality differences between these two 35 lenses that I ought to consider. The fastest lens I have now is my Jupiter 8 @ f/2. Seattle does to lend itself to many sunny days now and I wonder if it's worth a trade in fir the extra stops. Any suggestions would be appreciated. Or a link to a similar discussion, although I couldn't find a satisfactory debate. I want to keep the price down, close to an even trade for the skopar if I can.
Thank you all in advance.

Chrisrw · 12-01-2012

I am also considering using my lenses on a digital 4/3 or Sony Nex in the near future if that makes a difference.

funkydog · 12-01-2012

The grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. Don't give up the 35/2.5 until you've tried the 35/1.4. Or save your shekels until you can afford to keep both lenses and and the Nex. If I didn't already have a digicam, I'd get the Nex before another 35mm lens (fwiw I went down the 35/2.5 and 40/1.4 route).

The question has been asked before but interestingly enough the recommendations were for other lenses not originally under consideration by the OP.
Nokton 35mm 1.4SC or 35mm f/2.5 Color Skopar PII

CV 35/1.4 vs. CV 35/2.5

There's a long W/NW 35/1.4 thread with many samples. Have a look before you commit to the lens.

Bingley · 12-01-2012

There's little to no distortion with Skopar. A debate has raged over distortion on the 35/1.4, and whether it's worse than on other fast 35s.

Two more considerations: are you shooting a film or digital camera where you can adjust the iso setting? And do you need shallow dof for aesthetic reasons?

Benjamin Marks · 12-01-2012

When you need a fast lens, there is no substitute for the speed. You should know that the 35/1.4 does have a little focus shift as you stop down to f:5.6. It is nothing you can't work around, but it is real - I have seen it through an EVF while stopping the lens down. I would also have a look at the Canon RF lenses.

Brian Legge · 12-01-2012

I've found the distortion with the 35/1.5 noticeable. Most of the time its straight lines in backgrounds - or lines that should obviously be straight. Nothing that wrecks the shot but I do need to be aware be careful not to compose in a way that focuses on it.

I usually use it over the 2.5 for speed. I've been tempted to try the 35/2.5 + 35/1.2 route but I often shoot until I run out of light so if the goal was to take only 1 35mm lens with me when I go out... that doesn't work. Maybe I should just stick with 50s when I need speed.

kxl · 12-01-2012

Since your need seems to be low light rather than shallow DOF, I'd say keep the 35/2.5, get the NEX6 and bump up the ISO.

I've owned both and while they are both decent lenses, I preferred the 35/2.5 especially with both film and digital. While I liked the 35/1.4 SC for B&W film, I did not care too much for its image aesthetics with digital. That's my personal opinion - YMMV.

maddoc · 12-01-2012

The Color-Skopar 35/2.5 PII was my first RF lens but I later replaced it with a 35mm Summilux pre-ASPH (which I still have a like). Recently I got the itch to add a 35/2.0 Summicron but since prices are ridiculous I remembered the Color-Skopar and bought one again. It is a fabulous lens, renders similar to my 50 Summicron (vs 4, tabbed) and uses same E39 filters. Also, the Color-Skopar does not show any (noticeable to me ) distortion and is not prone to flare when having strong light sources just outside the frame.

Chrisrw · 12-01-2012

Thank you all for the feedback. Since I am fairly new to film photography and can get carried away with all the different stuff out there, I may keep what I have, shoot as much as I can to get a better sense of how it helps me to achieve what I want out of film. If I find that I need more speed out of a lens, then I'll go from there. I've heard too many great things about the cv color skopar to give it up just yet.

RFluhver · 12-02-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by maddoc

Recently I got the itch to add a 35/2.0 Summicron but since prices are ridiculous..

I really regret not picking up a 35/2 Asph from Mapcamera 18 months ago when the average prices there then was about 180k yen. But anyway, for practical purposes, I don't need it. I also have the 35/2.5 Skopar and that is a truly outstanding lens.

ayazdani · 12-21-2012

I have both lenses and enjoy them equally, but for different reasons.
The 35/2.5 produces higher IQ and microcontrast. It may be a bit soft in the corners, but nothing that most folks would pick up on. It is compact and a great daylight lens. My main gripe with this lens is how easy the aperture ring can be moved. My 35/2.5 focus ring is quite stiff as well.
I've grown to appreciate the 35/1.4 and find myself using this lens 80% of the time. Yes, distortion is noticeable (if you're shooting architecture or brick walls). I find the focus throw and aperture ring stiffness to be just right for me. It's sharp enough and looks quite nice wide open.

jsrockit · 12-21-2012

I've made this trade (skopar for the nokton) a few times... and always go back to the skopar. The nokton shifts too damn much on digital Ms for it to be useful as an all around lens. Too bad, because I want to love it. These days I just use a Leica Summaron 2.8.

Lss · 12-22-2012

Quote:

Originally Posted by jsrockit

The nokton shifts too damn much on digital Ms for it to be useful as an all around lens.

That's exactly how I use it, though.