Lens advice for R-D1 please

D

daveproctor

Member
Local time
10:25 PM
Joined
Sep 13, 2007
Messages
12
I recently got myself an R-D1 and am really delighted with the way it's got me out again taking pictures. So far I've got a decent collection of CV lenses (12mm, 15mm, 28mm and 50mm) but am looking at other possibilities.

I have two options, one is to get a lens which fall between the 28 and 50mm lenses the second is to get a longer lens.

With the first option I'd be really grateful if anyone could give me any experience they may have comparing the 35mm Ultron and the 40mm Nokton in terms of image quality. The Nokton is the better fit between the 28mm and 50mm and is cheaper but I'm not sure how the two compare optically.

It may look like I'm in danger of over-equipping myself with lenses but at some point I'm likely to get a film camera and would use the 35/40 lens as my walk around lens.

On the second point, I'm a bit worried about how easy the 90mm lens is to focus given the short rangefinder on the R-D1 - is this a problem? I've got myself a 135mm viewfinder which should be about right.

Thanks in advance for any advice.

Dave
 
Hey Dave,
I bought a LEICA tele-elmarit 90 2.8 for my RD1 and could not focus it accurately. I have heard from others that they can with no problems, but I could not! Maybe with an eyepiece magnifier you can, but I did not try it. Insteat, I am looking into the CV 75 2.5

I have and used the 40 nokton extensively and can vouch for its great IQ. I have not used the 35 1.7 nor the 35 1.2
 
Why dont you also think about a 35mm Nokton? It is heavy but it is a different type of lense of the ones youve got. It is very nice in low light conditions and NOT because the extra half stop over the 40mm Nokton but because it is very resistant to flare with spot or strong lights. I have both and like them both. The 40mm Nokton for its good quality, size and price. The 35mm Nokton for what I have commented above. Just think it is something different of what youve got.
 
msendin said:
Why dont you also think about a 35mm Nokton? It is heavy but it is a different type of lense of the ones youve got. It is very nice in low light conditions and NOT because the extra half stop over the 40mm Nokton but because it is very resistant to flare with spot or strong lights. I have both and like them both. The 40mm Nokton for its good quality, size and price. The 35mm Nokton for what I have commented above. Just think it is something different of what youve got.
Click to expand...

I'd love to see a little comparison test between these two lenses sometime, as I'm sort of on the fence about choosing one or the other...and would really really like to save about 300 bux (along with some weight and size).
 
I agree with you SteveM. 35mm Nokton is very heavy and rather expensive. 40mm Nokton is just a joy to carry about and it is much cheaper. It is a luxury to have both but I feel they are rather different. The behaviour of the 35mm Nokton is just great at night shots or interiors. Again, it is because of the way it deals with strong spots of light. But to carry it everywhere is sometimes something like a burden.
Tomorrow I will try to post (I have to try how to do it) some example shots of the 35mm Nokton under very low light conditions, which may not say too much. When I go back home (I am afraid on several weeks time) I will try to shoot some same pictures with both and I hope they will help you more and show on images what I am trying to express in not very precise words.
 
For a while the 40mm Nokton was the only lens I kept on the R-D1. Though it is a stop slower, the lens I keep on it now is the 35mm UC Hexanon. Sometimes it gets swapped for the ZM Sonnar, and occasionally for the 90mm Elmarit. I have had no problem focusing the Elmarit on the R-D1.

- John
 
I had the 40 Nokton for some time, and in my case there were problems focusing it on my RD1S. It was fine on my film cameras. I was very impressed with its sharpness and colour rendition, but the wide open bokeh wasn't subtle. Due to the focusing difficulties, I replaced it with a Summicron-C, which is a great cheap lens but not as wide an aperture.

I now have the 35 Nokton, and it's phenomenal. Even wide open it's fairly sharp. It has the sharpness and beauty of colour and tone about its images like the Nokton 40, but it gently blends OOF into mulch in the most delicious way. Many describe this lens as a low light lens, but the truth is that it's a superb general purpose lens if you don't mind the bulk. I love it so much that I have almost forgotten its size. Anyway, if I want small I can always take the Summicron-C.
 
I hadn't really considered the Nokton (mainly due to price!) but from the comments here it loos like it may be the one to go for as it offers something over and above my existing lenses.

Will have to look to sell my beloved GR1V though to fund this but may be worth it!

Thanks everyone who gave their advice

Dave
 
I use a 28mm Biogon on my RD-1 99% of the time.
Its an excellent lens and 42mm with the crop factor, which is equal to the Nokton focal length on a film camera. In general, I'm a 50mm and under photographer, so I think it depends on the focal length your interested in replicating on the RD-1(35mm, 50mm, 55mm) as well as image quality and lens size.
The RD-1 is a great camera, have fun with it!
 
I hope my new flickr account works well. Here are some samples of the 35mm Nokton (one is at a normal cloudy day outsides). Just look at the bulbs at interiors. Both interior photos where shot at limit conditions.
marianosendin
 
I would also suggest looking for a Minolta 40 M-Rokkor. It is the lens that hangs on the front of my RD1 most of the time. Small, light-weight, and produces wonderful images. It has just the right amount (goldilocks) of contrast that works really well for the digital workflow.
 
Definitely read both of Sean Reid's R-D1 lens review articles:

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/rd-1-lens.shtml

http://www.luminous-landscape.com/reviews/lenses/fastlensreview.shtml

Also take a look at Cameraquest's Voigtlander lens chart for the technical specifications of each lens:

http://www.cameraquest.com/voigtlenchart.htm

I own a 35 Ultron and have been very pleased with its quality. Advantageously, the 35 Ultron is less than half the price and weight of the 35 Nokton. The 40 Nokton is smaller and slightly cheaper than the 35 Ultron. The Nokton has the edge on speed at 1.4 vs. 1.7, and matches the R-D1's frame lines better. I chose the 35 Ultron over the 40 Nokton because I have greater use for a 53mm equivalent focal length than the Nokton's 61mm. I also prefer using the Ultron's lens barrel for focusing opposed to the Nokton's focus tab.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom