foto_fool
Well-known
I bought the new 35mm/f1.4 Nokton from Stephen a couple of weeks ago and took it out with my other 35's to see if one of them was going up for sale. I went to one of the local Veteran's cemetaries, not because of a morbid fascination with my own moratlity (though lately, true enough) but because it offered a great combination of near-field detail and far-field challenges.
Leica M6 on a tripod. No hoods used. HP5+ because that's what was in the camera. Developed in DDX (9.0 min @ 68°F) and scanned with Plustek Optic 7200 running Silverfast Ai, 16bit-8bit grayscale, no sharpening. PP in Photoshop: 10% adjustment to brightness and contrast only - same for every frame.
Here's the Nokton (left) and Summilux ASPH @ f1.4:
Below is a link to my online album where a different and more challenging scene is shot with all three lenses from f2.0 through f8.0. Note that if you are using a slower connection you probably want too use the slideshow function - the 17Mpx jpg files are about 10Mb each.
http://public.fotki.com/jkellyca/35mm-lens-comparison/
My observations:
1) The Nokton is much softer than the other lenses wide open.
2) The Summilux is sharper near-field and much softer far-field than the other two lenses.
3) The UC Hexanon (LTM with a CV adapter) is the sharpest of the three at wider apertures, but softer at f5.6 and f8.
4) The Hexanon could also be a bit slower than the other two lenses at indicated aperture - the shots with this lens all seem a bit darker than those with the other two.
5) The far-field OOF with the Nokton is pretty nice looking.
6) There is a very small amount of vignetting with the Nokton and the Hexanon at 2.0 but none wth the Summilux.
7) In the Steiner monument series I was shooting right into the sun. Flare? What flare?
Bottom line for me - I'm keeping all three lenses.
I'm hoping some more experienced folks will take a look at these and point out things I missed. Have some fun - download the originals of the Sneed monument and toggle between the Nokton and Summilux (A/B) shots - you can easily see that there are interesting differences in distortion of the image from these two lenses.
Leica M6 on a tripod. No hoods used. HP5+ because that's what was in the camera. Developed in DDX (9.0 min @ 68°F) and scanned with Plustek Optic 7200 running Silverfast Ai, 16bit-8bit grayscale, no sharpening. PP in Photoshop: 10% adjustment to brightness and contrast only - same for every frame.
Here's the Nokton (left) and Summilux ASPH @ f1.4:


Below is a link to my online album where a different and more challenging scene is shot with all three lenses from f2.0 through f8.0. Note that if you are using a slower connection you probably want too use the slideshow function - the 17Mpx jpg files are about 10Mb each.
http://public.fotki.com/jkellyca/35mm-lens-comparison/
My observations:
1) The Nokton is much softer than the other lenses wide open.
2) The Summilux is sharper near-field and much softer far-field than the other two lenses.
3) The UC Hexanon (LTM with a CV adapter) is the sharpest of the three at wider apertures, but softer at f5.6 and f8.
4) The Hexanon could also be a bit slower than the other two lenses at indicated aperture - the shots with this lens all seem a bit darker than those with the other two.
5) The far-field OOF with the Nokton is pretty nice looking.
6) There is a very small amount of vignetting with the Nokton and the Hexanon at 2.0 but none wth the Summilux.
7) In the Steiner monument series I was shooting right into the sun. Flare? What flare?
Bottom line for me - I'm keeping all three lenses.
I'm hoping some more experienced folks will take a look at these and point out things I missed. Have some fun - download the originals of the Sneed monument and toggle between the Nokton and Summilux (A/B) shots - you can easily see that there are interesting differences in distortion of the image from these two lenses.
Last edited: