Heliar Classic 50/2 and Nokton 50/1.5

Heliar Classic 50/2 and Nokton 50/1.5

  • Just keep the Heliar Classic 50/2

    Votes: 65 33.0%

  • Just keep the Nokton 50/1.5

    Votes: 87 44.2%

  • Both of them are necessary

    Votes: 45 22.8%
  • Total voters
    197
M

mdspace

Established
Local time
12:20 AM
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
142
Location
Japan - Mexico
View My Gallery
I have been using the Heliar Classic 50/2 for a year and after read many good reviews about the Nokton 50/1.5, I finally decided to buy one.

The Heliar Classic 50/2 is a beautiful and compact lens M-mount ever, using it in my Bessa R2 and my R-D1s I found that is very high contrast and less flare and the B&W pictures that produce in my opinion are very unique.
The disadvantages of this lens can be that is very annoying to collapse and uncollapse, is very easy to forget to extend it and lose good pictures. Other disadvantage for me is the 39 filter size that is uncommon now making difficult to find easily any new filters of this size.
I just have one year with this lens and I don't have any problems with the lens barrel mechanism by now, but I'm not sure if it's a hard-use lens.

I wish to know any opinion comparing with the Nokton 50/1.5 and any characteristics, advantages and disadvantages about this lens.

Should I sell the Heliar Classic 50/2 because I will not miss it having the Nokton???

Moderator Edit: There are TWO versions of the 50/2 Heliar. The 1st version was a collapsible M mount lens, available in either chrome or black paint. It was sold in the 250th Anniversary Voigtlander kits. The 2nd version is the Nickel 50/2 Heliar which is SCREW mount and NOT collapsible. Both versions have the same optics.
 
Last edited:
I was in the same boat as you - the Heliar went.

Disagree with you on the 39mm filter size, sure you won't find it in the local photo Nikon/Canon shop but look around it's a common RF lens size.
 
This is something luketrash wrote in the thread about the different VC 50mm lenses. It´s the best describtion I read so far about the Heliar Classic:

"I just got the Heliar Classic f2 and it's right up my alley: It's weird, and produces noticibly different images from most other 50mm lenses. It's got that rangefinder lens feeling.

The Nokton f1.5 is obviously a great lens, but looks like something that fell off of a 1970s SLR camera. With this goofy gear aquisition habit of mine, I like the interesting stuff rather than the technically perfect stuff. I have modern SLRs and a digital camera if I want to make cutting sharp photos.

I jumped on the Heliar 50mm f2 when I found it used because I can see the 3d aspect of many photos I've seen made with it. It's definitely sharp enough to use in the day to day world to the degree if you're making blurry photos with it, it's probably your fault, not the lens'. I like the funky aspect of it's almost useless collapse. I mean you gain ~1/4" of space by pushing it in.

I like that many people hate it and compare it to Leica gear always. My goal is to try and make photos that are more interesting than the people that bash the lens make with their 'better' equipment.

So far, my opinion is that the lens has goofy ergonomics for focusing and aperture adjustments. It has a tiny 39mm filter thread size. It has the propensity to sit collapsed while you happily take out of focus images, forgetting to have extended it. It has the ability to make everyone you meet scratch their heads and wonder why you'd ever purchase that over their cheap canon or nikon 50mm f1.8 lenses they have mounted to their digital cameras.

In other words, it's pretty much made for someone like me."

Personally I do like the Heliar Classic very much. The size of the filter thread doesn´t bother me as other rangefinder lenses use this size.

If I were you I would keep this lens.

Thomas
 
I went the opposite direction to you - starting with a Nokton before adding the Heliar. I'm surprised you find the 39mm filter size an issue as, here in Europe at least, they're still common and easy to find. Most of the lenses I own use E39 filters, so I viewed that as a bonus for the Heliar.

You'll find that the two lenses have very different finger prints. The Nokton is a modern lens with a very modern look to it. It gets a lot of praise for its sharpness (although I can't say I found it very special in that department, and certainly nothing like as sharp as the 40mm Nokton).

The Heliar though, rather like the ZM C-Sonnar, is really more of a vintage lens, just made with modern materials. It has a unique look which is somewhere between vintage and modern - it really seems to polarize opinion but I really like it, especially in b&w. My only criticism of the Heliar is that the maximum aperture of the lens (like a lot of the faster CV optics) is really a bit of a stretch. View it as an f2.8 with an extra stop for emergency use. And it's a bit heavy - a rigid version would've been lighter and really no more bulky.

Ultimately I moved the Nokton on and kept the Heliar. The former was just too big and bulky for me and felt too much like an SLR lens bolted to the front of a rangefinder. I was never really grabbed by the look it gave my images either, finding it a bit bland and unremarkable.

Like so much in life though, it'll come down to personal taste. Just give them both a good try and see which one works best for you.
 
kalokeri said:
"I just got the Heliar Classic f2 and it's right up my alley: It's weird, and produces noticibly different images from most other 50mm lenses. It's got that rangefinder lens feeling.

The Nokton f1.5 is obviously a great lens, but looks like something that fell off of a 1970s SLR camera. With this goofy gear aquisition habit of mine, I like the interesting stuff rather than the technically perfect stuff. I have modern SLRs and a digital camera if I want to make cutting sharp photos.

I jumped on the Heliar 50mm f2 when I found it used because I can see the 3d aspect of many photos I've seen made with it. It's definitely sharp enough to use in the day to day world to the degree if you're making blurry photos with it, it's probably your fault, not the lens'. I like the funky aspect of it's almost useless collapse. I mean you gain ~1/4" of space by pushing it in.

I like that many people hate it and compare it to Leica gear always. My goal is to try and make photos that are more interesting than the people that bash the lens make with their 'better' equipment.

So far, my opinion is that the lens has goofy ergonomics for focusing and aperture adjustments. It has a tiny 39mm filter thread size. It has the propensity to sit collapsed while you happily take out of focus images, forgetting to have extended it. It has the ability to make everyone you meet scratch their heads and wonder why you'd ever purchase that over their cheap canon or nikon 50mm f1.8 lenses they have mounted to their digital cameras.

In other words, it's pretty much made for someone like me."
Click to expand...

You're right, I think Luke's called it spot-on. The only thing I'd add is that, even though my main 50mm is a current Summicron (an awesome optic), the Heliar finds a place in my life precisely because it's so different.
 
Concerning the Heliar, I was constantly goofed by the collapse thing, so I sold it and got a ZM C Sonnar 50/1.5. it has its own signature. Very different from my CV 40mm/1.4. I use the Sonnar a lot.
 
The Heliar produces such gorgeous images, I can't imagine ever selling one. Here's my pix taken with it. It's my favorite lens these days.

You know, if you can't be arsed to check if the lens is extended (or are too busy shooting fast), just leave the wee bugger in its extended and locked position; it's not much bigger and the thing is built like a Panzer.

39mm is one of Leica's standard filter sizes. All but one of my lenses (the 35/1.4 Nokton) are 39mm.
 
maggieo said:
The Heliar produces such gorgeous images, I can't imagine ever selling one. Here's my pix taken with it. It's my favorite lens these days.

You know, if you can't be arsed to check if the lens is extended (or are too busy shooting fast), just leave the wee bugger in its extended and locked position; it's not much bigger and the thing is built like a Panzer.

39mm is one of Leica's standard filter sizes. All but one of my lenses (the 35/1.4 Nokton) are 39mm.
Click to expand...

You have a valid point. BTW, what is arsed?
 
kshapero said:
Concerning the Heliar, I was constantly goofed by the collapse thing, so I sold it and got a ZM C Sonnar 50/1.5. it has its own signature. Very different from my CV 40mm/1.4. I use the Sonnar a lot.
Click to expand...

I own a Sonnar too. What differences did you notice between both lenses?
 
mdspace said:
Other disadvantage for me is the 39 filter size that is uncommon now making difficult to find easily any new filters of this size.
Click to expand...

39mm an uncommon filter size? I can't agree. 39mm and 43mm are, beside 46mm, 40.5mm (Contax/russian lenses) and 40mm (some LTM Canon's) the most frequent rangefinder lens filter sizes.

B&W, Heliopan, Leica, Hoya and many other manufacturers offer a wide range of filters in those sizes.

Concerning the comparison Nokton 1.5/50 and Heliar 2/50, the speed might speak for the first, the size and compactness for the second lens. The Heliar also has a nicer bokeh than the Nokton.

Didier
 
kshapero said:
Why is it easier shooting a 35 indoors in relation to a 50? Speed being equal.
Click to expand...

Because you can usually get away with a shutter speed that is twice as long, and often, light is at a premium indoors.

Also the point made above about room to step back, of course.

A 35/1.4 has been my 'standard' lens for a quarter of a century or more.

Cheers,

R.
 
Roger Hicks said:
Because you can usually get away with a shutter speed that is twice as long, and often, light is at a premium indoors.

Also the point made above about room to step back, of course.

A 35/1.4 has been my 'standard' lens for a quarter of a century or more.

Cheers,

R.
Click to expand...

Then my Ultron 35/1.7 will be my new indoor lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom