40mm Nokton 1.4 MC, how sharp is it wide open, I mean really?

R

Ronald_H

Don't call me Ron
Local time
10:05 PM
Joined
Feb 24, 2008
Messages
1,727
This lens would be a great low light carry anywhere combo with my M2.

Yes, I know of the 35mm 1.2 (too big) and 1.4 (not enough difference to the 1.7 I already own). And Leica 'Luxes are too damn expensive.

Sample pics are appreciated. I looked at Flickr and in the gallery here, but couldn't find anything sthat wasn't too small or shot at very long shutter speeds.
 
Not as sharp as I hoped

Not as sharp as I hoped

Typo, sorry,
My 4th generation 35mm Summicron blows it away in sharpness , as does my 50mm Summicron and older 28mm Elmarit m. That was my once and only Voigtlander purchase (I am attracted to the new 15mm though, as I intend to use it at mid f stop anyway, so sharpness should be fine). It mostly sits on my shelf. My 35mm Summicron is used 80% of the time. If you cannot afford the 35mm Summicron, get the 40mm Summicron (same as Nokton price or cheaper) . Buy a Manfroto monopod, that way, f1.4 will not be important anymore.
 
If you are going to photograph hand held the eventual difference in sharpness to other lenses is hardly of any significance.
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
hans voralberg said:
Not the sharpest lens ever, it's ok-ish.

Here are some high-res shot with mine, all are un-sharpened.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hans_voralberg/2556014086/sizes/o/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hans_voralberg/2643861199/sizes/o/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hans_voralberg/3067723681/sizes/o/

http://www.flickr.com/photos/hans_voralberg/2612618209/sizes/o/

Bokeh wise I wouldn't called it harsh, no double-line, just donut shaped highlight that can get really funny looking.
Click to expand...

My guess is that all these images suffer from low shutterspeeds. You should look at samples shot from a tripod.

Here are some test shots from a tripod: fist picture, focus is on the high building, in the third shot focus is on the Gossen lightmeters on the table. These shots are from a SC not the MC, I read that in terms of sharpness these are the same. With an SC you get a more 50-ies look.

http://www.xs4all.nl/~kpmg0072/images/test/cv%2040mm%20I.jpg

http://www.xs4all.nl/~kpmg0072/images/test/cv 40mm I (1).jpg

http://www.xs4all.nl/~kpmg0072/images/test/cv 40mm I (2).jpg
 
Last edited:
I have to disagree with those who indicated it wasn't particularly sharp. I tested the 40 Nokton against both my 50mm Asph Summilux and 35mm Asph Summilux. While I admit the test was unscientific, I used a tripod and shot the exact scene at every stop through f/8 with all three lenses - the Nokton gave the Leicas a run for their money. In fact it performed so well, I decided to sell the 35mm Asph Summilux.

The most I can say (negative) about the 40mm Nokton is I don’t particularly like its oddball 40mm focal length.
 
Two additional notes.

1) The lens is a little longer than 40mm. It didn't work well for me with 35mm M2 framelines.
2) Focusing at .7m is nice, and DOF is really shallow.

144195148_UmwfQ-L.jpg


144208337_ctvcm-O.jpg


There is a lot of hype about it, from the "bokeh-king" admirers among others. But it's a very decent performer if you like the focal length, the best 40 out there, IMO.

Roland.
 
Last edited:
I have the 40M/C, and it's possibly one of the best used M lens deals out there, with useable 1.4 for low light. However, the bokeh is not to my preference. There are 2 issues of the bokeh I don't like, and see it with both the MC and SC 35 and 40 versions: double lining, and exaggeration of backlit highlited circular lights. They don't cream or mush like a cron, lux, or sonnar, they just brighten up and distract. This is all IMHO. Again, probably the best used M lens bargain out there for a standard length 1.4 lens.
 
Well, I do already have a Summicron DR, a monopod and a tripod. I also have a Nikon 50mm f1.4 SLR lens. The Nikon is (too) soft at f1.4.

The 40mm is meant for when I want to take the M2 + one lens. I often find myself in low light situations. I WANT that extra stop, but I don't want to lug around a large lens. For a one lens solution I prefer a 40 over a 35 and a 50.

I'll have a good look at the examples guys, thanks!
 
It may not be the sharpest and it may have some wonky bokeh (which I only noticed when someone told me) but it's my favourite lens.

Here's one at f/1.4 full-res from the M8 - http://www.flickr.com/photos/superkully/3500718629/

If you search for 'cv40/1.4' in my photostream you can see my crappy snaps with this lens. Most will be friends only so let me know your ID.

cheers,
 
Ronald, you say that you "know of" the 35/1.2, but have you ever seen one in real ? It is thinner than my SLR lense Canon 50 1.4, but also 1 cm longer. Have only had it for a short while, but I think I like what I see in image quality. I even like it that much that I think it will soon become my standard lense. In daily use I think you will not find much difference between M2 with 40/1.4 or 35/1.2. In both cases it is not really a pocketable combination. The main issue would be weight (it is heavy) and not size in my opinion....and in the end what really counts is IQ, at least in my book.
 
Peter S said:
The main issue would be weight (it is heavy) and not size in my opinion....and in the end what really counts is IQ, at least in my book.
Click to expand...

IQ includes barrel distortion, and size means viewfinder intrusion in my book :)

Cheers,

Roland.
 
I have a brand new one and I think it is too sharp! I would gladly trade it for a beat up older 50mm if I could. FWIW.
 
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mumcu/2780053003/sizes/l/

To me the nokton is a f2 lens that was stretched to include 1.4. :) I have no scientific proof of this but its sweet spot wide open seems to me to be more around f2 than 1.4. On my MC model 1.4 brings a bit of more light capture to the center of the frame and looses sharpness and color rendition at the same time. I use f1.4 for two reasons: to get extra light at any cost and/or to create a unique look with the vignetting in the corners.
 
Last edited:
kemal_mumcu said:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mumcu/2780053003/sizes/l/

To me the nokton is a f2 lens that was stretched to include 1.4. :) I have no scientific proof of this but its sweet spot wide open seems to me to be more around f2 than 1.4. On my MC model 1.4 brings a bit of more light capture to the center of the frame and looses sharpness and color rendition at the same time. I use f1.4 for two reasons: to get extra light at any cost and/or to create a unique look with the vignetting in the corners.
Click to expand...

Hmm, this is not the first time I have read this. Interesting...
 
I have the SC version for use on the M8. I sold the 35/1.2 simply because of it's bulk - the 40/1.4 is discrete and i'd agree with Kemal that i often prefer its look at F2 than 1.4.
If i need sharpness at 1.4 i shoot with the 50/1.4 ASPH but its a much heavier lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom