Summaron 35 2.8 or Nokton 35 1.4

[rsosa]

I have to make some fast decision as want to save some shipping and taxes expenses.

I own an M4 and Nokton 50 1.1, want a 35 mm

Want the leica look but... am concerned about this aging lenses and their problems...

So im between similarly priced lenses
Summaron 35 2.8 with goggles
Made my mind is not a big hassle having the goggles, and wont try to remove em and grind barrel to show 35 framelines on the M4
Read it is considered a very good performer and perhaps a lens to keep

Nokton 35 1.4
I like the faster and newer factor, but what happens with the looks!!!??
I want to have that Leica look and this lens branded as "classic" is supposed to give creamy dreamy look?

Best bet would be to compare them myself, but in Uruguay you dont have those privileges

Any suggestions?

much appreciated

Rodrigo

 

[leicashot]

I have the Nokton 35/1.2 and Biogon C 35/2.8. The Biogon is possibly the best and most corrected wide angle lens I've used and matches beautifully to the perfect 50/1.4 ASPH so would go well with your 1.1.

The Biogon C is probably the only lens I've never seen a bad review from owners on. It's perfect in every way. At 2.8 I would 'assume' there is no 35mm lens that beats it, from the center to the corners and it improves slightly when stopped down to f/8. Distortion is the lowest you'll find with a nice flat field which is why it's so good to the corners wide open. It's hard top flare too....and did I mention it's sharp and contrasty?!?!

Oh and no focus shift issues at all. So no, I don't recommend either lenses you're looking at, but considering you are looking at the Summaron, the Biogon-C is an obvious recommendation if speed isn't necessary.

Good luck

 

[rsosa]

Thank you for your comments, but the biogon is almost twice priced,
I know u get what u pay for, but this time can't justify the extra $ or I would probably get KIA

 

[mfogiel]

I can only tell you, that the Summaron 2.8 is a spectacular lens for daylight shooting, and mechaniclly it is probably the top of Leica craftmanship.If the glass is clean, this lens will likely outlive you. I would consider getting rid of the goggles, because the lens is small, but quite heavy, and the goggles will only add weight and make it more difficult to focus. The character of the lens is that of very high resolution with moderate to low contrast - great for B&W.
Here are some examples:

As you can see, even on Tri X the resolution is great, and the bokeh is typical old school Leica. I have not used the Nokton 35/1.4, but I know it is a capable and more versatile lens, but with a more modern and anonymous rendering.

 

[Ljós]

Rodrigo,

I have the Summaron f2.8 35 and I can recommend it. I think it would fit your setup because you say you already have the superspeed 1.1 50mm. You could use the Summaron as your walkabout/daytime lens, and bring out the Nokton when the light fades.
I have no personal experiences with how the goggles feel in use (mine is the M2 version), but can tell you with 100% certainty (from the checking up I did before I bought my goggle-less Summaron) that even if you wanted to you cannot (satisfactorily) turn the Summaron into one that can be accurately focused without goggles.
But you say you are cool with using the goggles, so that's good.

I actually made the same choice as you, I could have bought a 35 1.4 Nokton too. For me it was even more leaning towards the Nokton, because it was about my main lens and certainly the speed of 1.4 can be very useful! Still I have no regrets so far. I feel that with a rangefinder body a 2.8 lens (wideangle) allows you to cover a very big share of day and night situations. I sometimes wish for f2... f1.4 is something I would need/use very rarely with a 35mm.

From your posting I get the sense that you would never get rid of the "metaphysical doubt" of maybe having missed out the "legendary" Leica look if you got the Nokton 🙂 I suggest you get the Summaron, as long as the optics are clean. In your home market of Urugay (actually, in any market) I am certain that you could sell the Summaron quickly and without much loss if you should not get along with it.

Oh, to entice you more 🙂 with the goggled Summaron, you can actually focus as close as 0.65m 🙂

Greetings, Ljós

 

[sanmich]

Sorry for the slightly OT but...
How would the goggles work on a .72 body?
bring up the 50mm frame line and reduce the magnification?
kindof having a .58x body??

 

[Vincent.G]

I have to make some fast decision as want to save some shipping and taxes expenses.

I own an M4 and Nokton 50 1.1, want a 35 mm

Want the leica look but... am concerned about this aging lenses and their problems...

So im between similarly priced lenses
Summaron 35 2.8 with goggles
Made my mind is not a big hassle having the goggles, and wont try to remove em and grind barrel to show 35 framelines on the M4
Read it is considered a very good performer and perhaps a lens to keep

Nokton 35 1.4
I like the faster and newer factor, but what happens with the looks!!!??
I want to have that Leica look and this lens branded as "classic" is supposed to give creamy dreamy look?

Best bet would be to compare them myself, but in Uruguay you dont have those privileges

Any suggestions?

much appreciated

Rodrigo

If I have to choose between the two, it will be the nokton 35 f1.4 for its versatility. The s.c. version is great if you do just b&w. Get the LH-6 hood.

There are many versions of summaron f2.8. The m2 version is neater as it does not use goggles. In addition, there are some variations among the m2 versions. Search for HubbL's thread on summaron. Know what you are paying for.

 

[johannielscom]

I'd get the M2 version of the Summaron, not the goggled one.

I own an M3 but do not even consider it for that, too bulky. I'd rather consider the whole frame as 35mm.

My mum uses to say: 'good things come slowly', so jumping into it might not be the best choice.

The Summaron 35/2.8 on an M4 is a great set. Matched very nicely.

 

[John Lawrence]

The Summaron 2.8 is an excellent little lens, beautifully made, and which in the past was very much under rated (I've no idea why though). However, these days prices seem to be on the up and range (here in the UK) from £300 - £500 for the version without goggles.

As to which is best for you, I would say it depends on whether you need the low light capability of the Nokton or not.

John

 

[rsosa]

So basically Summaron has the character, Nokton has the flexibility
Guess im gonna go with character as functionality was covered with the 50 1.1 🙂

Regarding what was said about removing goggles, there seems to be no definitive answer about if the goggles would be removed. Some say totally NO, others say get the M2 version (more expensive), others says, even with goggles, focus wont be accurate but acceptable, and a few little post here and there says, remove them, grind the lens base and 35 framelines will show in finder.

For me, it makes sense to say it will work in every M body as goggles fits and grinding lens material, but then you need to modify a lens, which is somehow a pity

thx everybody for the feedback, much appreciated 🙂

 

[Mister E]

Man get the 35/1.4.

 

[sanmich]

For me, it makes sense to say it will work in every M body as goggles fits and grinding lens material,

I would be very careful about this.
AFAIK the goggles may have a function in the focusing and the lens without them may be off. I think I've seen a thread around here explaining this better than what I just did...

 

[ferider]

Get the Nokton.

Summaron is slow, most have haze, googles are a pain to use.

The Summaron will only work with googles and not focus correctly when they are removed.

 

[FrankS]

If you already have a fast lens, then I'd get the summaron.
If you need a fast 35 and/or you don't like infinity locks, then I'd get the other one.

I've had both summarons, and MUCH prefer the Summaron without goggles due to the added bulk of the goggles.

The answer is definitive: if you remove the goggles from a summaron, the camera's RF is not accurate (except at infinity), but you can focus using the distance scale on the lens.

 

[Mister E]

I would be very careful about this.
AFAIK the goggles may have a function in the focusing and the lens without them may be off. I think I've seen a thread around here explaining this better than what I just did...

The pitch of the focus is set for use with the goggles. There is no way around this so without the goggles you'll have lots of mis focused shots. Get the 35/1.4 CV. It is very small, matches looks with the f/1.1 and will be pleasant.

 

[Frontman]

I love the Summaron, it works well for me in both black and white, and color. I use the non-goggled version on my M4/M6. It is very compact, and without a lens hood I can fit the camera with the lens mounted in a coat pocket.

As others have said, the Summaron is beautifully constructed, and it looks more at home on the front of an M than most other lenses.

You can find a good Summaron for a decent price if you are patient and shop around.

 

[rsosa]

its incredible how no goggles version rise the bar in price
I am more inclined now for the summaron, but its somehow a pity to have the 35 framlines on the M4 and use the goggles

 

[Ljós]

Regarding what was said about removing goggles, there seems to be no definitive answer about if the goggles would be removed. Some say totally NO, others say get the M2 version (more expensive), others says, even with goggles, focus wont be accurate but acceptable, and a few little post here and there says, remove them, grind the lens base and 35 framelines will show in finder.

Rodrigo, FrankS is right, there is a definitive answer. Once you remove the goggles, the only way to "focus" would be by setting the distance on the lens barrel. Fully using a Summaron means either a goggled version WITH goggles (your case), or a Summaron that never came with goggles in the first place (often called "M2-version".
The M2-version is usually more expensive than the goggled version, but this says nothing about the optical qualities of the different versions. It is only about the convenience of not needing goggles.

The advantage of the goggled version is that it can focus down to 0.65m, the M2-version to 0.7m. (There is also a screwmount version, focus only to 1m.)

Greetings, Ljós

 

[John Lawrence]

Get the Nokton.

Summaron is slow, most have haze, googles are a pain to use.

When I was searching for a summaron, all the ones I looked at (and I looked at a fair few) did not have any haze and most were in first rate condition. I didn't think it was a lens that is particularly prone to haze, unlike say early summicrons, and I put the good condition down to the fact that it was often sold as a lens for amateurs (pros using the 35 summicron) and thus didn't have such a hard life.

The biggest problem I had was finding one that met my very, very high standards at a very, very low price! But I did in the end.

John

 

[Erik van Straten]

I can only tell you, that the Summaron 2.8 is a spectacular lens for daylight shooting, and mechaniclly it is probably the top of Leica craftmanship.If the glass is clean, this lens will likely outlive you. I would consider getting rid of the goggles, because the lens is small, but quite heavy, and the goggles will only add weight and make it more difficult to focus. The character of the lens is that of very high resolution with moderate to low contrast - great for B&W.

Marek, you cannot get rid of the goggles. You'll really need them for focusing. The goggles adapt the 50mm frame into a 35mm frame; it was ment for use with the M3, a camera that does not have 35mm frames. When you remove the goggles, focusing will be off.
I do not understand why you call the lens heavy. My M2 version weights only 134 grams.
I do agree that it is a spectacular performer.

Erik.