The $8,500 Divide: My Real-World Take on the New Nokton 35mm F1.2 IV vs. the M 35mm Noctilux

[MP Guy]

I just posted a visual review of the Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 Nokton IV on PureRangefinder. With all the hype surrounding the new $9,650 Leica Noctilux, I wanted to see how the "practical" alternative actually holds up.

Everything in the article was shot wide open at f/1.2. I dive into the rendering, the "f/1.4 bokeh myth," and why I think this 300g lens is the smarter everyday carry for M-shooters. I even included a few night samples and close-up tests with the Visoflex 2.

Check out the full gallery and my final thoughts here:Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 Nokton IV vs. Leica 35mm Noctilux: The $8,500 Review.

 

[p.giannakis]

Nokton, summilux, Noctilux, distagon... I envy the people who have access to this sort of gear.

Thank for the write up, it was nice reading it 👍

 

[FrozenInTime]

The Nokton ergonomics seem better - the focus ring grippier and more substantial, with the aperture ring more clearly separated.
I don't like FLE mechanisms - often making for a stiff, lumpy focus action; they don't age well ( 50/1.4 Summilux ASPH a particular example ).

I have used the 40/1.2 since its introduction, and like its rendering. The 35/1.2 IV seems more practical and appealing that the Noctilux ( not just trying to save $$$$ ).

 

[Archiver]

As an owner of the Nokton f1.2 v1 and the Distagon 35, I'm still definitely interested in the Nokton v4. It's a much lighter and more compact lens which would be useful for travel, even though I am perfectly fine with the size and weight of the Distagon. The Distagon has been with me as an everyday lens and on many trips both around town and interstate, and it has never let me down. The new Nokton might be an alternative for that role.

As for the Noctilux, I simply can't justify spending ten times as much for what seems like a very similar lens. But I admit that the Noctilux is visually very attractive.

 

[jbielikowski]

Ergonomics of the new Nokton are wonderful, tested one week ago against the Lux 35 ASPH and I feel a bit of buyer remorse with the latter.

 

[MP Guy]

Anyone who will drop 9500.00 on a lens is not going to be swayed or bothered by my review in anyway. I am just pointing out the case for or against it.

 

[Godfrey]

Isn't it great that we have so many options in high quality lenses these days? 😇

I have a largish kit of M mount lenses and really don't need or want any more. None of mine are perfect, all of them produce results that I like.
That said, I don't have any hyper-fast 35mm lenses ... would I buy the Voigtländer over the Leica?

Eh. I don't know. It depends on what moved me at the moment I wanted to buy another lens. I'm not a fanboy of any brand, my kit is all over the map with respect to brands, and if I'm even considering a $10k lens it means I've got the money and am not concerned about it.

Thanks for the review and comparo, regardless. They both seem to be very nice options despite the price disparity. Maybe someday I'll buy one. 😉

G

 

[JeffS7444]

Too bad that reviewers who claim that the pricier items have a certain "something extra" are careful never to provide side-by-side comparisons, but you know what they say about not biting the hand that provides review samples.

Super-unlikely that I will buy the lens: I did purchase a brand-new 50/1 Nocti (2700 USD in the early aughties!), but this, along with the pre-aspherical Summicron 90/2 were two of my least-favorite Leica lenses, partly due to size and heft. Briefly sampled the current 50/0.95 and felt it was greatly improved over the older optic, and I have every expectation that the new 35/1.2 will likewise be a fine performer. Size doesn't look too bad (though I have yet to see it depicted with lens hood attached)

Besides the price, there's the matter of my current high-speed lenses (58/1.2 Canon FL, 17/1.2 Olympus Zuiko Pro, 24/1.4 Sony G-Master) not being among my most-used. The first has vintage charm, and the latter two are excellent in pretty much every way, but I simply don't do a lot of ultra shallow DoF imagery. In fact, had I known that Sony would release the much smaller 24/2.8G, I think that would have been a better fit for me. Maybe I'll make an exception for LLL's homage to the 50/1.2 Noctilux: Who knows, LLL's offerings could become collectables in their own right.

Nokton? Thanks, but the Voigtlaender lenses which most interest me are the Apo-Lanthars!

 

[PRJ]

I don't see the point in comparing them honestly. People who are going to spend $9500 aren't going to care how good the lens is compared to a Voigtlander, they will just buy it thinking they will have the "best" lens. I'd imagine a lot of people will buy it because it is the most expensive lens.

Personally, I'd never spend that much on a lens so which one is better is a moot point. I have 35s that I am happy with. Great images can be made with practically anything. All the rest is pretty much ego. Keep in mind all the greatest photographers in history didn't have these lenses and it didn't matter to them one bit. They still made it happen.

 

[Godfrey]

I don't see the point in comparing them honestly. People who are going to spend $9500 aren't going to care how good the lens is compared to a Voigtlander, they will just buy it thinking they will have the "best" lens. I'd imagine a lot of people will buy it because it is the most expensive lens.
...

You folks have a dark view of Leica owners. 🤔 Strange for a forum named "RangeFinder Forum." Making such broad generalizations about Leica owners is a bit over the top, even if you're engaging in hyperbole.

Me, personally, if I had $10K to spend on a lens and wanted a 35mm, I'd look at all the options first, decide which one suited me best, and buy that regardless of price. I might buy both of these lenses and then return or sell off the one I liked less. Or I might keep them both.

As I've said, I'm neither a fanboy nor a collector. I use whatever I buy. And while I sometimes buy with some curious reasoning behind my choice, I rarely buy anything pricier than $200 or so without a lot of deliberation. Most of the other photographers I know do the same... I know few who buy something simply to show off how expensive a piece of equipment they bought. They're always much more concerned with the photographs they make, and most descry having to spend so much to get the top notch gear that they'd like...

G

 

[Rayt]

Well it’s the rangefinder forum not the Leica forum. But calling Leica users fanboys is too much for me. I am going to spin a record now. Art Blakey & the Jazz Messengers. You guys continue your proletariat struggle without me.

 

[MP Guy]

In defense of the comparison or Not comparing, sometimes, I think some people just glance or scroll through postings on the net without really reading everything. I understand sometimes there is that Too long Don't Read philosophy and I am guilty of that myself. But, in this case, this is what is stated at the top of the article.

Before we dive into the images, let’s clear the air. In the wake of the Leica 35mm Noctilux announcement, I’ve seen a wave of comments jumping to conclusions without having seen a single side by side comparison. To be absolutely clear, this is not a comparison between the Leica and the Voigtlander. I am not here to declare one better than the other or to crown a winner in a spec sheet war.

Instead, this is a re-evaluation of a modern classic. The Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 Nokton has been a staple in the M mount world for years, and with the release of the Version 4 (IV), it’s time to look at it through a 2026 lens.

The goal of this review is to determine if its current rendering, its signature wide open character, and its mechanical integrity are good enough to play in the same arena as the newest flagship glass from Leica.

In fact, the only thing that can be determined as an absolute fact when comparing these two lenses right now is the price point. One carries a staggering five figure premium the other offers world class performance for a fraction of that.

I am not chasing the red dot or the luxury badge here, I am chasing the image. Every photo in this review was shot wide open at f/1.2 to see if this lens can still hold its own as a bokeh master in the modern era. If you’re here for the bling, you’re in the wrong place. If you’re here for the rendering, let’s begin.

 

[Godfrey]

I read all of that. But what was the point of posing the comparison when, as you say, there's little to be had as yet of anything from the new Leica lens to compare against? And you specifically called out the price differential as if you had a chip on your shoulder about Leica pricing...?

Perhaps it would have been more objective and level to say, 'Hey, Leica just announced a new 35mm f/1.2 super lens ... Since it's not in anyone's hands yet, and it's pretty pricey, why not look at what Voigtländer offers in way of a super fast 35mm f/1.2 now and see what it offers us?"

G

 

[yossi]

Brand name is something hard to understand. Just wondering if a PRC company were to release a 35mm Noctilux clone at $1k, how many would choose them over VC nokton?

I do agree that for those who have deep pocket, they will just get a Noctilux without comparing any specs or review photos. It is more of a social attribute than a photographic tool. (Not seeking argument here, so it is just IMO). Quite a few such rich people in my country are like that and they are not necessary Singaporeans.

 

[Wenge]

I just posted a visual review of the Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 Nokton IV on PureRangefinder. With all the hype surrounding the new $9,650 Leica Noctilux, I wanted to see how the "practical" alternative actually holds up.

Everything in the article was shot wide open at f/1.2. I dive into the rendering, the "f/1.4 bokeh myth," and why I think this 300g lens is the smarter everyday carry for M-shooters. I even included a few night samples and close-up tests with the Visoflex 2.

Check out the full gallery and my final thoughts here:Voigtlander 35mm f/1.2 Nokton IV vs. Leica 35mm Noctilux: The $8,500 Review.

Well done MP Guy and it makes sense. It takes trying many/all lenses on each camera I think to get which one works. $10k for a lens makes no sense given the Voigts, unless someone is a Leica collector. (not me, i use the camera)

I returned a 35/2 Lanthar M recently because my Voigt 28/2 already worked great and was/is better than that on my M8. Traded 35 Lanthar for 50/2 M Lanthar which I think does make sense (diff story).

 

[Ko.Fe.]

This review is good reminder how many good VM lenses are and not expensive.

 

[boojum]

The Nokton ergonomics seem better - the focus ring grippier and more substantial, with the aperture ring more clearly separated.
I don't like FLE mechanisms - often making for a stiff, lumpy focus action; they don't age well ( 50/1.4 Summilux ASPH a particular example ).

I have used the 40/1.2 since its introduction, and like its rendering. The 35/1.2 IV seems more practical and appealing that the Noctilux ( not just trying to save $$$$ ).

This is a bit of a hijack but I am with you on the 40mm CV 1.2. Good color and IQ plus I like it is very similar to a normal human FOV.

More in the thread are the diminishing returns as expense rises. Is the lens capable of justifying ~$10K? I think we are all guilty of some insane spending on our GAS, true. I certainly am. But that is a lot for a lens. I have some really good old lenses that came in way cheaper. That CV 40mm 1.2 is an example. In used I have a very good '57 J8 and an old Amotal. The PRC Elcan is nice as are the two Thypoch 50's which I bought new.

And while I have emptied my wallet on gear a few times I honestly cannot justify it as much other than vanity. I honestly could probably get by just fine on the M240 and about three of the used lenses I have. Is there a 12 Step program for GAS? ;o)

And back to the hijack, this is the old M240 with that CV 40mm 1.2 hanging off the front of it. Good color and IQ. And about all the camera I need to get by on.

M2419899 M240 + CV 40mm f/1.2 ASPH Nokton by West Phalia, on Flickr

​