00ziggi
Member
hey everyone-
so i just bought the Bessa R3A- my first RF camera. and i really dig it... i've got a camera fetish, and this thing fits right in there.
however, i bought the 40/1.4 nokton as i was looking for a good general purpose low-light lens... and i think it's just too wide. those framelines are waaaaaaaay out in the corners of the viewfinder, and i just like to compose a bit tighter.
so i'm looking to buy a good 50mm... hopefully, one that works well in low-lighting situations. anyone have suggestions?
also, i have a dumb newbie question: if i get a 50/2.5, does that mean that you shouldn't stop the lens down past 2.5, ever? as in, 1.4 is now out?
not sure how these things work.http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/images/smilies/confused.gif
thanks!
brent
so i just bought the Bessa R3A- my first RF camera. and i really dig it... i've got a camera fetish, and this thing fits right in there.
however, i bought the 40/1.4 nokton as i was looking for a good general purpose low-light lens... and i think it's just too wide. those framelines are waaaaaaaay out in the corners of the viewfinder, and i just like to compose a bit tighter.
so i'm looking to buy a good 50mm... hopefully, one that works well in low-lighting situations. anyone have suggestions?
also, i have a dumb newbie question: if i get a 50/2.5, does that mean that you shouldn't stop the lens down past 2.5, ever? as in, 1.4 is now out?
not sure how these things work.http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/images/smilies/confused.gif
thanks!
brent
clarence
ダメ
The lens won't let you enlarge the aperture to anything larger than 2.5. It's not a question of should, but could.
There are plenty of fast 50mm lenses available. 2.5 is relatively slow. 1.0 - 2.0 would be generally considered fast lenses. The most affordable modern fast lenses would be the Cosina-Voigtlander ones. Modern Leitz lenses are significantly more expensive at up to 6 times the price of the CV ones. The difference lies in superficial build quality and lens characteristics, which should not be confused with lens performance. Every lens has its idiosyncrasies, and if you, like me, are not yet good enough to tell them apart from their signatures, then price would probably be the most important consideration.
Clarence
There are plenty of fast 50mm lenses available. 2.5 is relatively slow. 1.0 - 2.0 would be generally considered fast lenses. The most affordable modern fast lenses would be the Cosina-Voigtlander ones. Modern Leitz lenses are significantly more expensive at up to 6 times the price of the CV ones. The difference lies in superficial build quality and lens characteristics, which should not be confused with lens performance. Every lens has its idiosyncrasies, and if you, like me, are not yet good enough to tell them apart from their signatures, then price would probably be the most important consideration.
Clarence
R
Richard Black
Guest
50's
50's
I have several 50's. The FSU, former Soviet Union, lenses are the Jupiter 8 f2,
Jupiter 3 f1.5, and Industar I-50 f3.5. I like them all but each has its distracters. The Jupiter 3 is the fastest but it can be a bit soft at 1.5. The Jupiter 8 at f2 is a bit sharper. I've hear great things about the Nokton 1.5 by Cosina Voigtlander. But I must advise these lenses required an adapter to fit your camera. The adage here is that the difference is about 1 step forward or backward depending which lens is on the camera. I prefer wider but I do like the Jupiter 8.
50's
I have several 50's. The FSU, former Soviet Union, lenses are the Jupiter 8 f2,
Jupiter 3 f1.5, and Industar I-50 f3.5. I like them all but each has its distracters. The Jupiter 3 is the fastest but it can be a bit soft at 1.5. The Jupiter 8 at f2 is a bit sharper. I've hear great things about the Nokton 1.5 by Cosina Voigtlander. But I must advise these lenses required an adapter to fit your camera. The adage here is that the difference is about 1 step forward or backward depending which lens is on the camera. I prefer wider but I do like the Jupiter 8.
Terao
Kiloran
Best modern 50 in terms of price/performance is the Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.5
The Leica & Zeiss equivalents do a better job but not 3 to 6 times better. If you had all the money in the world then the Leica Noctilux f/1 is the king.
Moving further back in time there are some interesting options in the superfast bracket - Canon 50mm f/1.2 springs to mind (mainly because I own one ) Canon went even faster with an f/0.95 but its expensive and rarely available in Leica mount. There are loads of good f/1.4s that can be had for not much money (once again Canon springs to mind - probably '60s equivalent of the Nokton.
As far as lenses in general go they're rarely at their best wide open (max aperture, smallest f/ number). Closing them down (stopping down) a little really helps with contrast and sharpness. Having said that you can get some interesting results with a lens wide open (and of course sometimes you're forced to use it that way)...
The Leica & Zeiss equivalents do a better job but not 3 to 6 times better. If you had all the money in the world then the Leica Noctilux f/1 is the king.
Moving further back in time there are some interesting options in the superfast bracket - Canon 50mm f/1.2 springs to mind (mainly because I own one
) Canon went even faster with an f/0.95 but its expensive and rarely available in Leica mount. There are loads of good f/1.4s that can be had for not much money (once again Canon springs to mind - probably '60s equivalent of the Nokton.As far as lenses in general go they're rarely at their best wide open (max aperture, smallest f/ number). Closing them down (stopping down) a little really helps with contrast and sharpness. Having said that you can get some interesting results with a lens wide open (and of course sometimes you're forced to use it that way)...
x-ray
Veteran
Terao said:Best modern 50 in terms of price/performance is the Voigtlander Nokton 50mm f/1.5
The Leica & Zeiss equivalents do a better job but not 3 to 6 times better. If you had all the money in the world then the Leica Noctilux f/1 is the king.
Moving further back in time there are some interesting options in the superfast bracket - Canon 50mm f/1.2 springs to mind (mainly because I own one
As far as lenses in general go they're rarely at their best wide open (max aperture, smallest f/ number). Closing them down (stopping down) a little really helps with contrast and sharpness. Having said that you can get some interesting results with a lens wide open (and of course sometimes you're forced to use it that way)...
I would agree that the 50 Nokton 1.5 is one of the best fast 50's on the market. I owned one and loved it but had too mmany 50's. I have the ssph summilux 50 and the 50 Planar and have had each of the 50 Summicrons over the past 39 years and also had the 50 1.2 Noctilux for a few years. In the 70's I worked for a corportaion and used the 50 f1 Noctilux for a year and a half. While the 50 asph summilux and Planar are better they arent's much better and are only better wide open. The difference is so slight that I don't think you or i could see the difference in less than a 24 inch print and only if shot wide open. The summicrons are very good but the asph summilux and planar are my favorites with the planar quickly becoming my favorite due to the smooth tonality and very low flare under tough lighting.
As to Noctilux lenses, I sold the 50 1.2 because it wasn't as good as the summicron as a general purpose lens. The 50 f1 was an improvement but it's just not a great general purpose lens for a number of reasons. Unless you shoot at f1 there's no reason to own it. It's performance is only fair at f1 and probably near impossible to focus accurately on the Bessa's short RF base. For most shooters including myself the 1.4/1.5 lenses are all that's needed and f2 will do most of the time. I shoot under some really difficult lighting and find I rarely shoot at 1.4. Even at 1.4 the DOF is so shallow it's not usable for much of my work.
Save yourself some money and use it on some good seminar instruction and learn how to use your equipment to the fullest. Sometimes money spent on learning is the wisest investment.
ClaremontPhoto
Jon Claremont
Or you could carry on using the 40mm but switch on the 50mm framelines and compose with those.
Later you can review your photos and crop slightly so your finished photo is equivalent to a 50mm.
Later you can review your photos and crop slightly so your finished photo is equivalent to a 50mm.
kshapero
South Florida Man
That is what I do, but another stellar alternative is the CV 50mm f2. You will rarely miss the extra stop. It is a little bit softer and more classic. holds up well at full bore f2 to f16.ClaremontPhoto said:
glynjones
Member
I did exactly the same as you last year, and had exactly the same thoughts. I got a good deal on the Nokton 1.5 and have never looked back. Its a great lens, but it is a lot bigger than the 40mm you have. I'm happy with it as I find it easier to focus, but I did consider the color skopar for its size.
They are screw fit and you'll need an adaptor, but they're easy to come by and I simply leave mine on the lens all the time
Glyn
They are screw fit and you'll need an adaptor, but they're easy to come by and I simply leave mine on the lens all the time
Glyn
BrianPhotog
Well-known
The Nokton (incl. the LTM->M adapter he would need) is cheaper & faster...although the Heliar does render images wonderfulykshapero said:
Terao
Kiloran
The problem I have with my Nokton (50) is that it just isn't very exciting. Its like a really reliable semi-fast family saloon (big Volvo or Audi or something). A jack of all trades...
raid
Dad Photographer
I recently tested about twenty RF 50mm lenses. There are many excellent options for you to consider. Since you are not insisting on any specific make(such as Leica or Zeiss ...), you could choose a lens that balances value with performance.
Some 50mm lenses that are excellent value:
1. The 50/1.5 J-3 after having it inspected and reshimmed by Brian Sweeney is
a very sharp lens even when used at 1.5. A reshimmed J-3 will cost you
about $125. This is not bad for a sharp 50/1.5.
2. The J-8 50mm/2.8 is dirt cheap and an excellent performer.
A clean J-8 costs about $35-$50.
3. One of the best deals for its quality is the Canon 50mm/1.8. (get one)
It costs around $125-$150.
4. The Leica Summitar is an excellent overall performer with charm.
It may cost $150.
5. The Nikkor 50mm/2 is still inexpensive compared to other first class lenses.
It may cost you $175-$225
6. The amazing Canon 50mm/1.2 is available at $300-$350 for super fast
performance with high sharpness when used for general photography
stopped down.
The above lenses are vintage lenses that I favor over the new design lenses. Each photographer may have different preferences. If you prefer a lens with higher contrast, try one of the lenses like CV or Heliar or ....
Raid
Some 50mm lenses that are excellent value:
1. The 50/1.5 J-3 after having it inspected and reshimmed by Brian Sweeney is
a very sharp lens even when used at 1.5. A reshimmed J-3 will cost you
about $125. This is not bad for a sharp 50/1.5.
2. The J-8 50mm/2.8 is dirt cheap and an excellent performer.
A clean J-8 costs about $35-$50.
3. One of the best deals for its quality is the Canon 50mm/1.8. (get one)
It costs around $125-$150.
4. The Leica Summitar is an excellent overall performer with charm.
It may cost $150.
5. The Nikkor 50mm/2 is still inexpensive compared to other first class lenses.
It may cost you $175-$225
6. The amazing Canon 50mm/1.2 is available at $300-$350 for super fast
performance with high sharpness when used for general photography
stopped down.
The above lenses are vintage lenses that I favor over the new design lenses. Each photographer may have different preferences. If you prefer a lens with higher contrast, try one of the lenses like CV or Heliar or ....
Raid
ferider
Veteran
Check out 140117174642.
Hard to beat.
Roland.
Hard to beat.
Roland.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
You've gotten some very good advice here. Raid's list is a great starting point. You could go to a site like flickr.com where folks have tagged their images with the lenses that they used to make them. This can give you a sense of how images look made with each lens. Often subtle differences though cannot be seen at web-resolution. The good news is that for 50's there are literally millions of lenses out there that can be used with your new camera. I own a Nockton and think it is a great lens. A used older Summicron is a great option too. I bought one of these in 1994 and it is still one of my most-used lenses.
And as you've probably figured out, lenses are referred to by their maximum aperture. Each full f-stop lens in twice the amount of light as the one before it. (So f1.5 lets in twice as much light as f2, four times as much light as f4 and so on). These speeds dove-tail nicely with the progression of shutter speeds, each of which lets in approximately twice as much light as the next higher one on the dial. So an f1.5 lens lets you use a higher shutter speed in low light than an f2 lens or f2.5 lens. Also, the smaller the f-stop the greater the depth of focus. At f1.5 the lens will nicely isolate your subject. At f16, a lot of stuff other than that placed at the plane of focus will be sharp.
F1.4 and f1.5 are close enough that the difference is academic; also lens manufacturers often round these numbers so that the marked aperture is often several tenths of stop off of the actual f-stop. Don't sweat it. Differences of more than a third of a stop are hard to perceive in actual use.
Good luck, let us know what you choose and make lots of pictures.
And as you've probably figured out, lenses are referred to by their maximum aperture. Each full f-stop lens in twice the amount of light as the one before it. (So f1.5 lets in twice as much light as f2, four times as much light as f4 and so on). These speeds dove-tail nicely with the progression of shutter speeds, each of which lets in approximately twice as much light as the next higher one on the dial. So an f1.5 lens lets you use a higher shutter speed in low light than an f2 lens or f2.5 lens. Also, the smaller the f-stop the greater the depth of focus. At f1.5 the lens will nicely isolate your subject. At f16, a lot of stuff other than that placed at the plane of focus will be sharp.
F1.4 and f1.5 are close enough that the difference is academic; also lens manufacturers often round these numbers so that the marked aperture is often several tenths of stop off of the actual f-stop. Don't sweat it. Differences of more than a third of a stop are hard to perceive in actual use.
Good luck, let us know what you choose and make lots of pictures.
00ziggi
Member
thanks for all the great advice!
thanks for all the great advice!
this is all very helpful... as i said, i'm just getting started in RF photography, and the volume of technical terms that i need to grasp can get a bit daunting.
thanks everyone for patiently dishing out their experience.
i'll post some photos when i get something decent to come out... http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif
cheers!
brent
thanks for all the great advice!
this is all very helpful... as i said, i'm just getting started in RF photography, and the volume of technical terms that i need to grasp can get a bit daunting.
thanks everyone for patiently dishing out their experience.
i'll post some photos when i get something decent to come out... http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/images/smilies/rolleyes.gif
cheers!
brent
Rafael
Mandlerian
ferider said:
That looks like a fantastic deal! If I didn't already have one...