35/1.2 Nokton on NEX... Anyone?

Sure, I use that combo, but not all the time -- the combo is front-heavy. Also, I prefer the AOV from a 35mm or wider, but that's my personal preference.

So, while I wouldn't buy a 35/1.2 SPECIFICALLY for use with a NEX5, I use the combo if I need f1.2. BTW, I also have a Gorilla Pod and an IR remote for those low light shots.
 
Take this for what it is worth, but I heard from a friend that the current 35/1.2 is discontinued, and a new version is coming this summer.
 
funny you should say that. I sold my CV35 f/1.4 and got the CV35 f/1.2.

Kind of ironic, since when I was looking at the 35's last year it was a toss up since the 1.2 was 2x the size, weight and price. Now that I'm using the 1.2 I realize I should've got the 1.2 in the first place since it has such a unique look - according to ME!

kshapero said:
True but only because it is cheaper and smaller. In terms of quality and visual signature the 35/1.2 has it all over the 35/1.4. Why oh why did I sell mine?😕
Click to expand...
 
berlincontemporary said:
Who has tried the 35/1.2 Nokton on the NEX?
Click to expand...

I dug out the 35/1.2 and mounted it on my NEX3. I had forgotten what a beast this lens is. The lens is quite heavy, the barrel is substantial enough so that you can easily manipulate the lens with your left hand. A smaller lens like the 40/1.4 nokton or the M-Rokkor 40/2 require a little more attention on the controls, whereas the big old 35/1.2 just settles into your hand very conveniently.

Just shooting it at the objects in the living room, the lens produces wonderful images - comparable to the recent 50 cron I compared it to. The 40/1.4 MC nokton is a compact jewel, and seems great until you compare it against the 'cron and the 35/1.2 Nokton, at which point you realize there's a notch above it.

But its heavy - its still way smaller than a real rangefinder, but the camera starts to feel like the old Sony F707 zoom P&S.
 
sychan said:
I dug out the 35/1.2 and mounted it on my NEX3. I had forgotten what a beast this lens is. The lens is quite heavy, the barrel is substantial enough so that you can easily manipulate the lens with your left hand. A smaller lens like the 40/1.4 nokton or the M-Rokkor 40/2 require a little more attention on the controls, whereas the big old 35/1.2 just settles into your hand very conveniently.
Click to expand...

good god, 490 grams, actually heavier than my 1968 canon FL 55 f/1.2!

I don't find any issues with front heavy handling on the nex, as you note, at a certain point you hold the lens, not the body,

The only issue is that the whole thing is heavier.

I mean what camera body is balanced with a nikon 180 ED hanging off it?

With a DSLR, it does not hold naturally, or AS naturally from the lens barrel as the nex--for me.
 
Last edited:
I have the 35 f1.4 but have been thinking about the f1.2. The 1.4 is a lovely little lens but it's got perhaps a bit too much character at times (mad distortion as well).

This is compared to the 28 f2 though, the 28 might give a better fov, i find the 35 on the nex just a little too narrow for indoors.

Has anyone compared the 28 with the 35 f1.2 in terms of overall performance (aperture aside)?

cheers
paul
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

MP Guy
Another 50mm f1 nokton review
Replies
2
Views
186
ellisson
ellisson
R
Wide angle lens on M3?
Replies
19
Views
1K
ellisson
ellisson
T
Nokton 50 1.1 won’t mount on cameras
Replies
12
Views
642
peterm1
peterm1
Ken Ford
Comparing the Voigtlander fast 50s
Replies
15
Views
953
Yokosuka Mike
Yokosuka Mike
D
Petri computor 35
Replies
2
Views
231
DanP
D
Back
Top Bottom