steveyork
Well-known
D
Deleted member 65559
Guest
Very nice tonality Steve
steveyork
Well-known
Broken Window by Steve, on FlickrMulti-coated version with yellow filter on Fomapan 100 in HC-110 (1:31)
steveyork
Well-known
Lost Eye Wear by Steve, on FlickrMC version with yellow filter on Fomapan 100 in Fomadon LQR/Vuescan
steveyork
Well-known
steveyork
Well-known
zleica
Established
@steveyork, I really enjoy seeing your images taken with the CV 35/1.4 VII. I also noticed that you have used the 35mm f/2 Ultron Aspherical. Could you please comment on the comparison of the two? Thank you.
Cheers,
Cheers,
steveyork
Well-known
Both are really nice lenses, especially given the price point. The Nokton is full of character with more of a classical look, and the Ultron is clinical and sharp, more of a modern look. The Nokton, however, is sharp enough, and I was only disappointed once, when I used it with Tri-X and Diafine. Both are light weight, small. Build quality of both are better then the Leica Summicrons I once owned (4th and Asph). I prefer the ergonomics of the the Nokton, but that doesn't mean the Ultron is bad in this regard. It just takes some getting used to. Since I'm a bokeh lover the extra stop of speed on the Nokton is fun to use. I see why the pre-asherical Summilux has such a strong following. The crazy, erratic bokeh wide open is a good metaphor for life.
The bokeh of the Ultron is a more modern, smooth transition. I've used the Nokton much more, because the camera dedicated to the Ultron has been sick.Sorry, I'm no expert with optics, and just now getting back into M mount cameras after a long absence. I realize my observations are a bit banal and trite, but we're fortunate to have such choices at relatively affordable prices.
zleica
Established
Steve, thank you so much. This is the information that I am looking for. I really enjoy using the Nokton 35/1.4 II (SC) very much.Both are really nice lenses, especially given the price point. The Nokton is full of character with more of a classical look, and the Ultron is clinical and sharp, more of a modern look. The Nokton, however, is sharp enough, and I was only disappointed once, when I used it with Tri-X and Diafine. Both are light weight, small. Build quality of both are better then the Leica Summicrons I once owned (4th and Asph). I prefer the ergonomics of the the Nokton, but that doesn't mean the Ultron is bad in this regard. It just takes some getting used to. Since I'm a bokeh lover the extra stop of speed on the Nokton is fun to use. I see why the pre-asherical Summilux has such a strong following. The crazy, erratic bokeh wide open is a good metaphor for life.
Sorry, I'm no expert with optics, and just now getting back into M mount cameras after a long absence. I realize my observations are a bit banal and trite, but we're fortunate to have such choices at relatively affordable prices.
Cheers,
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
First images with it. On M-E 220. Camera doesn't show accurate aperture in EXIF, it seems. I selected old Lux.
Sometimes bokeh is fine.
It even adds legendary Leica glow.
Sometimes...
... bokeh happens.
But at least it allows faster speeds. Of shutter.
Sometimes bokeh is fine.
It even adds legendary Leica glow.
Sometimes...
... bokeh happens.
But at least it allows faster speeds. Of shutter.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
@ f1.4
DwF
Well-known
Thanks for sharing these Ko.fe. I've been curious about this lens. I had the 40 f 1.4 many years back and sold it but also know this lens is quite an improvement for digital cameras. Your "bokeh happens" example with all of that harsh lighting would challenge any lens!
David
David
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
Thank you, David.
I took pictures with it for three days now. I like its size. Handling seems better than with Color Skopar 35 II. It is focusing accurately at f1.4. To me it is kind of lomography lens on large apertures and OK lens on small apertures. Usable due to its size and focus tab.
It does glow @f1.4
Classic, I guess, but so far I haven't seen purple fringing.
Summilux 35 1.4 ASPH profile in camera DNG and in LR enabled.
From DNG with 35 1.4 ASPH profile in camera, but turned off in LR.
Lens selfie @f1.4
I took pictures with it for three days now. I like its size. Handling seems better than with Color Skopar 35 II. It is focusing accurately at f1.4. To me it is kind of lomography lens on large apertures and OK lens on small apertures. Usable due to its size and focus tab.
It does glow @f1.4
Classic, I guess, but so far I haven't seen purple fringing.
Summilux 35 1.4 ASPH profile in camera DNG and in LR enabled.
From DNG with 35 1.4 ASPH profile in camera, but turned off in LR.
Lens selfie @f1.4
DwF
Well-known
Interesting KoFe your comment Lomography at large apertures. That is how I thought of the pre-Asph 35m Summilux. I would think this at least at f 1.4 improves on that lens....as much as we love the old Summilux for it's character!
David
David
steveyork
Well-known
Molly's Dopplinger by Steve, on Flickrmulti-coated version with yell filter on Fomapan 100 in Clayton F76. Vuescan
steveyork
Well-known
Street Art #3 by Steve, on FlickrMulti-coated with yellow filter on Fomapan 100 in Clayton F76. Vuescan.
steveyork
Well-known
Street Art #2 by Steve, on FlickrMulti-coated version w/ yellow filter on Foma 100 in Clayton F76. Vuescan.
Ko.Fe.
Lenses 35/21 Gears 46/20
vincentbihler
Member
long term review
long term review
Hi everyone,
I'm back with a personal insight of what I think of that lens. I have been using it since last november.
To make it short, I have to say it is a gorgeous tiny piece of glass.
Mine is the 35mm f1.4 Single Coated vII.
Wide open, it really recals the summilux pre asph, but with a tad more control on flare and veiling. The only thing that disapointed me a bit is the heavy coma at night (look at the christmas lights picture, you'll understand). It can be annoying for night cityscapes where city lights come to the edges of the frame... I hoped this version was improved with coma compared with the v1... But it hasn't and may even be a bit worse. But all other drawbacks of the v1 has been mostly solved with this v2. So it is a winner for me. If you close it down a bit, it becomes seriously perfect. I have nothing to say. Distortion is really only rarely an issue, sharpness is uniform across the frame. Lovely look.
The following pictures are straight out of scanner (Pakon f135+) and have been shot with an M6, HP5, devd in D76 1:1.
All in all, it could be a perfect one lens for everyday use. I would recommend it over the v1 in that case. That said, the v1 can still be very interesting if you already own a good summicron 35 or biogon, because of its flaws that are stronger than on the v2, and creates more character.
long term review
Hi everyone,
I'm back with a personal insight of what I think of that lens. I have been using it since last november.
To make it short, I have to say it is a gorgeous tiny piece of glass.
Mine is the 35mm f1.4 Single Coated vII.
Wide open, it really recals the summilux pre asph, but with a tad more control on flare and veiling. The only thing that disapointed me a bit is the heavy coma at night (look at the christmas lights picture, you'll understand). It can be annoying for night cityscapes where city lights come to the edges of the frame... I hoped this version was improved with coma compared with the v1... But it hasn't and may even be a bit worse. But all other drawbacks of the v1 has been mostly solved with this v2. So it is a winner for me. If you close it down a bit, it becomes seriously perfect. I have nothing to say. Distortion is really only rarely an issue, sharpness is uniform across the frame. Lovely look.
The following pictures are straight out of scanner (Pakon f135+) and have been shot with an M6, HP5, devd in D76 1:1.
All in all, it could be a perfect one lens for everyday use. I would recommend it over the v1 in that case. That said, the v1 can still be very interesting if you already own a good summicron 35 or biogon, because of its flaws that are stronger than on the v2, and creates more character.
