35mm Comparison: Nokton 1.2, Nokton 1.4 MC, Hexanon 2.0

[nksyoon]

More test shots of the CV 35 Nokton 1.4 MC - shot on Leica M8, handheld, DNG, ISO160, -1/3EV, AWB, Aperture priority, apertures as indicated on test sheets. Converted with Adobe Camera Raw, no sharpening.

(As an aside, doing this test emphasized the handling differences between the lenses in terms of aperture and focusing rings - the 1.2 has the smoothest focus and "solid" feeling aperture stops - not sure how to describe it, when it clicks into place it feels well damped while the 1.4 feels lighter - maybe it's just the difference in mass of the lenses. The 1.4's focusing is tighter than the 1.2, but it's a brand new lens. The Hexanon's aperture ring feels rough compared to the Noktons)

Larger:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3193/2298771968_209edfde8e_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3098/2298772578_594543a2e8_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3135/2298771672_37f9043d68_o.jpg

 

[venchka]

The Hexanon's aperture ring feels rough compared to the Noktons

You need a new Hexanon lens. Is your Hexanon the M-Hexanon or the UC-Hexanon? My UC-Hexanon lens is as smooth as a hot knife through butter.

 

[funkaoshi]

This makes me want to get the Nokton 1.2.

 

[mackigator]

Thanks for this comparison!

 

[rlouzan]

Thanks🙂 at f/1.4 the 35mm Nokton MC is commparable to the 3.5cm Nikkor c F/1.8 😱 (Bokeh-wise), by f/2 the difference between Noktons is gone😀 .

 

[photogdave]

The 1.4 actually looks nicer than the 1.2 at f/2. This just reenforces my desire to go for the 1.4. Thanks for the test!

 

[Hates_]

Thanks for the test. Really interesting to see exactly how they compare side by side.

 

[venchka]

I like my lenses

I like my lenses

Makes me appreciate my Konica 35/2.0 UC-Hexanon and Canon 35/2.8. Both paid for. 😎 😀 🙂

Don't misunderstand. If I spent more time in the dark and didn't have the 35/2.0 I would be all over the new C/V lens.

 

[lorenzo.ferrarini]

To my eyes, the 1.4 looks sharper wide open than the 1.2 at the same aperture, but the latter is more pleasant in its rendition. The usual dilemma? 😕

 

[nksyoon]

You need a new Hexanon lens. Is your Hexanon the M-Hexanon or the UC-Hexanon? My UC-Hexanon lens is as smooth as a hot knife through butter.

It's the M-Hexanon. I bought it new a couple of years and it hasn't been abused so it should be representative. It's not sandpaper rough, just not as smooth as the Nokton 1.2 and just a little grittier (more of a metal on metal feel) than the 1.4.

 

[minoltist7]

I don't like 35/1.4 at /1.4 ( "fish scale" effect)
35/1.2 anh Hexanon show their best rendering at their respective widest settings (1.2 and 2.0)
35/1.4 probably the least liked wide open rendering , but nice at F/2

 

[morgan]

I love my 35/1.2, but it's a heavy beast. I may grab the 1.4 for days when i want a lighter kit. They do look very close, but I like the rendition of the 1.2 better. There are times, when the stars align, that the 1.2 is just pure magic. But I'm pretty impressed with the 1.4.

 

[raid]

Makes me appreciate my Konica 35/2.0 UC-Hexanon and Canon 35/2.8. Both paid for. 😎 😀 🙂

Don't misunderstand. If I spent more time in the dark and didn't have the 35/2.0 I would be all over the new C/V lens.

Wayne,
Have you seen a comparison of the Canon 35/2 with the 35/1.8?

 

[papasnap]

interesting. is it just my eyes, or is the big nokton noticably less contrasty at f1.4 than the little nokton, but vice versa at f2?

nksyoon, thanks for a great comparison by the way, these things usually put me to sleep, but I was interested to see the results in this case!

 

[nksyoon]

I think in terms of contrast, it's Hexanon > Nokton 1.2 > Nokton 1.4.

Only the scene with the buildings in the background shows the Nokton 1.2 being less contrasty than the Nokton 1.4 at 1.4. This may be an exposure variation.

 

[MCTuomey]

i was thinking that there is some exposure variation b/w the shots. for example, the bldg w/foreground shrub shots taken with the hex look a bit underexposed relative to those from the cv lenses. it's not easy to achieve equivalent exposures outdoors, no doubt, but variation does typically skew results from this kind of informal "testing."

anyway, thanks very much for the samples.

 

[venchka]

Strange

Strange

It's the M-Hexanon. I bought it new a couple of years and it hasn't been abused so it should be representative. It's not sandpaper rough, just not as smooth as the Nokton 1.2 and just a little grittier (more of a metal on metal feel) than the 1.4.

I own two Konica lenses, 28mm M-Hexanon and the wee 35mm UC-Hexanon, and both are smooth as silk gliding over a baby's bottom. Your example doesn't sound at all like either one of mine.

 

[xayraa33]

the Nokton f 1.2 has the nicest out of focus areas at the larger openings of these three lenses.
the 1.4 has the least.

 

[jackal2513]

NASTY !

that new 1.4 nokton is like shooting through a bag of iron filings ! truely rotten

at this stage im getting eiether the 35 biogon or the 35 skopar classic

 

[retow]

No GAS symptoms on my side when looking at the CV 35/1.4 shots. Except for its speed, seems to be just another ok lens.