Renzsu
Well-known
Flare with the 1.2, it does happen indeed, but when it does, I kind of like it 
Ljós
Well-known
Mike, thanks for the description. That is very interesting, as you did the test on a Leica M8 where focus shift should be more noticeable than on a film camera.
Greetings, Ljós
thomasw_
Well-known
.....Maybe it's just not the lens for me, that's why I'm looking for some feedback on other lenses to make a decision whether to keep it or not
I can offer my opinion on the CV 35/1,2. The lens does have some barrel distortion but it never bothered me; in a comparison with the CV 35/1,4 this is a moot point. In terms of rendering character, I found that the f1,2 to be one of my favourite 35s of all time --- but it came at a cost. A cost that is very significant to me. An essential reason for shotting RFs for me involves the compact lenses and the excellence of the VFs and their brightlines. The obstruction of my 35 framelines was very annoying and ultimately intolerable. The sheer weight and size of the f1.2 made it fail as a lens that I enjoyed using; and I wanted to like using it, I bought and sold 3 different copies, trying to like using it. I liked some of my results a lot, but too many photo opportunities were nullified by hinderances relating to its bulk; a slight slipping forward in the hand that wrecked the composition or some unwanted aspect of the out of frame area being blocked unknowingly etc..
The speed of the f1,2 is seductive, its rendering sublime -- the ergonomics made it yucky to use. So I had to find a way...and I have. I no longer own a 35/1,2....and I found Leica's 35/1,4 ASPH to be too big as well. So what is the solution for getting speed and beautiful rendering but without a large package that can have undesirable effects? For me it is the W-Nikkor re-issue 2005 35/1,8 -- I am looking at having my copy converted to M-mount like Mister E did. I have found it to be a smashing all-round lens, having a beautiful rendering in low light -- I prefer it to the f1,2 or even my lux asph or pre-asph lux
Of course, you have to find what you prefer...even if it commits lens-reputation heresy.
ampguy
Veteran
Backlit leaves are a challenge, sometimes you need a lower contrast lens, and/or to shift the histogram a bit to the left - this was taken with a late '60s 50 lux @ 1.4:
Vincent.G
Well-known
Hi umcelinho
In fact the flare in your photos are nice! I owned the Nokton 35mm f1.2 and borrowed a Nokton 35mm f1.4 SC to use before. Let me share with you my experience.
I guess you already know enough about the 35 f1.2's reputation in its rendering. For the size factor, my advise is to borrow one to shoot. Or play with it in the shop to have a feel about its bulk and most importantly, its VF intrusion. Removing the hood can reduce the intrusion but it is still there. This bothers some people whereas some are fine with it. I am with the latter. But I sold it eventually because of its size - I prefer my 35mm lens to be compact. It's a personal preference - mainly influenced by my compact Summaron 35mm f2.8.
Overall I like the 35mm f1.4 more. Its distortion or harsh bokeh that some complain about are not significant enough to bother me.
In fact the flare in your photos are nice!
I owned the Nokton 35mm f1.2 and borrowed a Nokton 35mm f1.4 SC to use before. Let me share with you my experience.I guess you already know enough about the 35 f1.2's reputation in its rendering. For the size factor, my advise is to borrow one to shoot. Or play with it in the shop to have a feel about its bulk and most importantly, its VF intrusion. Removing the hood can reduce the intrusion but it is still there. This bothers some people whereas some are fine with it. I am with the latter. But I sold it eventually because of its size - I prefer my 35mm lens to be compact. It's a personal preference - mainly influenced by my compact Summaron 35mm f2.8.
Overall I like the 35mm f1.4 more. Its distortion or harsh bokeh that some complain about are not significant enough to bother me.
Vincent.G
Well-known
The following are shot with Kodak Ektar 100.
Nokton 35mm f1.4 SC @ f1.4
Nokton 35mm f1.2 @ f1.2
Nokton 35mm f1.4 SC @ f1.4
Nokton 35mm f1.2 @ f1.2
Licorice
Member
2nd image, 2with 1.2 is clearly drawing much better and that is why I've just gone for the 35/1.2 despite my concerns of its VF blockage. Coming from DSLR, I belive the size should be bearable. So I will also try to live with the VF blockage, using no hood at all. Currently I am waiting it to arrive.
Another alternative for the original poster could be 35/1.7 Ultron which seems to be quite flare resistant, no focus shift. It is said to have a fairly low contrast though, which helps for B&W anyway and there is some CA which is also a no issue for B&W. Don't know how it compares to 35/1.4 though, having no hands-on experience with either lens.
Another alternative for the original poster could be 35/1.7 Ultron which seems to be quite flare resistant, no focus shift. It is said to have a fairly low contrast though, which helps for B&W anyway and there is some CA which is also a no issue for B&W. Don't know how it compares to 35/1.4 though, having no hands-on experience with either lens.
ppap
Newbie
It is funny how for some people some things are bad while for some others are good.
I am actually looking for a compact and fast 35mm flare-prone for artistic reasons and was a bit undecided if to save for a lux pre-asph or getting a nokton and maybe a 50 sonnar.
I think ill go with the nokton options after seeing some fantastic flares here
I am actually looking for a compact and fast 35mm flare-prone for artistic reasons and was a bit undecided if to save for a lux pre-asph or getting a nokton and maybe a 50 sonnar.
I think ill go with the nokton options after seeing some fantastic flares here
photogdave
Shops local
The flare is one of the reasons I love the Nokton SC so much:
gavinlg
Veteran
Wow, funny how people see things differently. That's exactly the type of rendering from this lens that I love
Agreed.
(extra characters)
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
I just posted a series of shots on our Flickr site. Rolls F656 - to F660. All done wide-open with various fast 35's. Nokton 35f1.2, two versions of the Nokton 35f1.4 SC, Summilux 35f1.4 pre-asph and a Nikkor 35f1.8 (M-mounts on the Zeiss ZM and the Nikkor on a R2S)
Nothing spectacular, but it does show some of the differences between the "draw" of these lenses.
Nothing spectacular, but it does show some of the differences between the "draw" of these lenses.
Mister E
Well-known
I love the rendering in the first shot in the OP and the flare in the second shot is glorious. I really like this lens, if I didn't have the 35 Lux ASPH I'd get one.
MikeL
Go Fish
[edit] Thanks, Roland, I've tried using a matte tape on the inner side of the hood thread and also tried the same with a step-up adapter ring I have, covering the entire surface of the inner thread, but I'm still getting the round flares... even with the hood.
From my messing with the 35mm summilux pre-asph, the round flares come from light hitting the very edge of the lens at f1.4. Hoods can't help much with this. On the pre-asph, it is very hard to get round flares when stopping it down to f1.7. By f2, I can't make round flares happen on the two copies I've used. When I need f1.4, I accept the abberations and potential for round flares. At f2 and smaller apertures, images are quite similar to the version 4 summicron (I can't tell them apart when I had both), but with its streched design, there are consequences at f1.4 that people either like or don't.
Umcelinho, assuming the CV Nokton has a similar design, were your photos all at f1.4?
ampguy
Veteran
Hi Mike
Hi Mike
I've been shooting a 3,28x,xxx late Canada model w/o infinity lock with both the round 12526 and the rect 12526 and out of several hundreds of images at 1.4, only a couple of the circular flare, but very many with the veling flare (and reduced contrast at 1.4 than stopped down). Mostly shot with on the M8, but a handful of rolls with film in the M6.
Wonder if it's because of the M8? Are other M8 users getting circular flare with the pre-asph 35 lux regularly?
Hi Mike
I've been shooting a 3,28x,xxx late Canada model w/o infinity lock with both the round 12526 and the rect 12526 and out of several hundreds of images at 1.4, only a couple of the circular flare, but very many with the veling flare (and reduced contrast at 1.4 than stopped down). Mostly shot with on the M8, but a handful of rolls with film in the M6.
Wonder if it's because of the M8? Are other M8 users getting circular flare with the pre-asph 35 lux regularly?
Lss
Well-known
I have the 35/1.4 SC and have been thinking about complementing it with another 35 (most probably Biogon-C 35/2.8) for quite some time. In the end, I have however decided to stick with the Nokton as my main 35. It's simply good enough and very nice to use thanks to its size. Perhaps the time will come for me to pick up the Zeiss anyway, but I think I need something wider first: 25 or 28.
umcelinho
Marcelo
Thanks, Tom!
Mike, all the shots with the circular flare are wide open. If I stop down to 1.8 or 2, the flare will be pretty much gone, after I noticed this I have been spotting down slightly to prevent flare when it's not wanted. The rectangular hood I have will make it almost circular flare-free, though! It's a little big, but I like how it looks - it's a 43mm screw-in rectangular hood for camcorders.
I ended up getting a 1.2 some weeks ago, and have been shooting it a lot to decide which to keep, 1.2 or 1.4... So far, I really like the results!
Mike, all the shots with the circular flare are wide open. If I stop down to 1.8 or 2, the flare will be pretty much gone, after I noticed this I have been spotting down slightly to prevent flare when it's not wanted. The rectangular hood I have will make it almost circular flare-free, though! It's a little big, but I like how it looks - it's a 43mm screw-in rectangular hood for camcorders.
I ended up getting a 1.2 some weeks ago, and have been shooting it a lot to decide which to keep, 1.2 or 1.4... So far, I really like the results!