35mm Nokton f1.2 vs 40mm Nokton f1.4. Which lens is better?

[eleskin]

I have the 40mm Nokton and I am wondering if the 35mm f1.2 is a better lens in terms of sharpness wide open, bokeh, etc,,,,

The 35mm is more money, so I am expecting some difference in quality.

 

[rxmd]

What for? I like the bokeh of the 1.2 better, but it's a matter of taste and you have to know what you like better. Sharpness-wise I don't think they're all that different, at least as far as I'm concerned the 40/1.4 has left little to desire. Forums, flickr etc. are full of pictures from both lenses.

In my opinion the 1.2 is better, a lot bigger and heavier and certainly something like three times more expensive. If, after looking at pictures, you think you get three times the enjoyment out of your pictures, go for the 1.2. My 1.4 is an everyday walkabout lens, the 1.2 certainly wouldn't feel like that.

It also depends on your camera; on my M5 the 1.2 feels just fine, on a smaller camera it might feel too bulky, and if you have a Bessa or something, or a .58 Leica, you have slightly more trouble focusing the 1.2 accurately depending on your eyesight. Nobody, and no online subjective judgments in particular, can replace taking the lenses in your hand and trying them out.

I like both better than the 35/1.4. 😉

 

[SolaresLarrave]

Better for what? At what? Better at all? Or just cooler looking?

 

[baycrest]

I've got both.


I find the 35 f/1.2 easier to focus quickly, likely because of its size and relatively larger focus "wheel". I like its smoother bokeh.

That said, the 35 is quite a large lens and if that's an issue, and you're looking for a 35, you might also consider the Zeiss Biogon f/2, which is slower and smaller and has a bit more contrast.