40/1.4 vs 50/1.5 Noktons

[mc_vancouver]

Has anyone got any sense of which is the better lens? The 40 is smaller, considerably smaller, than the 50. The 50, which I have, extends into the viewfinder of my IIIf, but I'm getting an external finder to take care of that. The hood that is included is really pretty useless except as the only way to keep the standard lens cap on, while the larger hood, made for the 35/1.2, works, but blocks the rangefinder no matter which way it is oriented (due to the angle of the hood's larger ring). If you've got both, or got an opinion---and who doesn't have an opinion on this site!--I'd like to hear about it.

 

[back alley]

i have the 40/1.4 and am waiting on a 50/1.5, so will have an opinion soon...🙂

 

[RayPA]

I have both, but I can't give you a "which one is better" decision. My 40/1.4 is the SC, and I use it strictly on my CLE. The 50/1.5 is in my stable of 50's. I'm not sure if Puts reviews the 40/1.4. I think he reviews the 50/1.5 on his site (but I may be wrong). 🙂


🙂

 

[sockeyed]

I have both, but if I had to choose one, I'd take the 40. I love its compactness, its sharpness and its tonality (I have the SC version).

Some Nokton-50 pix:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sockeyed/tags/cv5015/

Some Nokton-40 pix:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sockeyed/tags/cv4014/

 

[TimBonzi]

You will not be disappointed with either lens. I think your choice depends on how you like to frame your photos. For most of my shots I like to fill the frame, so I use the Nokton 50mm as my prime lens, and move all the way to the 25 when I need more room. The 40 will give you just a bit of elbow room and make framing easier.

 

[kshapero]

I have used 50mm for decades and just got about 4 months ago a 40mm. After about 35 rolls, I am hard pressed to use the 50mm. The 40mm gives me just a little more frame room and it makes a difference. Bottom line, take either one and just shot pictures.

 

[BillBingham2]

The size and speed of the 40 made me fall in love with it. I never was much of a 50 lover, though I do like my 50/1.4 on my Nikon S2. When ever I use my T or my Leicas, its the 40. It's fast, sharp and small.

You will not be unhappy with the 40.

B2 (;->

 

[mc_vancouver]

Thanks my rff friends. Good advice. I'm thrilled with the 50 and very intrigued to try the forty when I get an M-mount body. Not if, but when.

 

[Dougg]

As one consideration, I'd choose the focal length for which there are viewfinder framelines in the camera I'll use it with. I've long had a M2 and a CLE. I use a 35 'cron and a 50 Skopar on the M2 and a 28 'cron and various 40's on the CLE. Due to my fondness for the CLE I have three 40's for it, the original Rokkor, the Nokton, and a 43mm Pentax-L. I like the 40 field of view so much I got a 40 Ultron for my Pentax. Further, the 60 and 65mm lenses on my 6x4.5cm cameras is about the same field of view, and the 75-90mm is similar for 6x7. The M2 is better than the CLE with 90mm due to the higher VF magnification, but where I have to use an accessory VF like with the 75mm and anything wider than 28mm, then the body can be chosen for other reasons. I never had a 50mm for an RF camera until recently, so that's been a learning experience. I like the M2's 50mm framelines...

 

[jtm]

You're right that the hood for the 50mm Nokton seems pretty useless. Like Roland, I've been happy using an empty filter ring or two as a shade (and as a tiny bit of physical protection from banging into things). Then I cover it with a normal snap-on 52mm cap. I got one that says "Canon Ultrasonic", which is nice on an M2.

 

[mc_vancouver]

IT's not that the hood is useless. It's a fine looking hood and does offer more side light protection than the smaller standard hood or the empty filter trick, but on an older Leica it does block part of the rangefinder. I don't know if this is the case with any of the Bessa cameras or an M series. If anyone wants this hood, ie for its intended victim, the 35/1.2, I think I'll sell it.

 

[jtm]

The normal hood for the 50/1.5 does not block the rangefinder on any CV camera, or on an M. It does cut into the 50mm frame lines in the viewfinder, but that's not surprising. It does this more on a CV camera than on an M because the CV finders are closer to the lens than an M finder.

On a screw mount Leica, the back of the lens blocks so much of the viewfinder, even with no hood at all, that I wouldn't try to use it without an external finder.

 

[back alley]

on the zi, it blocks a tiny bit of the lower left frame line, but nothing significant.
this lens is actually smaller than the 28/1.9 - well shorter anyway but a bit fatter.

joe

 

[mc_vancouver]

I tried taking some digital shots of what the Leica r/f would see through the larger hood. Just to be clear, the hood I'm talking about is the LH3, which was not made for the 50 Nokton,but does fit it, by tightening the screw, not by bayonet mount, which only the 35 has. You can see them on this page. I like shooting backlit subjects, but I was disappointed that this otherwise lovely, well-made hood, interfered with my focusing. Keep it? Sell it? Maybe I'll end up with a 35/1.2 someday....

 

[Crasis]

Speaking of lens hoods, hows the LH5 that comes with the 40/1.4 on the R3A? Does it significantly block what you see in the viewfinder?

Is there a smaller hood that will fit on that lens? Too bad there isn't a nice, small, rectangular hood for it 🙁

 

[jtm]

... Just to be clear, the hood I'm talking about is the LH3, which was not made for the 50 Nokton,but does fit it....

I can see how that lens could be useful, but the lens that normally comes with the 50mm Nokton doesn't do any more good than a couple of filter rings, and it looks a lot bigger than it needs to. I might like to have a vented one, though.

 

[kully]

Speaking of lens hoods, hows the LH5 that comes with the 40/1.4 on the R3A? Does it significantly block what you see in the viewfinder?

Is there a smaller hood that will fit on that lens? Too bad there isn't a nice, small, rectangular hood for it 🙁

Don't worry about the blockage Crasis, you won't notice it.

I only have it on for protection - I never had flare (MC) before I bought it.