40mm lenses - am I missing something?

Oh, that was a burst or replies, thank you.

I do realize that I should not "fear" the Nokton - I will have one more look 😉 It indeed offers a high speed in a small package. And also - they are quite plentiful on the used marked. I have to agree that every lens will produce an 'other-then-desired' bookeh under certain conditions. My impression is that this happens more easily on digital cameras than on the film (I did notice this with some Nokton examples).

The Pentax 43/1.9 really caught my attention, so I would have a few questions. Are there OTHER mounts than the ltm (that is the one I would be able to mount on the R3A) - I have seen plenty of them on the eBay (for crazy BIN money like 500 - 600 euro) and it seems like there is a very similar lens but for SLR, or am I wrong? They have exactly the same name though. What is the close focus of this lens in LTM mount? many of those on eBay say 0.45m, that sounds SLR-like ....

Once you say that the Pentax is so nice, I would love to see a few examples of its qualities (they seems to be scarce on Flickr) :angel:

So you say that the Sonnar is that rare - that indeed explains why it is so hard to find. It seems like a nice lens but f/2.8 might a bit slow at times.
 
If you are interested in the 40mm lens as an overall view, I would highly recommend reading Mike Johnstons column the online photographer. He did a review and article why the 40mm is on many occassions better than the 35mm. It is an older article in his archives and is very good reading. I think I recall him saying that Sally Mann liked that focal length.

From personal experience I second the 40mm rokkor. I have the 2nd version with the multi-coatings. It is a super sharp lens with an awesome bokeh/character in the out of focus areas. I had mine reconditioned to bring up the 35mm frame lines on my M camera as I dropped my CLE.

Funnily enough, I have tested this lens extensively and subsequently compared it with the ZM Biogon 35mm 2.0 I found that the rokkor is better suited on sunny days as it garners better shadow detail with less contrast. It produces a nicer rendition. The Biogon contrast was way too strong for my liking when there was a few zones difference in the shadows and the highlights. Even though flare was better suppressed this contrast detracted from the overall look. But some people may like that.

Having said that, I prefer the Biogon on cloudy days as it gets better contrast for those occassions. I guess it comes down to the old adage of using a suitable lens for the particular lighting condition.

Bottom line: the 40mm lens view is great and you can pick up a rokkor or a 40mm summicron for a fraction of the price of a 35mm pre-asph summicron/asph summicron, 35mm pre-asph summilux/asph summilux. Some photographers would correctly argue that having a 50mm then getting a 40mm might be pointless as they are too similar. Perhaps if you wanted a 40mm then a 75mm lens might be a good companion.

Advantage: I was shooting in Asia and I found that that extra 5mm was significant as there was too many things that were complicating the frame, things on the side that I wanted to eliminate so the 40mm was perfect for that compared to the 35mm. I don't like cropping out photos and prefer to get it right in house.

Get a rokkor, guaranteed you won't be disappointed. I have heard excellent things about the rollei sonnar 2.8, however why pay all that money for one less potential stop. With the hood the rokkor will apparently be smaller than that 2.8 and also one stop faster.
 
Jaans said:
If you are interested in the 40mm lens as an overall view, I would highly recommend reading Mike Johnstons column the online photographer. He did a review and article why the 40mm is on many occassions better than the 35mm. It is an older article in his archives and is very good reading. I think I recall him saying that Sally Mann liked that focal length.

From personal experience I second the 40mm rokkor. I have the 2nd version with the multi-coatings. It is a super sharp lens with an awesome bokeh/character in the out of focus areas. I had mine reconditioned to bring up the 35mm frame lines on my M camera as I dropped my CLE.

Funnily enough, I have tested this lens extensively and subsequently compared it with the ZM Biogon 35mm 2.0 I found that the rokkor is better suited on sunny days as it garners better shadow detail with less contrast. It produces a nicer rendition. The Biogon contrast was way too strong for my liking when there was a few zones difference in the shadows and the highlights. Even though flare was better suppressed this contrast detracted from the overall look. But some people may like that.

Having said that, I prefer the Biogon on cloudy days as it gets better contrast for those occassions. I guess it comes down to the old adage of using a suitable lens for the particular lighting condition.

Bottom line: the 40mm lens view is great and you can pick up a rokkor or a 40mm summicron for a fraction of the price of a 35mm pre-asph summicron/asph summicron, 35mm pre-asph summilux/asph summilux. Some photographers would correctly argue that having a 50mm then getting a 40mm might be pointless as they are too similar. Perhaps if you wanted a 40mm then a 75mm lens might be a good companion.

Advantage: I was shooting in Asia and I found that that extra 5mm was significant as there was too many things that were complicating the frame, things on the side that I wanted to eliminate so the 40mm was perfect for that compared to the 35mm. I don't like cropping out photos and prefer to get it right in house.

Get a rokkor, guaranteed you won't be disappointed. I have heard excellent things about the rollei sonnar 2.8, however why pay all that money for one less potential stop. With the hood the rokkor will apparently be smaller than that 2.8 and also one stop faster.
Click to expand...

Great input, Jaans. I was just about to buy that Rokkor. I went for the nokton to "know" CV... Thanks!
 
ferider said:
Check how similar the lenses are at f2.

Also, if you go the Nokton route and you use color, I recommend the SC version. You'll be in for a real treat.
Click to expand...

I agree that the Nokton is a great all-round lens, combining speed, a street-friendly angle of view, good sharpness, acceptable contrast and a rendition I like. Regarding the difference between the versions, however, I've by now shot both the SC and the MC versions and to be honest I have failed to discern much of a real-world difference in rendition with either colour or BW film. Maybe there is something in test shots with color charts under tricky lighting, but certainly nothing visible in everyday shots. The SC version may be a marginally better investment because of collectors, but that's it, and I don't buy lenses for the investment.
 
Matus said:
The Pentax 43/1.9 really caught my attention, so I would have a few questions. Are there OTHER mounts than the ltm (that is the one I would be able to mount on the R3A) - I have seen plenty of them on the eBay (for crazy BIN money like 500 - 600 euro) and it seems like there is a very similar lens but for SLR, or am I wrong? They have exactly the same name though. What is the close focus of this lens in LTM mount? many of those on eBay say 0.45m, that sounds SLR-like ....

Once you say that the Pentax is so nice, I would love to see a few examples of its qualities (they seems to be scarce on Flickr) :angel:
Click to expand...

The optical formula of the LTM 43/1.9 is the same as the pentax mount slr lens. So if you search flickr for 'pentax 43 limited' you should get plenty of samples. I find it easier to browse using flickriver.com actually. You would need to buy the ltm lens and use a ltm-m adapter to mount it on the r3a. You cannot mount the pentax mount version on the r3a.

I dont have the lens in front of me but I believe the ltm version focuses down to .7 meters.

I think that 500-600 euros is a bit high. I bought mine (in exc+ / near mint condition) from matsuiyastore on ebay with a coupon that brought the final price to a little over 500 USD.

I only have a few samples uploaded online, but here you go - click here

They are from my initial test roll with the lens, where I really pushed it in difficult lighting conditions etc.
 
mfogiel said:
"Contrrary to what the RF manufacturers wanted people to believe, the RF cameras are no good beyond 50mm, and there is no benefit whatsoever in using the 75 Heliar on an RF as against slr."
Click to expand...

Let's take this a little slower. Yes, many of us consider RF's to be at their best with normal to wide-angle lenses. But to summarily dismiss the use of any lens longer than a 50mm? First of all, you would be giving up the use of some really outstanding lenses, such as the 75mm Summilux; 75mm Summicron; 90mm Summicron; and 90mm Elmarit. These are world-class lenses!

Secondly, do we really want to carry an SLR in addition to the RF, just to use an 85mm or 90mm lens? A whole extra body just for that? And where do you get a 75mm prime in SLR mount?
 
I agree with many here who like the Nokton 40 - I owned the SC version briefly and it was superb optically and a bargain for what you get (around $300 in near mint condition). I limited myself to f2 most of the time, saving f1.4 for when I really needed it. The M-Rokkor and Summicron-C are a bit sharper in the center, but the Nokton wins at the corners. Flare resistance with the SC is about the same for all three (MC is clearly the best), and the Nokton's bokeh actually compares quite favorably with the other two in a few reviews I've seen. Sean Reid mentioned that the SC's bokeh will be a touch softer than the MC because of the extra veiling flare.
 
axiom said:
Not as limited as Rollei Sonnar though
380 silver copies + 50 black copies
apparently
Click to expand...

Are you referring to the Rollei Sonnar 40mm f2.8 HFT ???

I've seen literally dozens of new samples of these for sale at various shops in Tokyo recently. The average price is 49,800 yen.

Were there really so few made?
 
jonmanjiro said:
Are you referring to the Rollei Sonnar 40mm f2.8 HFT ???

I've seen literally dozens of new samples of these for sale at various shops in Tokyo recently. The average price is 49,800 yen.

Were there really so few made?
Click to expand...

I don't know, I was just quoting the # from other forums, which could ultimately came from the same person.
But if you look outside of Japan/Korea, you really don't see that many elsewhere.
Anyway, I am very happy with my 0002 numbered black.
 
The Rollei 40mm Sonnar uses 39mm filters, which are shared by a number of Leica lenses.

It's a very well made lens. The lens barrel is heavy for its size because it appears to be all-metal construction of brass and steel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

kxl
I WANT (not need) another 35mm lens.
2
Replies
27
Views
927
38Deardorff
38Deardorff
aoresteen
FujiFilm Caps for 40mm filter Size Lenses
Replies
0
Views
104
aoresteen
aoresteen
jaredangle
Calibrating the Voigtlander Bessa R-series rangefinder mechanism
Replies
2
Views
535
monopix
monopix
R
Wide angle lens on M3?
Replies
19
Views
1K
ellisson
ellisson
I
Nikon Rangefinder compartment case. What am I missing?
Replies
14
Views
798
Imakebadphotos
I
Back
Top Bottom