yanidel
Well-known
I am thinking about adding a 35mm or 40mm Nokton to my line-up. I currently own the 35mm Skopar, 28mm Ultron and an old great 50mm 1.5 Jupiter 3.
Yet, I would like some extra speed for low light shots. I read that the 40mm somewhat matches better the framelines of the R-D1 due to the safety factor and it is about $200 cheaper than the 35mm. It would also give me a new focal between 35 and 50.
So here comes the question : given the price difference, the R-D1 framelines match and my line-up, does anybody that has experienced with both lenses think the new 35mm Nokton is a better choice for the R-D1 ? Please explain the reasons. Thanks.
Yet, I would like some extra speed for low light shots. I read that the 40mm somewhat matches better the framelines of the R-D1 due to the safety factor and it is about $200 cheaper than the 35mm. It would also give me a new focal between 35 and 50.
So here comes the question : given the price difference, the R-D1 framelines match and my line-up, does anybody that has experienced with both lenses think the new 35mm Nokton is a better choice for the R-D1 ? Please explain the reasons. Thanks.
foto_fool
Well-known
I have both lenses and an R-D1. IMO the 35mm renders OOF a little smoother, but the difference is small and not 100% consistent (sometimes I like the 40mm better). That said, 99.5% of the time I leave the 40mm parked on a Bessa R3A as a knock-around and use the 35mm Nokton on other film bodies. The lens that spends the most time on my R-D1 is the 35/2.0 UC Hexanon.
If I were in your situation, I would save the cash and get the 40mm Nokton for the R-D1.
If I were in your situation, I would save the cash and get the 40mm Nokton for the R-D1.