40mm or 50mm Nokton?

ferider - wow, good job on that test. I agree with you, but I won't be surprised if others don't -- bokeh is soooo subjective....

I was surprised that the CV looked sharper @ f2, and I was surprised that the contrast difference between the SC and MC lenses was quite visible (if subtle).
 
The 40/1.4 SC is avgreat performer for B&W but I can tell that my MC version gives me slightly better color rendition -not to mention better contrast, all my own opinion of course. If you decide on the 40 SC version let me know, I would be happy to let it go to a good home. PM for the price and particulars if you'd like.

Good Luck
 
Before I go and file my 40mm Nokton. Are the 35mm framelines on the Leica M or Zeiss ZI really tight 40mm framelines? And if so, is that after 3m or what? Just curious.
 
For what it costs you cant go wrong with the VC 40mm/1.4. The Rokker is great but its an f/2 lens and would have to be purchased used -- nothing wrong with that but we're not exactly comparing apples to apples.
 
I can't speak highly enough of the 50/1.5 Nokton, it has to be the best bargain Leica-mount lens available. Even better, if you can get one second hand. Each time I expect my Nokton 50/1.5 to disappoint (surely it can't do this?), it doesn't, it just keeps delivering excellent results even wide open be it on digital M or film. My biggest fear, actually, is that mine breaks, they are no longer made and I have to purchase a Leica 50/1.4-lux-asph for 7 times the price.

However, were the choice to be made for a first lens and you did not have funds to buy both a 35mm lens of some kind and a 50-Nokton, then I'd have to agree that a 40/1.4 would be a very good compromise.

LouisB
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom