50/f2.0 Heliar compared to 50/f1.5 Nokton

[Yoricko]

How does the 50/f2 compare to the 50/f1.5 in cost, Image quality and built quality?

Someone offered to trade a 50/f2 for my 50/f1.5

I don't need the wide aperture and I don't like the little biggy of my 1.5.

 

[Benjamin Marks]

I find my Heliar to be a little soft at f2, but it has a nice quality. I think of it as a lens with some aberration-type "atmospherics" wide open. In this sense, it is a very different lens than the C/V 50/1.5 Nokton, my copy of which is very sharp wide open. I guess it depends on what you want to do with the lens.

Ben Marks

 

[Tom A]

It is a bit like comparing "apples and oranges". The Nokton 50mm f1.5 is an improvement over a pre-asph Summilux. Very sharp, even at f1,5 but rather contrasty and some people dont like the "fuzzy stuff" - i.e the bokeh.
The Heliar is designed to be slightly soft wide-open - makes it an excellent portrait lens. Once you stop it down to f2.8-f4 it is sharp, but with a more "mellow" contrast than the Nokton.
The collapsible function is minimalist - I have had one of these since they came out and I once collapsed it, just to see what it looked like. Otherwise it is always fully extended.
Go to Flickr and tag the two lenses and there should be lots of sample shots with either lens.
Personally I use the Nokton more - but the Heliar does get its day "in the sun" too. Very nice @f2 with slow or ultra slow film as it renders subjects very smooth. Just picked up a couple of 100 ft of Tech Pan - so once the summer and sun is here - it will go back on the R3M.

 

[Doug]

Agreeing with Tom, I think it comes down to what you like, including the look you want. The Nokton is larger, faster, more popular, and has a thread mount needing an adapter for use on a bayonet mount body.

The M-mount f/2 Heliar is a remarkable optical achievement, as it had been thought earlier that this lens design was, like the Tessar and Elmar, an f/2.8 at most. It has compact convenience, and its character. The compactness, collapsibility, bayonet mount, and fine performance in the mid-apertures might well appeal to you, and if so it would make a good "only 50" in your kit. I would say more "mainstream" than the C-Sonnar ZM 50/1.5, but less so than a Summicron or Planar 50.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Tom has it. I decided not to keep the Heliar because I don't feel the need for a medium-speed lens that's soft at full aperture. But eqially, I like the 1,5/50 C-Sonnar (my standard 50mm), which ain't exactly super-sharp at full bore.

Personal preference...

Tashi delek,

R.

 

[Yoricko]

Mmm, thanks for all the replies guys!

 

[photophorous]

I really like the look of the images I get from my Heliar, but if you want a lens that's razor sharp at f/2 or faster, it may not be for you. The Heliar has excellent build quality and usually sells for more than the Nokton. I haven't used the Nokton.

Heliar Classic Flickr group: http://www.flickr.com/groups/heliar_classic/

Paul