50mm f/1.4 options for the M mount.

[splitimageview]

I've always been partial to the Sonnar formula.

Loctite Blue will fix your Nokton issue straight away, clearly the cheapest option 🙂

 

[Lax Jought]

I never thought about nail polish or shellac or loctite. I've never loosened the screws to actually open the lens, knowing my luck I'd probably completely ruin the lens if I ever tried that.

Because there's always a bit of oil leaking out from under the screws, I assume that the oil is coming from the part of the lens that connects two parts together which allows focusing movement. I'm not sure how much oil I've lost from those compartments but it still feels kind of smooth so it can't have been too much.

Is there a risk that if I accidentally placed too much nail polish/shellac/loctite, that it will leak into the moving compartments and eventually cause movement or focusing issues, or somehow cause some minor wear and tear on the moving parts inside?

I lifted the screws a bit and put one tiny drop of shellac on the threads--just enough to wet them--and they've held, since.

dunk the screw tips in nail polish first

the easiest thing is to put some blue loctite on the screws.

clear nail polish just under the screw head. loosen with acetone if ever required.
just a dab. too much and you will strip the screw getting it out.

Loctite Blue will fix your Nokton issue straight away, clearly the cheapest option 🙂

 

[Lax Jought]

How about a Millennium Nikkor-S 50/1.4 + Amedeo adapter?

Or a Noctilux 50/1.0?

Hm.. I'll have a look at the Nikkor, I was thinking about newer lenses that are still available for a brand new purchase, I haven't been so familiar with older lenses that require adapters but I'm game if they're reliable workhorses.

Re the 50/1.0, I recall reading a while ago that there were some minor issues with the older Noctis, can't remember what they are. But for that kind of price, I'd much rather go for a newer Summilux 50mm f/1.4.

 

[Lax Jought]

There are many options as you can tell from the remarks above.
I have many 50mm lenses that I love using, which include these lenses with max aperture 1.5 or faster:

....

There are many excellent options also for 35mm lenses. Take your pick.

Hi Raid, nice to see you here. Sorry I didn't include my discussion in my original post but I mentioned earlier in this thread some reasons why I wasn't looking at some of those lenses on your list, and also the reason why I'm not really looking at 35mm lenses at the moment.

 

[Lax Jought]

IMO you should stick to the Nokton. Your problem doesn't seem to be very heav but If you have the money, get the Summilux. The Noctilux is just a beast (not IQ wise).

I stuck with the Nokton for a very long time but I'm ready for something new and more reliable. You can sort of see in my photo above that the little screw has a bit of wear and tear from every single time I've had to tighten it before taking it out for a gig. I also don't know how much oil has leaked out so far.

I have been considering the Summilux yeah, possibly a used one if I can find one in good condition.

 

[Keith]

For me the C Sonnar is the best out there for the price .. and the focus shift isn't that hard to master.

 

[Lax Jought]

I bought the lens from PopFlash. I heard that some of the lenses were being optimised for 1.5. I asked about it, but they had no knowlege of whether it was or not at the time. You know, if we're hand holding, we are seldom perfectly still and normal body movement can probably have as much of an impact on the thin plane of focus. Mabe mine cancels out the focus shift.

Some of you here in this thread are making a pretty good case for the Sonnar.

I was wondering why Zeiss doesn't calibrate it at f/1.5 by default because as I've heard it said before - people generally don't buy an ultra fast lens only to use it at f/5.6.

Also, if they calibrated it at f/1.5, the theory is that even if the focus shifted out of calibration at slower stops, the deeper depth of field might be enough to mask it.

 

[Lax Jought]

1/ Yes, my f/1.1 had the same problem with screws, right from the start. I lifted the screws a bit and put one tiny drop of shellac on the threads--just enough to wet them--and they've held, since. I think that they must have done something like that at the factory and some lenses were missed because this doesn't seem to be a common problem, while at the same time four tiny screws in this spot don't seem to me like the ideal solution without something to stick them in there.

This makes me nervous about the Voigtlander lenses. I should mention that I've had their 35mm f/1.4 for far longer than the 50mm f/1.1 and it's never given me any build problems. The IQ of the 35mm is that it's sharp in the middle wide open, but the corners remain slightly blurry even when stopped down, and the bokeh is a bit iffy in some circumstances. Still, I would've been happy to continue using it except that it flares really really badly when there is a light source nearby.

 

[Lax Jought]

If you can manage without f/1.4 speed, the ZM Planar 50 is pretty wonderful all-around.

If Zeiss produced the Planar at f/1.4, I'd be all over it. All reviews I've been reading about it have been very good.

Even my Zeiss ZE 50mm f/1.4 has its faults but I can definitely live with it if they made it in ZM mount.

 

[Lax Jought]

SLR Magic T0.95, Leica Mount (look for the rangefinder coupled version) is another option. But I can't recall if it has any focus shift or not. FYI, I was given a quote of US$ 4,288 (with shipping) in March 2012, with 3 years warranty, including parts and labor.

I did consider the SLR Magic and was subsequently surprised to learn about all the controversies and the eventual cancellation of the lens! I've been away from the camera scene for a while and missed that whole thing.

Nevertheless, for that price I'd much rather have the Summilux 50mm f/1.4 which is still a lens in production and serviceable by Leica themselves indefinitely.

Of course there is Noctilux F0.95m, the lovely elephant in the room. 🙂

That is kind of the dream lens if it wasn't for the price. 🙄

 

[Lax Jought]

I have the Canon 50s, and the CV 50 1.1, and others, but none are in the league of the ASPH Lux

That is the difficulty, I am wanting to upgrade from the Voigts especially after experiencing the IQ from my Zeiss ZE lens.

I checked the Sigma website, it's a pity they don't produce M mount lenses of their Art lenses. I would've seriously considered a 50mm from them if that was the case. I find that their Art lenses are very very good lenses, a bit on the clinical side, but they perform very well and are suitable as workhorse lenses.

 

[Lax Jought]

so if I can shoot at f2 at night so can You ... 😛

Thanks for the photos Helen, I'm no stranger to extreme low light photography myself but if you're photographing with the ISO limitations of film AND you're using f/2 lenses then I take my hat off to you. 😀😀😀

The closest I can say is for a long time I was restricted to the ISO limitations of the M8.2, but then again that was how I learnt how to photograph the night. 😀

 

[Lax Jought]

The OP doesn't say if they're budget-conscious,

Well I'm sort of budget-conscious, as in I can't afford the Noctilux and if possible I'd like to avoid paying for a brand new Summilux 50mm f/1.4.

I would've been in the market for an equivalent Zeiss though, I've been very impressed with the IQ I've been getting from their 50mm ZE version so that's the general direction I was hoping to upgrade to.

Flaring is an issue I'm conscious of. A lot of my work is in low light with light sources so I have to try and avoid excessive flaring if possible.

 

[Lax Jought]

I have an use the Sonnar the Nokton and Summilux 50's and have not experienced any problems. Maybe just lucky with the copies I have.

Good luck with your decision.

MM ~Sonnar-C 50/1.5

Out of the three photos you posted, I love the Zeiss and the Summilux ones the most, I would've picked them even in a blind test over the Voigtlander f/1.5, although I must say that Voigt photo doesn't look too bad either.

 

[Lax Jought]

For me the C Sonnar is the best out there for the price .. and the focus shift isn't that hard to master.

Dammit, you guys are making a very good case for the Sonnar, really liking the photos you're posting.

If I was to purchase the Sonnar, I'd probably have to purchase it brand new from Zeiss and have them calibrate it for f/1.5 before it leaves their doors while it's still under warranty and the calibration is free.

My concern with the focus shift is that it might make my job a bit harder when I'm already doing a lot of photography in low light and often fast or constantly moving subjects.

 

[MCTuomey]

The ZM c-sonnar is the best 50 for portraits, imho. Mine was optimized at f/2.8, which is its best aperture close-in unless you like that "one-eye in focus, the other out" look. Up close at f/1.5 a slight bow to the subject took care of the shift.

Dimensionality (that fullness), great color, lovely fall-off, butter bokeh - a people lens if ever zeiss made one.

Beyond 5-6 feet never had an issue with focus shift. Used it for a couple years for small club shooting, wide open, no focus problems not of my own making.

 

[Richard G]

Dammit, you guys are making a very good case for the Sonnar, really liking the photos you're posting.

If I was to purchase the Sonnar, I'd probably have to purchase it brand new from Zeiss and have them calibrate it for f/1.5 before it leaves their doors while it's still under warranty and the calibration is free.

My concern with the focus shift is that it might make my job a bit harder when I'm already doing a lot of photography in low light and often fast or constantly moving subjects.

It's not that easy. Look up mfogiel's contributions on this subject. (http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=51742&highlight=mfogiel+zeiss+sonnar) He has two C Sonnars, an early f2.8 optimised and a later f1.5 optimized. The point about the original f2.8 optimised Sonnars was that there was focus shift at f1.5 you might have to deal with, but at the smaller apertures things were fine. In some 1.5 optimized lenses the focus shift of quite a few centimetres at f2.8 and f4 made them, apparently, unuseable.

I did my own tests on mine (http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00aKSW) and found that mine was probably optimised for about f2.2 or f2.4. This means that mine front focuses by about a centimetre only at f1.5 and the slight back focus at f4 is well covered by the depth of field. I got mine new from Popflash too and it was apparently optimized for 1.5. I suspect Zeiss have it all worked out and don't actually go for perfect focus at f1.5 because of the problems mentioned above.

It's important not to obsess about this and keep some perspective. I only recently discovered that my late 1970s tabbed 50 Summicron back focussed by a few centimetres. I'd happily used it for nearly thirty years. I've had it fixed, but that may not have been necessary.

 

[Dante_Stella]

The f/1.5+ Sonnars work like this: they all have focus shift. People bitch about the ZM because they've apparently never used the others.

- The ZM is the easiest to live with; it is an integrated system with a matched helicoid. It is optimized for bokeh over absolute sharpness. If you need super sharpness on this lens, there is f/2.

- The Opton (use the Amedeo lever adapter that gets down to 0.6m if need be) also has focus shift, but depending on the interaction between lens and adapter, you may get a lens "optimized" at f/1.5 or f/2.

- The Jena prewar is harder to find, has a little more flare, and is not quite as sharp. It is relatively easy to adjust the focal length to perfectly match your adapter.

- The Nikkor is more corrected close-up and has the worst bokeh compared to the above.

- The MS-Sonnetar is the hardest to live with and has the worst bokeh. It also has a fast focusing rate and a very precisely adjustable focal length via the "coma" adjuster.

- The Jupiter-3 can be set up to work very well close-up. But it is not the sharpness leader here.

Dante

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

- The Opton (use the Amedeo lever adapter that gets down to 0.6m if need be) also has focus shift, but depending on the interaction between lens and adapter, you may get a lens "optimized" at f/1.5 or f/2.



- The Jena prewar is harder to find, has a little more flare, and is not quite as sharp. It is relatively easy to adjust the focal length to perfectly match your adapter.

Where does the "Carl Zeiss" Contax-mount fit in? Similar to the Opton?

 

[Richard G]

This is probably f1.5 on Tri-X with the C Sonnar.