CV about to announce an M Mount 50mm f1.1 Nokton!

Forgive me but I have never used any Voigtlander lenses but I wonder what people who own them think of their quality control and sample variation. Are we talking Canon (in my experience fair to bad variation,) or Zeiss (usually very, very good from experience with V series Blad experience.)
 
HenningW said:
It'll block a fair bit. A 1.5 Nokton blocks some; this will definitely block more. This lens is very close in size to the first f/1 Noctilux. If flare performance is reasonable, maybe you could dispense with the hood, and then you can see things.
Click to expand...

I rarely use the hood on the 35/1.2 . Without the hood, the Big Nokton doesn't intrude at all into the 35 framelines on the ZI. I expect the new 50 will have similar flare resistance (to the chagrin of "glow" fans?), and can be used hoodless. As such, I'm expecting an unobstructed view.
 
gdi said:
Yes, I wonder how close to 1.1 the lens actually is - it is splitting hairs to look at 1.1 vs 1.0.

I know that when I shoot a Hex 1.2 and Nokton 1.2 at the same settings and scene the Hex shot is noticeably brighter. I wouldn't know if that is down to more or less generous maker calculations or coating/transmission differences.

Everyone should buy one of these just to support Cosina. ;)
Click to expand...

I've ordered the japanese book that compared 4 lenses of 0.95-1.1~ Can't wait to read it~;)
 
I keep looking at Tom's pics from this new lens and something keeps bothering me. Take a look at this one in particular:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/rapidwinder/3405676797/in/set-72157616278125070/

I something is bothering me in it, but I cant really figure out what. Maybe it's the soft/OOF center, - since focus was on the front row, but sides/edges are way sharper - sort of uneven bokeh/sharpness. Maybe someone can figure it out better?
 
Peter Klein said:
I like smooth bokeh, too, but for an f/1-ish lens I can conceive of owning, bokeh is last on my list.

--Peter
Click to expand...

I liked everything you said. Until this. I don't quite understand it. At "f/1-ish," isn't most of your picture going to BE bokeh? Unless you're shooting distant/semi-distant scenes, and if so, why would you be doing so at f1.1?

What am i missing? : )
 
TJV said:
Forgive me but I have never used any Voigtlander lenses but I wonder what people who own them think of their quality control and sample variation. Are we talking Canon (in my experience fair to bad variation,) or Zeiss (usually very, very good from experience with V series Blad experience.)
Click to expand...

I've only owned two. I had the 25mm very briefly, a long while ago, and don't remember anything about it. It was built nicely, though.

I currently have the 35mm 1.2, and it's built as well or better than any Leica lens i've owned, including the 35 and 50-ASPHs. It's solid. The aperture clicks are sweet as all get out. I haven't abused it, so i don't know how they hold up, and i presume each model is different in that regard....

Basically, i have no thoughts about not buying a Voigtlander lens because of QC issues. Every brand has sample variation. My first Leica 50mm Summilux-ASPH, bought NEW was a complete dog/lemon. It took Leica 6 months or so to finally replace it with one that worked as it should. I've never had any issues with my Canon lenses, except for the 50mm 1.2L - i had to try three of them to find one that focused accurately in the near range....
 
CK Dexter Haven said:
Originally Posted by Peter Klein
I like smooth bokeh, too, but for an f/1-ish lens I can conceive of owning, bokeh is last on my list.

--Peter

I liked everything you said. Until this. I don't quite understand it. At "f/1-ish," isn't most of your picture going to BE bokeh? Unless you're shooting distant/semi-distant scenes, and if so, why would you be doing so at f1.1?

What am i missing? : )
Click to expand...

Imagine yourself in a situation where you truly need f/1.1. Having that aperture makes the difference between getting the shot or not, or getting a sharp shot vs. a motion-blurred shot. Well, the first thing you need is an f/1.1 lens. All the good bokeh in the world isn't going to help you if you don't have the needed aperture.

Look at the cost vs. quality of all alternatives. The old Noct price is out of reach from many of us. The new Noct price is on another planet. The Canon 50/0.95 has some real flaws, and requires surgery to use on an M. The Hex 50/1.2 is slower and hard to get. This makes the new 50/1.1 very desirable.

Now, if you view an f/1 aperture more as an artistic tool than something that lets you shoot in the dark, then probably the old Noct is the lens for you. That will be five grand, please. For me, the new 50/1.1 is looking pretty good.

Some modern lenses are sharper and more contrasty than their older counterparts, but have more "wiry" bokeh. Look at the bokeh arguments about the VC Nokton 50/1.5 vs. the pre-aspheric Summilux. What I'm saying is that to some extent, I'd rather have a sharper main subject, or more evenness across more of the image. And for me, all things considered, minimizing focus shift and flare are more important than bokeh.

One of the nice things about the 35/1.2 Nokton is that it has relatively smooth bokeh, given that it's a modern aspheric lens. It's pretty sharp and doesn't focus shift for all practical purposes. It would be ideal if the new 50/1.1 Nokton was like this. But there may have been size/weight/cost considerations that made the designers choose a different balance.

Then there's the lens Tom shot with. We don't know how close it is to the final design. Also remember that bokeh can vary greatly with the distance to the subject vs. the distance to the out-of-focus elements. So we really have to see more pictures from the final production version to know what the lens will really be like. I'll reserve final judgement until then. But I'm encouraged by what I see so far.

--Peter
 
MikeL said:
It's visible on the portrait Mr. K. took of Tom as well. Maybe a tad more than on the noctilux. More character!
Click to expand...

YES. :)

Just wildly guessing: similar to the Nokton 35/1.4, KobayashiSan built a better corrected version of a classic lens. :)

We'll hear all about it (and how badly it compares to the .95 Noctilux, etc) when it starts to be put on M8 bodies, unfortunately. Already the bokeh is being critizised .... :bang:

Cheers,

Roland.
 
ferider said:
Already the bokeh is being critizised .... :bang:
Click to expand...

Hehe, I certainly don't see anything that would ruin a photo.

The blurred stuff from it, to my eyes, looks smoother than that produced by the so-called bokeh-king (major barf) at f2, in addition to other holy grails. In dim-light, the curvature won't be noticed much either. A nice lens in the right hands.
 
Krosya, the Doll shot was done handheld and with an f1.1 wide-open even the slightest body movement will affect the focus. I did not use a level or tripod for any of these shots either. I wanted to use it as I use any lens, handheld with all the problems that it can cause.
When you are looking at superfast lenses, you are in another field. ANY aberration in the optical field is magnified (see Noctilux!). If you want no distorsion, no vignetting etc - get a Heliar 50f3.5 and a tripod.
The lens I was using was a prototype (I think it was #2, but there was no markings on it). And it was a f1.1 - thats what I shot it at! Why have it if it is not used at that speed.
I like it for several reasons. A/It is affordable, B/ it is a modern lens with 35 years of evolution since the Noctilux when it come to glass composition and coatings, C/ It is compact enough that it can substitute for a regular 50 with the added speed when needed.
I have had 6 Noctiluxes over the decades, they can do good work, but they are afflicted with various problems, massive edge fall off, very low contrast at f1, not particularly good at medium f-stops. All of this should be put into context of Dr Mandler designing it close to 40 years ago. The Nokton 50 1.1 is a better lens and so is the Hexanon 50/60f1.2 - as they should be with the technology advances over the decades.
If you like what the Noctilux does, by all means get one or keep yours, but I would prefer a modern lens. So, it is "cheap" compared to the Noctilux - a decade ago you could pick up Nocti's for sub $1000 because nobody wanted them. Hype pushed the price initially and the stratospheric raise with the 50f0.95 also did it. I have seen very little stuff done with that lens so I have no opinions about it - but I certainly hope it will be better in some aspects than the Nokton f1.1 - probably not enough for me to consider it though. I rather have $8800 in my pocket and the Nokton!!!!!!
 
Tom A said:
....very low contrast at f1,... The Nokton 50 1.1 is a better lens and so is the Hexanon 50/60f1.2 - ...
Click to expand...
So far I have only read comments about Noctilux is very contrasty at F1, so you are claiming that the Nokton is contrastier? Any direct comparison in color?
I have read that the Hexanon 60/1.2 is not as sharp as Noctilux wide open (cant find ref now), are you sure about being newer from this company necessarily means better over the other company?
I don't own either (right now), I have no experience, but your statements are controversial to what I have been studying from internet forums about the Noctilux (research before I invest).
 
Although no one can really say for sure what the bokeh will be like till production lenses are readily available from Tom's shots the bokeh is definitely more like the 35mm f1.2 rather then the 40mm Nokton. Then again The 40mms bokeh is not as bad as its internet reputation and most who criticize it go by web shots rather than their own.

There was a thread a couple of weeks back asking what lens would you like most and a large proportion asked for a faster 50mm, well your wish has been granted. One thing I have noticed, unlike every new lens that has come out before, no one has complained about the price, a winner I think.

PS Another vote for an S mount version
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom