dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Ugh..
Part of me does not really want to get another 50mm lens (I always think one is enough
) but in reading some of the Sony A7/A7r threads and seeing Wilfred's thread yesterday on the Voigtlander Aspherical Nokton with the Sony A7 it has made me reconsider my "one 50mm is enough" philosophy.
So.. I was considering the Nokton and I played with it a bit again yesterday in my local store - sharp, decent bokeh, and overall a nice lens - but then I looked at the Zeiss C-Sonnar and saw how compact it was and how it rendered images; that's when I realized I was torn between two lenses (and feeling like a fool.... loving both of them was breaking all the rules... ).
With this in mind, and the fact that I currently have a wonderful Type 3 50mm pre-ASPH Summilux, which of the two lenses would YOU choose? Some background for you: all of my current M-mount lenses (including my Zeiss 21mm ZM Biogon) are non-aspherical. What would I "gain" from the Aspherical elements offered by the Nokton?
All comments, derogatory statements, glowing praise, and general disdain are welcome.
Cheers,
Dave
Part of me does not really want to get another 50mm lens (I always think one is enough
) but in reading some of the Sony A7/A7r threads and seeing Wilfred's thread yesterday on the Voigtlander Aspherical Nokton with the Sony A7 it has made me reconsider my "one 50mm is enough" philosophy. So.. I was considering the Nokton and I played with it a bit again yesterday in my local store - sharp, decent bokeh, and overall a nice lens - but then I looked at the Zeiss C-Sonnar and saw how compact it was and how it rendered images; that's when I realized I was torn between two lenses (and feeling like a fool.... loving both of them was breaking all the rules...
). With this in mind, and the fact that I currently have a wonderful Type 3 50mm pre-ASPH Summilux, which of the two lenses would YOU choose? Some background for you: all of my current M-mount lenses (including my Zeiss 21mm ZM Biogon) are non-aspherical. What would I "gain" from the Aspherical elements offered by the Nokton?
All comments, derogatory statements, glowing praise, and general disdain are welcome.
Cheers,
Dave
sanmich
Veteran
Let me see...
No real RF focusing, which means that the focus shift is a non issue.
OTOH, it means no need for an RF lens. Why not try SLR lenses? Isn't there an SLR lens much cheaper than these offering the same quality (pentax 1.4? Oly 1.2?). No limit for close focus...
That being said, I would love to try the Nokton myself (but I'm shooting M's)
No real RF focusing, which means that the focus shift is a non issue.
OTOH, it means no need for an RF lens. Why not try SLR lenses? Isn't there an SLR lens much cheaper than these offering the same quality (pentax 1.4? Oly 1.2?). No limit for close focus...
That being said, I would love to try the Nokton myself (but I'm shooting M's)
judsonzhao
Well-known
They are both great, Sonnar has a minimal focus distance of 0.9m, could be troublesome sometimes. But you intend to use it on A7, you could buy the lastes close-focus M-Nex adapter by Voigtlander (somewhat expensive though). Probably Sonnar has better bokeh, but nokton is sharper.
I'm always trying to get a nokton and do a little review and decide which to keep, lol.
The bokeh of Sonnar 50 is really awesome.
Some quick snaps, just testing photos.
On M9
On A7
100% crop
how it looks like:
There are also some film shots haven't been scanned yet, but it performed nice on the slides.
Judson
I'm always trying to get a nokton and do a little review and decide which to keep, lol.
The bokeh of Sonnar 50 is really awesome.
Some quick snaps, just testing photos.
On M9
On A7
100% crop
how it looks like:
There are also some film shots haven't been scanned yet, but it performed nice on the slides.
Judson
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Thanks guys.. let me make some further clarifications on this post:
Cheers,
Dave
- I intend on using the lens on both the A7 and my M7 - so this "focus shift" thing could/will come into play - what's that all about?
- Don't want to get any SLR lenses - although I have a Nikon DSLR I would prefer not to use SLR lenses on the A7 simply because it would entail buying another adapter
- I already have the Voigtlander Close Focus M to E mount adapter - so I'm not so concerned on the A7 about focus limitations of the lens - on the M7 however, this could make a difference
Cheers,
Dave
judsonzhao
Well-known
I used 2 sonnars on m6 .85 m9 ZI, no focus shift happened for now, as you can see from the photos by M9
sanmich
Veteran
Dave,
the Sonnar focus shift have been documented at length.
One other aspect is that the sonnar is supposed to be distortion free. The Nokton, I don't know. I checked an ltm version and it did have some barrel distortion.
the Sonnar focus shift have been documented at length.
One other aspect is that the sonnar is supposed to be distortion free. The Nokton, I don't know. I checked an ltm version and it did have some barrel distortion.
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Thanks for that Michael.
WRT the sonnar I'm going to look at that (the focus shift) and it's good to know that it's supposed to be distortion free.
It seems to be a tough call for me right now - of course, I could always just not get either and just continue to use the Summilux..
Cheers,
Dave
rscheffler
Well-known
I'd go with the Zeiss since the Nokton is supposedly similar in performance to the pre-ASPH 50 Lux, though I think rendering is somewhat between the pre-ASPH and ASPH. The Zeiss will get you more of that Sonnar rendering character, whereas your Lux will be more of an all-rounder. If you're really just after the Sonnar character, then I'd suggest finding a Zeiss-Opton Sonnar, or a Nikkor 5cm/1.4, both of which will be less than half the cost of the ZM. BTW, the Nokton will purple fringe a bit in higher contrast scenes at wider apertures.
mfogiel
Veteran
The Summilux pre asph is a beautiful lens. I have not tried the Nokton. C Sonnar though is simply different, and in my opinion it is the best 50mm portrait lens EVER. It has a serious problem on RF cameras, namely the focus shift, but if you are focusing from the sensor, then this problem goes away. For reportage a more neutral lens like Nokton would probably work better, the Summilux is a great compromise between the two, and has a different type of bokeh than the Sonnar.
rscheffler
Well-known
Regarding distortion, I haven't used the ZM Sonnar extensively, so not sure how much of an issue it is in real world use, but according to Zeiss's documentation for it, there is distortion and it's of the mustache type. Compare this against the distortion chart for the ZM 50 Planar, which is simple barrel type, but might be visually more noticeable than the Sonnar's.
Monochrom
Well-known
If you use a sony fuji or whatever you can use the VC glass, it´s nice.
On your film M or digital M, the choice will be the sonnar, beautiful bokeh, sharp and small...tons of tradition and as expected tons of good results!
On your film M or digital M, the choice will be the sonnar, beautiful bokeh, sharp and small...tons of tradition and as expected tons of good results!
Robert Lai
Well-known
So far, the Sonnar 50 1.5 is my only M mount 50mm lens. I did have a Summicron 50 (latest pre-ASPH version). I got rid or the Summicron as it just looked too clinically perfect to me. The Sonnar has character, and it's sharp too.
I also have the Summicron 50 collapsible, and the Nikkor HC 50 f/2 Sonnar in LTM. That's enough 50mm lenses!
I also have the Summicron 50 collapsible, and the Nikkor HC 50 f/2 Sonnar in LTM. That's enough 50mm lenses!
Filzkoeter
stray animal
Since you've got the Summilux: clearly the Sonnar. The Nokton will be propably too similar to the Lux, the Sonnar is different and renders beautifully
Regarding the shift: it's normal in the Sonnar formula that the point of fokus slightly shifts backwards if you stop the lens down. You can have it optimized at f1.5; then it will be spot on at every distance at f1.5. At f2.0 and propably f2.8 there will be a slight back focus (after that the depth of field will catch everything up). Or have it optimized for f2.8 (with slight front focus at 2.0 and 1.5).
It will not matter on a A7, but it does on a rangefinder.
Regarding the shift: it's normal in the Sonnar formula that the point of fokus slightly shifts backwards if you stop the lens down. You can have it optimized at f1.5; then it will be spot on at every distance at f1.5. At f2.0 and propably f2.8 there will be a slight back focus (after that the depth of field will catch everything up). Or have it optimized for f2.8 (with slight front focus at 2.0 and 1.5).
It will not matter on a A7, but it does on a rangefinder.
Pioneer
Veteran
I have the Sonnar 50 1.5 so I never* use my Summilux anymore and should probably sell it. Except for the fact that I rarely sell any lens. I also own the Nokton M 50 1.5, which is also a very nice lens. Again, I never* use it so could probably sell it as well, if I actually sold lenses.
If it were me I would pick the ZM Sonnar but I am rarely looking for perfect sharpness. That is not to say that the Sonnar is not sharp. Closed down to f4 it gets very sharp!
Focus shift is actually an issue with a number of lenses, including that famous paragon of eye-cutting sharpness, the latest Aspherical Summicron 50/2. However, for some reason that I really do not understand, one of the defining characteristics of the Sonnar has become its focus shift. It does seem a bit silly since it is so very easy to work with. If you are taking a picture wide open within 3 meters or so you may want to lean forward just a tiny bit after you achieve focus. Maybe that is all anyone could find wrong with it. Of course, most people never actually see it since their own technique overwhelms any focus error from the focus shift.
* = Never is actually a very relative term in this case. Although it sounds very final and absolute the truth is I use lots of different lenses, including the Summilux and Nokton. However the frequency is quite low when compared to how much I use my favorites so the word "never" seems to communicate the point well.
EDIT - Actually, you were probably right in the first place. If you already own the Lux, save your money. Shoot the Lux and be happy. Happiness is NOT defined by owning too many 50mm lenses.
If it were me I would pick the ZM Sonnar but I am rarely looking for perfect sharpness. That is not to say that the Sonnar is not sharp. Closed down to f4 it gets very sharp!
Focus shift is actually an issue with a number of lenses, including that famous paragon of eye-cutting sharpness, the latest Aspherical Summicron 50/2. However, for some reason that I really do not understand, one of the defining characteristics of the Sonnar has become its focus shift. It does seem a bit silly since it is so very easy to work with. If you are taking a picture wide open within 3 meters or so you may want to lean forward just a tiny bit after you achieve focus. Maybe that is all anyone could find wrong with it. Of course, most people never actually see it since their own technique overwhelms any focus error from the focus shift.
* = Never is actually a very relative term in this case. Although it sounds very final and absolute the truth is I use lots of different lenses, including the Summilux and Nokton. However the frequency is quite low when compared to how much I use my favorites so the word "never" seems to communicate the point well.
EDIT - Actually, you were probably right in the first place. If you already own the Lux, save your money. Shoot the Lux and be happy. Happiness is NOT defined by owning too many 50mm lenses.
Last edited:
dcsang
Canadian & Not A Dentist
Oh.. don't worry - I'll continue to use the Lux - Just that this lens will be a bit different and, based on the feedback here I've opted to go for the Sonnar. Sure it's fast like the Lux but I do want it to render differently than the Lux.
In the test shots I did yesterday it would appear the Sonnar seemed, at least to me, to render a "warmer" image than the Nokton under the same conditions/subject. I like that and I do like the Zeiss rendering (always have.. ever since my days with a Contax G2 and Blad.. )
Thanks to all for the input - I'll live with the focus shift on my M7 and I'll have to adjust accordingly (just have to remember that it's the 50 Sonnar on the camera and not the 50 Lux)
Cheers,
Dave
robbeiflex
Well-known
A fine choice Dave, I am very happy with mine. A word of advice, go out with the M7 and C-Sonnar on your first roll, shoot something like a barbed wire fence at an angle at the copse focus 0.9m at f1.5, stop it down to f2, f2.8, f4 and then f5.6. When you see the results, you'll know way more about the focus shift than any internet hyperbole will tell you, and an accomplished photographer such as yourself will compensate easily. I am nowhere near as experienced as you are, and this exercise was a real eye opener for me. Since doing this with my M6 I've had no issues with focus shift. I did the same with my M-E and found the focus is right on at f2 for that camera, and similarly I can compensate easily. It's a great lens with a special look. I'm sure you'll enjoy it.
Cheers from a fellow T.O. native, albeit one who lives far away from there now,
Rob
Cheers from a fellow T.O. native, albeit one who lives far away from there now,
Rob
sojournerphoto
Veteran
Sonnar.
Focus shift no issue. There is field curvature too, but that's fine in my practical experience. If you want a flat field then you get the Planar...
Edited to say that if I could only have one it would be the Sonnar.
Focus shift no issue. There is field curvature too, but that's fine in my practical experience. If you want a flat field then you get the Planar...
Edited to say that if I could only have one it would be the Sonnar.
Dacnard
Life witness
I had the LTM version of the Nokton. I couldn't come to terms with its size and the intrusion into the viewfinder of my M6 0.85
Now I have the Sonnar ZM and I am very happy with it, I love its size, its rendition and its looks.
Also It has a more solid feel and better construction feel than the Nokton.
So I vote for the Sonnar!
Now I have the Sonnar ZM and I am very happy with it, I love its size, its rendition and its looks.
Also It has a more solid feel and better construction feel than the Nokton.
So I vote for the Sonnar!
Robert Lai
Well-known
My Zeiss 50mm f/2 ZM Sonnar focus optimized at f/2
My Zeiss 50mm f/2 ZM Sonnar focus optimized at f/2
According to internet lore, the Zeiss Sonnar 50 is optimized at either 1.5 or 2.8. I've tested mine, and it is consistently spot on at f/2. I'm glad that someone else has found their lens to be optimized at f/2. It "splits" the focus shift between the other two apertures.
My Zeiss 50mm f/2 ZM Sonnar focus optimized at f/2
According to internet lore, the Zeiss Sonnar 50 is optimized at either 1.5 or 2.8. I've tested mine, and it is consistently spot on at f/2. I'm glad that someone else has found their lens to be optimized at f/2. It "splits" the focus shift between the other two apertures.
Richard G
Veteran
I could tell that you'd fallen for the Sonnar. It is the most Marvellous lens. A lot of fun at f2.8 and wider, sure, but even at f5.6 there's magic. And as you noticed, compared to a Summilux or Nokton it's incredibly compact.