Have You seen the new 35/1.4 Nokton?

I'd probably opt for a SC... depending on how much of a veiling flare/whatever that it has. If it's much more prone to flare than the mc i'll probably get the mc.

Though I pretty much always shoot black and white film.
 
the hysteria/ buzz over this new lens has been fun to watch. Even I, with my preference for old lenses from the 50s and 60s, have been enticed. However, I think that I will wait for reviews of the lens on RFF before taking the plunge.

Although, I have to admit that Roland's endorsement of the 35/1.7 Ultron intrigued me enough to watch an eBay auction.

It will be interesting to watch this develop. I wish that Cosina would release the new lens in LTM- what a treat for folks that prefer to use LTM cameras.
 
Stephen - Will you have access to the SC version as well as the MC version? The SC might be better able than the MC to co-reside in my bag beside the 35mm Summilux ASPH.

Tom A - If Cosina makes both an M-mount and an LTM version will they be able to sell 50% more units? Does this make it an economically viable proposal to do both?
 
I think the problem with making a 35f1.4 in LTM mount is bigger than we think. Even by todays standard a 35f1.4 is a rather complex design and the new CV lens is quite compact with only a 43mm front. that means it has to have a rather substantial rear element and that could cause problem with the 39mm thread. On a lens like the 35f1,2 (only 1/2 stop gain in speed, but considerably bigger front) - the rear element is simply too big to adapt to 39mm thread, As a matter of fact, it was discussed at one time in Nakano and I was told that the thread would have to be cut in the actual glass of the rear element! And we thought the Biogon 35mm 2,8 had a scary rear element!
I like the idea of having the two choices of the 35f1,4, either MC or SC. I have both of the 40's and I use them according to the mood I want to establish. The MC is sharp, contrasty and "modern", whilst the SC has a vintage look to it in bl/w. It is by no means less sharp than the MC version, but the softer rendition can be used for a more pleasing, smooth toned image. I haven't done any resolution tests on the 40's, but I suspect that they are very close to each other or, if anything, the SC has an edge there. Multicoating tends to fool us into thinking that higher contrast equals higher resolution,
As I said, I haven't handled the new 35's yet, only discussed what could be done with it. It looks very compact, only protruding about 28-29 mm from the body. Rougly the size of the old pre asph Summilux.
 
Joe Brugger said:
Wonder what size the filter ring is? Not 39, I'd expect. Having looked around for a Summilux 35 lately (too much money or too beat up) I think Voigtlander will sell a fair number of these.
Pardon my ignorance -- was there previously a 35/1.4 in LTM, or will the necessary glass fit in that mount?
Click to expand...

the closest to a fast f1.4 LTM was the Canon 35mm f 1.5 , but I did hear about some small number of the original 1958 35mm Summilux's made in LTM.
Leicaphiles can tell you if the new asph 35 Summilux was ever made in small numbers in LTM.
 
tab-ulating plusses and minuses

tab-ulating plusses and minuses

Krosya said:
ANd even than it'd have to be amazing, as I understand it has a tab and I hate tabs.
Click to expand...

me too. i don't like putting my finger on a tab, nor for that matter other people putting a tab on me...

but this lens does have a lot going for it, and it sure is fun to watch the proactive feeding frenzy, though
 
I cannot believe it that so many people here want again another new lens as if they did not already own a similar lens with a similar focal length. What is so great about buying a new lens?
 
raid said:
I cannot believe it that so many people here want again another new lens as if they did not already own a similar lens with a similar focal length. What is so great about buying a new lens?
Click to expand...

I don't own a single 35mm so for me... its obvious why I would want this. 🙂
 
GAS seems to be the case for most people. I only like older lenses, so the introduction of a new lens is insignificant to me.
 
raid said:
GAS seems to be the case for most people. I only like older lenses, so the introduction of a new lens is insignificant to me.
Click to expand...
Personally I've been after a faster, smaller 35 that focuses closer than my Ultron. A 35 Summilux of ANY vintage has been way out of my price range but now there is a brand new lens that has everything I'm looking for and it's within my budget. No brainer!
 
The differences between SC and MC are the coatings. SC is single coat... mc is multi-coat. Basically one is more suited for color (the mc) as it has a higher contrast to it.

SC is generally a lower-contrast lens so it has a more smoother look to it.

SC lenses are also generally more prone to flare.
 
This indeed may be the lens of choice to replace my cv 35 2.5 pII. Even though I am quite happy with that lens I would like to have something a little faster. I think this will be a great lens on the M8 and above all, show us one lens in the recent cosina voigtlander repituare that has completely let us down, needless to say with modern lens design and what not it will be a fine lens that 99% of us here wont be able to use to its full ability.
 
raid said:
I cannot believe it that so many people here want again another new lens as if they did not already own a similar lens with a similar focal length. What is so great about buying a new lens?
Click to expand...

An upgraded 35 summilux, with a warranty, at an affordable price. For me, I'm always hitting f2 and wanting more, and yes, I know if I get this I'll just be hitting 1.4 and wanting more. It boils down to a few things (in no particular order): size, cost, speed, (presumed) optical superiority over the old summilux and an inability to keep my credit card locked up.:bang::bang::bang:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom