is the 50/1.5 that big?

[-vin-]

Hi everybody,

after seeking a 40, I'm considering to buya 50 nokton. But I'm not sure of this choice because of dimensions of this lens.

How can it be compared to a summicron (basing the comparison ONLY on dimensions)?




Thanks!

 

[rover]

a picture of the r3a with 50 Nokton can be sound towards the bottom here

http://www.cameraquest.com/voigtr2ar3a.htm

and r2 with Summicron here

http://www.cameraquest.com/voigtBR2.htm

The r2 and r3a are the same size.

 

[OurManInTangier]

I don't know how big the summicron is ( unfortunately!) but I do know how big the Nokton is, BIG B..I..G ( as Charlie Croker once said)

Its a great lens, contrasty and big but a great lens nonetheless. I was going to buy one but ended up getting a cheaper second hand Canon 1.8 ( which I love.)

 

[laptoprob]

It is indeed quite a lot bigger IIRC. I had one briefly.

 

[-vin-]

thanks, guys!

it is really too big... so the choice is still the 40. oh, framelines!

 

[ferider]

The 40 is sooo much better than the 50, Vin. A unique lens due to
speed and size. And to these eyes, the OOF behavior is identical.
You will get used to framing 40 very quickly. In particular if you
have to crop to 8x10 often.

Best,

Roland.

 

[Jason Sprenger]

A nice Jupiter-3 50/1.5 might be a consideration, if you can find a good one. With a filter size of 40.5mm, it's amazingly small for such a fast 50 and seems to hold its own when folks do their lens tests.

 

[-vin-]

The 40 is sooo much better than the 50, Vin. A unique lens due to
speed and size. And to these eyes, the OOF behavior is identical.
You will get used to framing 40 very quickly. In particular if you
have to crop to 8x10 often.

Best,

Roland.

the 40 seems to be the best choice. I could also find one new at a good price here in Italy.
But I've seen some posts here on the forum talking about strange effects on OOF areas of the shoot...

 

[mercedes_sl1970]

Oh I have to jump in and say that they are both great lenses - sharp, contrasty, great tonal range, etc. Not sure if you can say whether one is better than the other - depends on your need, style, etc. I have both and enjoy them both for their different characteristics. Yes the 50 is big but so is the 40 when you add the hood. Some days I just happen to prefer a 40 and others a 50. Not sure that any of this helps. Hey ho!

 

[nemjo]

If thinking on 50 CV, take a look on the Heliar.
Great small lens, I find.

nemjo

 

[ferider]

the 40 seems to be the best choice. I could also find one new at a good price here in Italy.
But I've seen some posts here on the forum talking about strange effects on OOF areas of the shoot...

Don't believe all you read on the internet. Almost every lens can be made
to create behavior like this, including the 50/1.5, the 50/1.4 Leitz Summilux
and the "bokeh king" (35/2 v4).

Check my test in

http://ferider.smugmug.com/gallery/2727734

and the flickr M-Mount and 40/50 Nokton forums.

One of the big, big advantages of the 40 is minimum focus distance of .7m.

Roland.