cp_ste.croix
At the beginning again.
So I've been staring at pictures on Fickr, lens tests on Focus Shift (Thank you mfogiel), bokeh circles....and I think I'm going cross-eyed.
Here's what I need: A fast low-light lens that makes great pictures for my M3.
Now, I'd get the summilux asph, but I'm having some trouble finding a good used one for a price I can afford.
Between these three lenses, which might you choose and why? I realise there are trade-offs between all versions, and I guess I'll have to make a decision eventually, but I'd love your input. I'd like to buy one lens and keep it and not have to think about it again.
I already have a 50'cron but 2 just isn't fast enough for me in some situations. If I bought the 'lux I'd have to sell it to knock down the price a bit, but I could conceivable keep it if I bought one of the other two if it's performance was that much better.
Advice? Input?
Cheers guys!
Here's what I need: A fast low-light lens that makes great pictures for my M3.
Now, I'd get the summilux asph, but I'm having some trouble finding a good used one for a price I can afford.
Between these three lenses, which might you choose and why? I realise there are trade-offs between all versions, and I guess I'll have to make a decision eventually, but I'd love your input. I'd like to buy one lens and keep it and not have to think about it again.
I already have a 50'cron but 2 just isn't fast enough for me in some situations. If I bought the 'lux I'd have to sell it to knock down the price a bit, but I could conceivable keep it if I bought one of the other two if it's performance was that much better.
Advice? Input?
Cheers guys!
xayraa33
rangefinder user and fancier
Roger Hicks
Veteran
I have both the Nokton and the Sonnar. I don't remember the last time I used the Nokton. I just prefer the look of the Sonnar, and probably used it for 90% of the 500 or so shots I took of a music festival over the week-end (along with 90mm). But that's personal. No-one can tell you which to buy.
Cheers,
R
Cheers,
R
monochromejrnl
Well-known
ditto - or the Canon 50/1.5 LTM Sonnar copy.. my favourite lens.. I also have it in Contax mount and use it on my Contax IIA, prefer the M3's viewfinder but the Contax II can be more accurately focused using the focus dial...
if you're patient you can get one for under $300... if I had to have two 50s, I'd get the 50 Nokton... makes beautiful pictures, not built quite the same as the older Canons or Leicas but can't be beat for the money in a modern LTM lens...
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
The two lenses have different looks and are different beasts. The question is: what are you looking for? Lots of folks (including me) love the Sonnar look -- it is most special wide open, IMHO. I think that the Nockton (which I also own, but which I have not used in two years) is more of a general purpose lens. Not everyone loves its OOF areas when used wide open, but it is sharp and it is fast at a fraction of the price of a 50/1.4 Asph. At this speed, I also happen to love the Summarit (50/1.5) - a little soft wide open, great OOF areas, and a slightly greater minimum focus distance than the others, but very special, in my book. I would say, get the Nockton used, if you can find one. You can use it, see if you like it and, if not, sell it for roughly what you paid for it.
Good luck in your search.
Ben Marks
Good luck in your search.
Ben Marks
ferider
Veteran
If you want the Sonnar look for classic portraits, get a Nikkor 50/1.4 LTM. Real nice, small, and modifyable to focus down to .7m.
If you want an all purpose fast 50/1.4, get either the last pre-asph Lux, or if you have less money, the Canon 50/1.4.
Or get all three .... (what I did
).
The Nokton is a good lens just unreasonably big, not well built, and has (only) 0.9 min focus.
Cheers,
Roland.
If you want an all purpose fast 50/1.4, get either the last pre-asph Lux, or if you have less money, the Canon 50/1.4.
Or get all three .... (what I did
).The Nokton is a good lens just unreasonably big, not well built, and has (only) 0.9 min focus.
Cheers,
Roland.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Ah, yes: 'Go and buy a 50 year old lens [which may or may not still be as good as the day it was made]."
Newer lenses are probably an easier, safer bet. But if you don't mind the gamble, or can actually test the older lens, yes, there are bargains to be had.
Cheers,
R.
Newer lenses are probably an easier, safer bet. But if you don't mind the gamble, or can actually test the older lens, yes, there are bargains to be had.
Cheers,
R.
ferider
Veteran
Well you know .... it's for a 50 year old camera after all ...
Not to say that the ASPH 50/1.4 wouldn't be the best (but least affordable) choice ....
Roland.
Not to say that the ASPH 50/1.4 wouldn't be the best (but least affordable) choice ....
Roland.
mfogiel
Veteran
I think there are several very happy users (JSuominen) here of the Millenium Nikkor 50/1.4 as well. The C Sonnar wide open is basically a "dreamy" lens with totally unreal bokeh - for normal shooting wide open get something else.
furcafe
Veteran
Yes, but you need a proper Nikon RF-LTM or M adapter for the Millenium Nikkor, & not all of those adapters will allow critical focusing.
Last edited:
cp_ste.croix
At the beginning again.
I'm basically looking for something to shoot night markets, indoors, bars, etc with. Maybe a bit of portraiture and the like, but primarily low light stuff. I tend to prefer longer lenses for portraits.
ferider
Veteran
Chris,
Sherry seems to have both pre-asph (E43, black, external hood) and asph Lux available, 1 copy each at reasonable price since post-CLA, IMO.
Best,
Roland.
Sherry seems to have both pre-asph (E43, black, external hood) and asph Lux available, 1 copy each at reasonable price since post-CLA, IMO.
Best,
Roland.
sockeyed
Well-known
In some ways, it comes down to what you can/want to afford. The Nokton 50 is 1/3 the cost of the ZM Sonnar 50 and is a potent performer. You mentioned that you were interested in a pre-asph Summilux; when testing the Nokton, Erwin Puts suggested that the Nokton outperformed all but the new ASPH Summilux. Mine has been around the world with me and I love it. It has only been bumped from more regular use by the ZM Planar 50, which of course is only an f/2 lens.
Austerby
Well-known
I like the 40mm f1.4 Nokton - even faster than the 50mm lenses under discussion and slightly cheaper than the 50mm Nokton. It fits well on my M3 and is a very useful small low-light lens - though I do prefer my CZ Sonnar overall.
cp_ste.croix
At the beginning again.
thanks everyone!
bigdog
Established
"Ah, yes: 'Go and buy a 50 year old lens [which may or may not still be as good as the day it was made]."
Newer lenses are probably an easier, safer bet. But if you don't mind the gamble, or can actually test the older lens, yes, there are bargains to be had."
I agree with Mr. Hicks to some degree. I bought my Bessa R2a when I got fed up with my quirky Fed. I bought a new 35mm Ultron to go with it (excellent lens). I decided I needed a fast 50 to expand my kit.
I have a Jupiter 50mm f/2 which seems a bit soft but renders nicely for certain images/portraits (not sure if the softness is a lens to film plane issue I have read about). I also have an Industar LD 55mm which is razor sharp but a bit slow at 2.8 and the focus is very stiff but a steal....think I paid $20 for a brand new one with shade.
I returned my first Ebay won Canon 50mm 1.4 which had fungus, oily blades and sticky aperture ring but holding that little gem in my hand convinced me to try for another. I am glad I did because I picked up a pristine sample at just over $200 and I am very happy with it's performance. The Nokton was going to be my fast 50 but I never seemed to have enough saved and then after months of watching Ebay the Canon came along. I have no desire to get a Nokton now and I will look for a ultra-wide angle lens.
Newer lenses are probably an easier, safer bet. But if you don't mind the gamble, or can actually test the older lens, yes, there are bargains to be had."
I agree with Mr. Hicks to some degree. I bought my Bessa R2a when I got fed up with my quirky Fed. I bought a new 35mm Ultron to go with it (excellent lens). I decided I needed a fast 50 to expand my kit.
I have a Jupiter 50mm f/2 which seems a bit soft but renders nicely for certain images/portraits (not sure if the softness is a lens to film plane issue I have read about). I also have an Industar LD 55mm which is razor sharp but a bit slow at 2.8 and the focus is very stiff but a steal....think I paid $20 for a brand new one with shade.
I returned my first Ebay won Canon 50mm 1.4 which had fungus, oily blades and sticky aperture ring but holding that little gem in my hand convinced me to try for another. I am glad I did because I picked up a pristine sample at just over $200 and I am very happy with it's performance. The Nokton was going to be my fast 50 but I never seemed to have enough saved and then after months of watching Ebay the Canon came along. I have no desire to get a Nokton now and I will look for a ultra-wide angle lens.
cp_ste.croix
At the beginning again.
Alas, they're both sold.
Tanks again everyone for the thoughtful insights. My decision isn't any easier though
pau3
Well-known
By the way, if you're looking for a fast lens you should take into account that the
50/1.5 Nokton is closer to 1.8 - or even 1.9 - than to 1.5 lens. It is good,
but it's not that fast.
Pau
50/1.5 Nokton is closer to 1.8 - or even 1.9 - than to 1.5 lens. It is good,
but it's not that fast.
Pau
cp_ste.croix
At the beginning again.
is it that they've measured it wrong? I already have a summicron (which I'll probably sell) so if that's the case, between it's size and aperature it's out. Cheers!
x-ray
Veteran
I've not found this to be true with either copy that I've owned. Both have been on the money.
I still have one that I purchased new and the asph summilux. IMO the summilux is only slightly better at max aperture and I mean only slightly. In real picture taking you will not see any difference. If you believe you can see a difference go to my gallery and tell me what was shot with what lens. You can't even do it from original 11x14 prints.
I like the asph and find it to be a superb lens but realistically the Nokton is too. The Nokton is darn good and the newer version that I have has worked a few minor gripes out ( shallow clicks on aperture ring ). The new one that I've had for a year + has deep clicks and is smooth as silk. Matter of fact it focuses much smoother then my asph summilux which I find quite rough.
I've given considerable thought to selling the summilux. I just don't find it that much better and in most cases no better. The jury is out at the moment as to what to do with it.
After a few problems with my asph summilux I found that it was improperly assembled and the mount was not made correctly. It's now fixed but this represents poor QC on Leicas part. Ashamed that QC is not better.
My vote is the Nokton. Save the money and take a trip or go to a workshop and learn something new about photography.