nokton 35 1.4 and summilux 35 1.4 choosing & result

[monster]

Hi


I just bought a cosina voightlender 35 mm f/1.4 nokton for 1 weeks ago (560 USD include lens hood) its nice, good build quality, and compact, lovely lens.

but yesterday i've found a demo items from leica dealer there's a leica summilux 35 mm f/1.4 sold for 2900 USD , i want it

maybe i plan to trade for my nokton + summicron 35 mm f/2 asph and add some amount of cash to get this summilux



this is a hard choice 😕






someone can help me make a decision


Thanks.

 

[thomasw_]

I think it is more a question of lens signature preference as well as the cost. If you love the summilux 35 asph signature more than the signature of the cv 35/1,4, you will love your shots with the lux 35 asph more. That means your photos will be better in your view: and this is what matters ultimately. So if you can afford the lens you desire, spend your money as you please.

 

[BillBingham2]

Will you be making $3000 more money with the Leica than you could with the CV? Will you like it $3000 more? Worth is a very relative thing. Having CV and ZI to think about and try makes plunking down $3000 for a lens harder than it was before they were in the market.

B2 (;->

 

[monster]

did a summilux 35 mm f/1.4 has more performance in big gap from CV 35 mm f/1.4?


compare with much more price

 

[Nachkebia]

Do you mind showing us results from nokton 35 1.4? and frankly who gives a rats bokeh about Leica lens or not? who cares?!! Just take some pictures and stop thinking about Leica! this is my honest suggestion 🙂

 

[Tom A]

Having had a couple of 35/1,4Asph and gotten rid of them, I recommend that you shoot for awhile with the nokton 35/1,4.
The 35/1,4 Asph is a nice lens, not spectacular by any means as it is extremely sensitive to flare and a bit of a lump to haul around. The wide open performance is very good, but unless you shoot stuff in bright daylight at 1.4, you probably will not see much of a difference. In the murky light that requires 1.4 and slow speeds, either the Nokton 35/1,4 or even an older version of the 35/1,4 Summilux will do well.
You already have the 35f2 Asph and in my opinion, that is a better lens than the 35/1,4 Asph. Still a bit sensitive to flare, but easier to handle and from f2.8 on, just as good!
The Nokton 35/1,4 is not a fancy lens, just a damned good one and considering that the 35/1,4 Asph is going to cost you 5 times as much, a bargain of all times! If you need a high speed 35 - go for the Nokton 35/1,2 for when you need that kind of speed. Optically it is a bit of "pushing the envelope" lens - that 1/2 stop can actually make the difference if your choice is 1/8 sec or 1/15! Even after springing for the 35/1,2 you will have enough money left to keep yourself in film for quite a while!

 

[BigSteveG]

I have the 35 1.4 asph and, at times, have been saddened by its flare issues. It is a great lens and does have its signature. I tend to use it in low light situations and it does come in handy. For a sharp, "all around" day lens I use the Konica UC 35 and it is quite nice. The resolution is outstanding and I don't need anymore 35's.....unless a good deal on a Summaron came up!!!

 

[foto_fool]

I have not noticed flare with my 35mm Summilux ASPH, but then I can't recall ever really pushing it, or shooting it without the hood. I agree with Tom - it is "a bit of a lump to haul around" expecailly with the rectangular hood on. On the other hand, some of my favorite images made in the last year came from this lens.

Honestly, because of the price I probably would not own the 35 ASPH had it not come in a package deal with an M6 and some other gear. After reselling the gear I didn't need I found that I had picked up the 35 for free, and did not have another RF 35mm lens in the lineup at the time.

Since then I picked up a 35/2 UC Hexanon, which is a very good performer and less than half the size of the 35 ASPH - though with the Hexanon sometimes I miss the extra stop of speed compared to the Summilux. I have a 35/1.4 Nokton on the way. I will see if it reallly ofers the best of both worlds - as fast as the Summilux with the size of the Hexanon.

One thing I have not seen in Summilux images is vignetting, which I have seen with the 40mm Nokton. I have shot the Hexanon mostly on the R-D1 and so don't have enough comparison shots to say whether the compact Hexanon shows corner light fall off on full frame to the extent that the 40 Nokton does. If the 35mm Nokton vignettes to a degree I can live with, I may have one or two lenses for sale soon.

 

[kbg32]

Keep the Nokton.

 

[jan normandale]

Having had a couple of 35/1,4Asph and gotten rid of them, I recommend that you shoot for awhile with the nokton 35/1,4.
The 35/1,4 Asph is a nice lens, not spectacular by any means as it is extremely sensitive to flare and a bit of a lump to haul around. The wide open performance is very good, but unless you shoot stuff in bright daylight at 1.4, you probably will not see much of a difference. In the murky light that requires 1.4 and slow speeds, either the Nokton 35/1,4 or even an older version of the 35/1,4 Summilux will do well.
You already have the 35f2 Asph and in my opinion, that is a better lens than the 35/1,4 Asph. Still a bit sensitive to flare, but easier to handle and from f2.8 on, just as good!
The Nokton 35/1,4 is not a fancy lens, just a damned good one and considering that the 35/1,4 Asph is going to cost you 5 times as much, a bargain of all times! If you need a high speed 35 - go for the Nokton 35/1,2 for when you need that kind of speed. Optically it is a bit of "pushing the envelope" lens - that 1/2 stop can actually make the difference if your choice is 1/8 sec or 1/15! Even after springing for the 35/1,2 you will have enough money left to keep yourself in film for quite a while!

Monster .. you got a good answer here. I wish most people gave responses like this one.

 

[back alley]

tom is both knowledgeable and diplomatic, pushing no hidden agenda.

 

[Tom A]

The one caveat I have when it comes to my opinions on lenses is that I shoot film. I have tried to get into digital, but to no avail! I suspect that some lenses behave differently on film than on digital. I not only shoot solely film, but only bl/w - how retro can you get?

 

[Harry Lime]

Having had a couple of 35/1,4Asph and gotten rid of them, I recommend that you shoot for awhile with the nokton 35/1,4.
The 35/1,4 Asph is a nice lens, not spectacular by any means as it is extremely sensitive to flare and a bit of a lump to haul around. The wide open performance is very good, but unless you shoot stuff in bright daylight at 1.4, you probably will not see much of a difference. In the murky light that requires 1.4 and slow speeds, either the Nokton 35/1,4 or even an older version of the 35/1,4 Summilux will do well.

I don't know, Tom.

I know that you had some serious problems with at least one example of your Lux, but I've had mine for about 4 or 5 years now and flare has never been a problem. I shot it for the first few years in the blazing sunshine of California; backlight situations and all. No problems in close to 1000 rolls.

I also have the Canon EF 1.4/35L, which turned out to be more susceptible to flare than the Lux.

 

[Harry Lime]

But I do agree that the square hood that comes with the Lux ASPH is far too big and makes the lens very bulky.

I dumped the square hood and replaced it with a metal screw-in hood from the Contax G series. I cut a vent in to the front of it and it works like a charm, while taking up a fraction of the space.

 

[edhohoho]

I am very happy with the 35 Summilux ASPH because I really like the image rendering and speed. It also helps that I was able to get it at a fair price. However, since I enjoy taking pictures mainly in low light and at night, this lens has the best combination of relatively small size, high speed, and high performance for me since I hand-hold everything and try not to use my R-D1 beyond ISO 800. I can walk around all day (literally from day to night) with this one lens so it is versatile. The CV 35/1.2 gives very nice bokeh from what I have seen, but it is bigger.

I was recently looking into getting a smaller sized 35mm lens for daytime shooting, and out of the usual suspects, I liked the 35 Summicron ASPH based on what I have seen it do. Personally, I did not like the "double line" bokeh I have often seen from the 35 Summicron v4 and 35 UC Hexanon, which are very similar in nature. The CV 35/1.4 is quite nice from the few pictures I have seen, but it also has some of this "double line" character. Nowadays, since the prices of used 35 Summicron ASPH lenses are close to what I paid for the 35 Summilux ASPH, I personally can't justify spending even $600, let alone $1800, on a lens that I would only use during the daytime. For me, the 35 Summilux ASPH does all this and more so it was worth the initial investment.

I don't know too much about the 35 Summilux pre-ASPH, but it seems like a nice alternative given its smaller size. However, with its prices selling for near or more than what I paid for the ASPH, it's a no-go.

With regard to the 35 Summilux ASPH and flare, it does happen since I tend to shoot straight at point light sources at night--WITH a filter on and no hood (yes, I know, but it's been raining recently and I can be clumsy sometimes). I think most lenses would have difficulty under these conditions, and I often have more problems from internal reflections due to the filter, so I think for most intents and purposes the lens handles flare well.

There will always be the repetitive debate about cost, so all I will say is that while it is unfortunate that there is quite a premium to be paid for high-end equipment, for me, it is worth it in the long-run when one lens satisfies my criteria and needs concerning size, speed, and image rendering almost all the time as opposed to multiple lenses that individually deliver what I need some of the time.

 

[Dektol Dan]

Old + new is the adventure

Old + new is the adventure

The one caveat I have when it comes to my opinions on lenses is that I shoot film. I have tried to get into digital, but to no avail! I suspect that some lenses behave differently on film than on digital. I not only shoot solely film, but only bl/w - how retro can you get?

Retro yes, and using only black and white to judge a lens by is kind of like asking a color blind man give you his impression of a sunset.

From what I've seen the new 35 1.4 'Classic' is not a good value at all when compared with with the real classics. I'm having a ball mating old glass to the newer negative films. Consider that a 3.5 Summaron goes for $200, a 2.8 for $500, and the 1.7 Ultron (clearly not a classic, but a good example of the deprecation of VC glass) won't bring $240 in the classifieds on this site.

I think VC glass is a poor investment and the quality is exactly what you pay for.

Now that Tom and others have posted the results of the the 1.4 VC 35 I'm almost ready to post a comparison of the Ultron and the Summarons from a shoot I did this weekend. Sure they aren't fast but they aren't very good wide open when compared to the really expensive glass from Leitz.

I'm still scanning, but so far the 2.8 Summaron is clearly the winner, but you'll have to judge for yourself. It takes a Classic to be a Classic.

 

[Anupam]

I think VC glass is a poor investment and the quality is exactly what you pay for.

It's not an investment. If I need to invest I buy mutual funds instead of banking on the red dot. And I have found nothing but excellent quality from CV lenses. Sure I would love slightly better build, but not at ten times the price.

-A

 

[Bill Blackwell]

When I had the CV 40mm f/1.4 Nokton I did a comparison with both my 50 Asph Summilux and 35mm Asph Summilux. The Nokton was noticeably sharper wide open than either of the Leica lenses - evening out (where the Leica glass was marginally superior) at about f/5.6 - I could not believe it!

Shortly thereafter I decided to sell the Nokton. Don't ask why...

At 20% of the cost of a Summilux, you would be nuts to buy the Summilux even if the Summilux was twice as good as the Nokton (which it is not).

As to the "investment" rationale, I don't know anyone who has lost more than 15-20% when selling a CV lens purchased new. This is certainly on par with Leica (only the CV numbers are smaller).

 

[RuedigerMerz]

When I had the CV 40mm f/1.4 Nokton I did a comparison with both my 50 Asph Summilux and 35mm Asph Summilux. The Nokton was noticeably sharper wide open than either of the Leica lenses - evening out (where the Leica glass was marginally superior) at about f/5.6 - I could not believe it!

Very interesting Bill. I assume you have prove for that.

Rudy

 

[jerkmam]

i,would.like to no.if40mm1/4nokton is as sharp 35mm1/4nokton..at 11
,8,56,4,28,2 ,1/4.ihave.a35mmf2sunnicro<,3>,but no,50mm lenes, 1/4 lenes. the35mm1/2 is to big.