Nokton 35 1.4 on the R-D1?

M

morgan

Well-known
Local time
7:44 AM
Joined
Jun 12, 2006
Messages
711
Anybody try the newish nokton 35 1.4 on the RD-1 yet? I have the 1.2 and love it, but it's such a hulking beast, I'd like something smaller to carry around. I wouldn't get rid of the 1.2, I love it's character too much, but my current walk around is the ultron 1.7, but the 1.4 is even smaller than that, right?
 
I've tried the 35/1.2 and 35/1.4 on the Bessa R2A once. Not a serious test though. From what I saw they were equally good with different characters. The 35/1.2 offers a "butter like" flavor, while the 35/1.4 is more modern and with "thicker" color.

Yet the 35/1.4 is really compact. I'm using the 35/1.2 as my prime lens on the R-D1s, but there is not a day that I haven't been thinking about getting myself a 35/1.4. (Like you, I wouldn't part with my 35/1.2 either. Simply love it too much.)
 
The 35/1.2 is easier to handle on the RD-1 if you can rig a side grip. And take off that hood!

If you already have the 35/1.2 and look for something smaller to pair with it, why not try an old Canon LTM lens, or a CV 35/2.5? Or, a bit pricey but my current fav, a ZM 35/2.8?

If your heart is set on another fast lens in a small package for use on the RD-1, I'd recommend considering the CV 40/1.4 instead. The 35 framelines would actually fit the 40 better and that lens is much cheaper than the 35.
 
The 35/1.4 Nokton works fine on my R-D1, and yes it is really small - even 1mm shorter than the 40 Nokton. But for my shooting I prefer the 35/2 UC Hexanon. PM me if you are seriously interested in a like-new 35/1.4 Nokton for a good price.
 
Thanks for the offer John, let me stew on that. I'm thinking about picking up a Nikon Fe2 to abuse. I've been pretty happy with the ultron, but it's a little characterless, which definitely can't be said about the 1.2. On the other hand, the 1.2 is just so big, the camera doesn't fit in my messenger bag with it on. I'm seriously tempted to at least try the 1.4....
 
I use the VC 40:1.4 on the R-D1S and this is a good match. The lens is tiny compared to other lenses and being the SC type it is sharp as hell.....
Kopie%20van%202008_0619_1938.jpg
 
I am the odd man out. I use a Ultron 35/1.7 on my R-D1 with pleasing results. And cheaper than the other two.
 
I definitely don't dislike the 1.7. For me, I like it more on my R-D1 than on my film cameras, somehow it suits the Epson. But I'm stuck where I'd like a physically smaller lens since I'm going to keep the 1.2 for sure. I don't want to go longer than a 35, I already feel cramped enough on the R-D1.

As a side note, we're going to Buenos Aires in a few weeks and I'm thinking about picking up a 28 or 21.
 
Really awesome shots, seriously. I like the processing as well. You've sold me on the lens when I go for another 35. I'm probably going the cv 21mm for my trip - I'd love the zeiss but it's out of reach right now.
 
I have an RD1-s and both a CV 35/1.2 and a CV 35/1.4 SC. I use the 1.2 more often than any other lens with the R-D1s, but there are times when the 1.4 comes in handy for an "understated" look. I use the 1.4 SC mostly with my Bessa and B&W film. I don't have any R-D1S+1.4 SC images within easy reach right now, but I might post some later.

BTW, the "character" will depend on whether you use the SC versus the MC version. Again, I have the SC version.
 
I agree Keith. Even if I got the 1.4, the 1.2 isn't going anywhere. It's my favorite lens. But sometimes it's just too big, especially on my daily commute. When I'm going somewhere where I know there will be shots (especially of people), the 1.2 goes.
 
I have not tried a CV 21mm on the R-D1 but have had veruy good results with the Avenon (Kobalux) 21/2.8. You can find them on eBay every now and again for much closer to the cost of the CV than to the Zeiss. It's bigger then the CV but smaller and lighter than the ZM Biogon.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom