Nokton 40/1.4 vs Summicron-C 40/2

dmchadderton

dmchadderton

Member
Local time
5:20 PM
Joined
May 8, 2005
Messages
48
Sorry if you've read this before on one of the other forums, but I thought I'd ask a slightly wider audience ...

Has anyone got any experience with the lenses above? I have a nice Nokton 40/1.4MC which I have altered to default to the 35mm vf frameline, but have been offered (not immediately accessible for testing though) a very nice example of a Summicron-C 40/2 for 260ukp.

The 'cron 40/2 looks a perfect match for my M7 and could be an ideal standard lens for me (seems very small too).

Thoughts (and/or examples) anyone?

__
Dave
 
Last edited:
Can't help you with your question, but if you check the classifieds, Benjamin Marks is selling a 40/2 Summicron for $260, U.S.
 
I do not have a Nokton. The Summicron 40mm F2 is very sharp, and small. I use it on the CL and on the M3. If you do buy a Summicron we at RFF will look forward to a "Shoot-Out" between the two. The question has been asked many times, but not answered by someone who has both.

And the one for sale here is a very good price. Consider it, or use it as leverage against the offer made to you.
 
I've heard that the Nocton is not only bigger, faster, newer, and better for impressing the chicks, but it also has better resolution and contrast than the Cron. I ain't got neither, but I do use the Rokkor version of the Cron as the standard lens on my M3. So far it just seems like a 40mm version of my 50mm Cron (latest version), but I don't have the test equipment to prove its inferiority. I just take pictures with it, and they look damn good.
 
Perhaps my opinion is only anecdotal. I dont use the Cron, but when I travel to Barcelona, Taffer, let to me prove his Cron. Im astonished when I saw the large of the focus route . Make me slow to focus quickly. My Elmar is very smooth, but the Cron, was a bit hard to move.

I see too, like Richard, some post of the Cron Vs Nokton, but in the Epson RD1, and for my eyes, the Nokton is better in all, except maybe the bokeh in 1.4 - 2 that is a bit harsh. Remember that the APS-C sensor is different to the film, and probabbly the results are differents.
 
Rapidwinder Tom told me the Nokton 40/1.4 is an excellent lens. I have the 'cron-c and find it to be a fantastic lens. Many shooters also swear that the Minolta 40mm F2 is just as good or better than the Leica. :bang:
 
Last edited:
FWIW, I don't have the Summicron, but do have the 40/2 M-Rokkor (version for the Minolta CLE) & the 40/1.4 Nokton (multi-coated version). Personally, I don't find the M-Rokkor/Summicron to be *significantly* smaller/lighter than the Nokton, but that's just my own perception. As to performance, I think the Nokton is @ least as good as the M-Rokkor @ f/2 (probably better because of its more recent design & materials) & has the advantage of f/1.4. I know that other users have complained about the Nokton's boke, but I don't find it to be unpleasant @ all, although the M-Rokkor's boke is very smooth.

Some of my shots using these lenses (currently biased in # towards the Nokton, as it's newer & I haven't uploaded much before late-2003 to Flickr):

Rokkor: http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/minolta402mrokkorc198083/

Nokton: http://www.flickr.com/photos/furcafe/tags/cosinavoigtlander4014nokton/

I don't know whether there is any significant optical difference between the M-Rokkor & the Summicron. Per jja's post, I think 260 UK pounds for the Summicron is on the high side.
 
I think 260 UK pounds for the Summicron is on the high side.

Way high. $260USD is more like it. There's one selling here currently for that much.
 
furcafe said:
I don't know whether there is any significant optical difference between the M-Rokkor & the Summicron.
Click to expand...
There is no optical difference whatsoever between the two except that the Rokkor is multicoated.
 
Yes, I have learned a few things since I bought the M-Rokkor many years ago . . .

ywenz said:
maybe the Rokkor owner is just an inferior photographer compared to Nokton guy, because the Noktons look much better.. albeit, pixel peeping at these resolutions is fairly pointless(pun get it?)
Click to expand...
 
After my sale, I will have a 40/1.4 and a 40/2, I'd be happy to post some compart-pictures, if someone will e-mail me a reminder. FWIW, I have found them both to be capable lenses. I think the 40 Summicron is generally underrated by Leica enthusiasts and is a GREAT way to play with a quality piece of glass for not too much money. I won't be parting with my other one. :)
 
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2004/12/03/466.html

As mentioned on Photnet to Don here is a comparison that other on this forum may like to see as well. It compares both single and multicoated Noktons and the Summicron and CLE Rokkors. Its in Japanese but you can easily figure out which pics go with what lens. Pay particular attention to the temple shots with the big red lantern out front. Check the roof tiles the writing on the oblisk on the left and the chicken wire round the statues in the middle. Its clear from f2 to 4 that the Nokton is the sharper lens on all counts. I have four M mount 40mm lenses but not the SC Nokton. I have the 2 Rokkors, Summicron and MC Nokton and my comparisons reveal the same as this Japanese test. Some do always say that the CLE Rokkor and the Summircon yield identical results but as revealed in the Japanese test the Rokkor shots are always warmer than the Summicrons. All are great lenses but the Nokton is on top optically. That being said I find myself using the Summicron more often due to its smaller size and that the Nokton can be too high in contrast to my liking sometimes. Maybe the SC version Nokton may be in order.
 
Palaeoboy said:
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2004/12/03/466.html

I find myself using the Summicron more often due to its smaller size.
Click to expand...

Could you elaborate on this comment Palaeoboy. I have considered the Nokton specifically because of its compact size. At 29.7 mm, I believe that it is even shorter than the Summicron. Of course, I may be wrong.

I know that the Nokton is a much wider lens (55 mm) than the Summicron. I s this what your are referring to & how does this affect handling/ergonomics. Or are you referring to issues of size relative to the hood?

Any help is appreciated.

Thanks,
Huck
 
Hi Huck.

The Summicron-C is only 23.5mm long. I think that makes it the smallest of all Summicrons(?). So its smaller in all dimensions than the Nokton including weight. The Summicon has a flush aperture ring and the front tapers slightly from the the rear,while the Nokton with is larger glass has a flared aperture ring make it noticably larger and more visible in the viewfinder. Where the full compactness comes in if you want to take hood with you. The Summicon has a unique flat clip on lens cap that clips into the rubber hood. This hood and cap together are as thick as the Noktons lens cap is alone. If you want to take a hood for the Nokton its a much larger vented job. Its is a great hood but it does make the lens considerably larger if you choose to use it. The odd series 5.5 filters have a secondary advantage (although alot of people hate them) is that if you want to add a permanent UV filter the size doesnt increase at all, its contained within the hood. Add one to the Nokton and its becomes thicker again. Since my main M Mount cameras are CL's and CLE's the Nokton makes them alot chunkier when you have one mounted. (The CL looks quite mean with a Nokton mounted like it really means business! LOL) One thing i find is that when the Summicron cap is mounted its really solid like the lens has its own little shield. The Noktons cap feel loose and feels like it could easily be knocked off.

If your choosing between them it could be difficult, I collect 40mm lenses so dont mind owning more than one. If you need 1.4 then there is no other choice and its a good lens to be sure. If you take alot of shots in flarey conditions, again the Nokton. According to the Japanese test posted above the singe coated Nokton flares less than the Multicoated Rokkor. So its not all in the coatings! If you want the sharpest 40 then again its the Nokton. If your using it on a CL and didnt need 1.4 then the Summicron is the way to go as its definately the more compact package. If you can let me know what camera and other lenses you wanted to use it with? That may influence me one way or another as to which to choose in your case.
 
Thanks, Joel, for such a complete answer! :) I knew that the Summicron was compact, but I didn't realize that it was THAT small. 23.5 mm is impressive. Amazing that the SC flares less than the MC.

I have the Rollei 35 RF with the 40 Sonnar & have been tempted to get the Nokton for times when I need the extra speed. I love the Sonnar; it's a great lens & pretty compact in its own right (28.5 mm without the hood). I don't want to replace it, but the Nokton has been tempting. I may start my own little 40 mm collection. ;)

In terms of other lenses, I have the 50 Summicron, CV 75 Color-Heliar, & the CV 28 Color-Skopar. I've been lusting for the ZI for the past year & may add a lens - prabably the 35 Biogon - when I pick that up, so I have to pace myself.

Huck
 
Last edited:
Huck, THe SC flares less than the Multicoated CLE Rokkor in case you misread what I wrote. The MC Nokton flares least of them all.

If you have the Sonnar already I would go with the Nokton MC. It will also fit well on the size of the Rollei RF. If you decide to sell the sonnar let me know. I only have that lens in a Rollei 35s would be nice to have an M/LTM version as well.
 
Yes, Joel, I did misread your post . . . ah, the woes of speed reading. Thanks for pointing out the error of my ways. I guess that modern coatings - even on the SC - are better than those that were used 25 years ago. Funny, but CV coatings are one of the things that Erwin said could be improved on their lenses in general.

I did offer the Rollei kit for sale to help finance the ZI but had no takers. (See classifieds.) I probably priced it too high - which shows, I guess, that I didn't really want to sell it. I'd hate to part with the Sonnar & would only sell it with the camera or if the camera sold separately, so that I no longer had 40 framelines. The 35RF with Sonnar & CV 75/2.5 really makes a nice compact travel kit.

Thanks again for your tips.

Huck
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom