Huck Finn
Well-known
Joel, I should ask you whether you have any comments on the much discussed bokeh qualities of the 40 Nokton.
Huck
Huck
Nokton 40/1.4 vs Summicron-C 40/2
- Thread starter dmchadderton
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 34
- Views 6K
Huck Finn
Well-known
Bump. - Huck Finn
Palaeoboy
Joel Matherson
Oh Dear the big "B" question. I was asked this question before on another forum and was almost linched for answering! Bokeh is a very subjective thing. Do I believe the bokeh is better or worse on the Nokton? No neither is better or worse but they are different. I often see bad Nokton bokeh shots taken at 1.4 generally with some concentrated light source in the back ground. This of course is the bad bokeh receipe no matter what lens you used. I will have to put it like this, yes they do have a different character to their bokeh but neither is better or worse. I think this is not a case of Leica vs Voigtlander bokeh but rather older lens design vs modern lens design. I think that if the 40mm Summarit in the Minilux went to 1.4 that it would probably have similar character to its bokeh and at f4 I think you would be hard pressed to pick which lens took what picture. Modern lenses are corrected more than older ones. My opinion is that the better corrected and generally sharper modern lenses with emphasis on correcting for aberations in focus may not (to some peoples eyes) have as smooth a transition to out of focus as the earlier lenses with less correction.
I personally find I dont mind the bokeh of either, BUT it does bother me to mix and match lenses of different character when using them together that day. This generally involves multiple sets of lenses. For example if im using the 40mm Summicron I will generally use a 90mm Elmar-C and a Version 3 Elmarit 28 as I find the overall character in these 3 lenses of similar Vintage. If im using the Nokton then I use the 28 f3.5 and 90 f3.5 Voigtlander lenses because their overall character is similar with respect to contrast etc. I dont think it bothers most so I think its one of my pet quirks that I notice when I mix and match lenses of different vintage. Even too extreme sometimes. For example when I first purchased a CLE 40mm Rokkor I noticed that although it has a similar character to the 40mm Summicron it was slightly higher in contrast and has a warmer tone. By chance I was offered a Rokkor 28mm and found it too has a matching warm tone to the Rokkor 40mm. (If you look at that Japanese test you will see that warmer tone I refer too) So that meant a 3rd set DAMN! Im actually scared of getting the 40mm Sonnar in case its slightly different character may force me to get a 4th Zeiss set! Its madness! I have 3 Pelican cases that I move the camera bodies from one set to the next depending on which 40mm I want to use. I think most people arent so compulsive that they can mix and match lenses without nitpicking the way I do. The differences are all very subtle but one you know its there you cant help notice it every time. An eclectic mix of lenses never bothered me before it just deveoped when I started comparing 40mm lenses and I could no longer attribute the character change to different focal lengths. Lesson here is dont start buying the same focal length just because its fun as it has a domino effect!! Overall though, I think that modern Leica, Voightlander and Konica lenses can be mixed without noticible character shifts (Not sure about new Zeiss lenses as I havent tried them) So to, by and large the earlier Leica and Minolta lenses can be mixed as most wouldnt pick the slight contrast/tone changes without incredibly close inspection. In the end the reason I asked you which lenses you had as I consider the other lenses you own important in matching to the 40.
I personally find I dont mind the bokeh of either, BUT it does bother me to mix and match lenses of different character when using them together that day. This generally involves multiple sets of lenses. For example if im using the 40mm Summicron I will generally use a 90mm Elmar-C and a Version 3 Elmarit 28 as I find the overall character in these 3 lenses of similar Vintage. If im using the Nokton then I use the 28 f3.5 and 90 f3.5 Voigtlander lenses because their overall character is similar with respect to contrast etc. I dont think it bothers most so I think its one of my pet quirks that I notice when I mix and match lenses of different vintage. Even too extreme sometimes. For example when I first purchased a CLE 40mm Rokkor I noticed that although it has a similar character to the 40mm Summicron it was slightly higher in contrast and has a warmer tone. By chance I was offered a Rokkor 28mm and found it too has a matching warm tone to the Rokkor 40mm. (If you look at that Japanese test you will see that warmer tone I refer too) So that meant a 3rd set DAMN! Im actually scared of getting the 40mm Sonnar in case its slightly different character may force me to get a 4th Zeiss set! Its madness! I have 3 Pelican cases that I move the camera bodies from one set to the next depending on which 40mm I want to use. I think most people arent so compulsive that they can mix and match lenses without nitpicking the way I do. The differences are all very subtle but one you know its there you cant help notice it every time. An eclectic mix of lenses never bothered me before it just deveoped when I started comparing 40mm lenses and I could no longer attribute the character change to different focal lengths. Lesson here is dont start buying the same focal length just because its fun as it has a domino effect!! Overall though, I think that modern Leica, Voightlander and Konica lenses can be mixed without noticible character shifts (Not sure about new Zeiss lenses as I havent tried them) So to, by and large the earlier Leica and Minolta lenses can be mixed as most wouldnt pick the slight contrast/tone changes without incredibly close inspection. In the end the reason I asked you which lenses you had as I consider the other lenses you own important in matching to the 40.
Huck Finn
Well-known
Great story, Joel! 😀
I appreciate your point about the Nokton bokeh at f/1.4. Too often I've seen people compare the Nokton & Summicron & refer to the bokeh of each wide open. Well, not a fair comparison. and of course the light source is another major factor. Thanks for pointing out the nuances.
Thanks for the rest of your reply as well. Now that you've sensitized me to the differences in these lens lines, you'll have me running out to but the Rollei 80 Planar to match with my 40 Sonnar in addition to buying the Nokton to go with my 2 CV lenses. And of course when I buy the ZI I'll not only have to buy the 35 as my all-around lens, but I'll have to get a 25 & 85 to go with it . Uh oh, did I say the ZM 85. No way, too rich for my blood. Even the Rollei 80 was too pricey for me - & it's half the cost of the ZM 85. Ugh!
Cheers,
Huck
I appreciate your point about the Nokton bokeh at f/1.4. Too often I've seen people compare the Nokton & Summicron & refer to the bokeh of each wide open. Well, not a fair comparison. and of course the light source is another major factor. Thanks for pointing out the nuances.
Thanks for the rest of your reply as well. Now that you've sensitized me to the differences in these lens lines, you'll have me running out to but the Rollei 80 Planar to match with my 40 Sonnar in addition to buying the Nokton to go with my 2 CV lenses. And of course when I buy the ZI I'll not only have to buy the 35 as my all-around lens, but I'll have to get a 25 & 85 to go with it . Uh oh, did I say the ZM 85. No way, too rich for my blood. Even the Rollei 80 was too pricey for me - & it's half the cost of the ZM 85. Ugh!
Cheers,
Huck
Last edited:
Flyfisher Tom
Well-known
Joel,
On the off chance you have these shots available ... it would be helpful to see the 40VC versus 40 cron, 40 rokkor all at F2. I agree that bokeh is highly subjective. That said, a comparison of the lenses on the SAME photographic subject at the SAME f-stop would be the easiest way to settle the "B" question in the minds and eyes of the beholder ;-) Thanks
On the off chance you have these shots available ... it would be helpful to see the 40VC versus 40 cron, 40 rokkor all at F2. I agree that bokeh is highly subjective. That said, a comparison of the lenses on the SAME photographic subject at the SAME f-stop would be the easiest way to settle the "B" question in the minds and eyes of the beholder ;-) Thanks
Beniliam
Out of the limelight
Im very interesting in the rendition of this lens at wider apertures. In my mind, have been time with the idea of making a reportage of the night in Madrid. Its very compact lens for 1.4, and its more cheaper than the 35 mm Nokton, that is heavy and big... I belive its great lens, but, my questions are: the aperture 1.4 is sufficient for take photos in the street, hand held, without flash, without tripod, but when high iso sensitive (1600-3200)... or is necesary to buy more faster lens (middle point more the other Nokton...). I dont have a ´good pulse´...
I see many examples at full aperture... Probabbly at 1.4, and 2... is harsh compared the old look of the Leica lens. But its very possible that this was like other member said, for the new corrections of the lens... I like the smooth bokeh, but the lens was only used in bad light situations, is too very important the flare resistance... maybe more... I like the SC version... but... what do you thing.
Dave, Im sorry if I boycott your post, isnt my intention 🙂
I love the 40 mm perspective... more even that the 50... The majority of my photos was taken by a 50 mm lens, I loved the 50 mm perspective, but... if Leica showed in her cameras the 40 mm framelines, probabbly the thing would be change.
I see many examples at full aperture... Probabbly at 1.4, and 2... is harsh compared the old look of the Leica lens. But its very possible that this was like other member said, for the new corrections of the lens... I like the smooth bokeh, but the lens was only used in bad light situations, is too very important the flare resistance... maybe more... I like the SC version... but... what do you thing.
Dave, Im sorry if I boycott your post, isnt my intention 🙂
I love the 40 mm perspective... more even that the 50... The majority of my photos was taken by a 50 mm lens, I loved the 50 mm perspective, but... if Leica showed in her cameras the 40 mm framelines, probabbly the thing would be change.
Last edited:
taffer
void
Beni, start drinking coffee and you'll get from 1/2 to 1 extra stop 😉
And there IS one Leica with nice 40mm framelines... and I'm not (CL ! CL ! CL! ) telling which one...
And there IS one Leica with nice 40mm framelines... and I'm not (CL ! CL ! CL! ) telling which one...
Beniliam
Out of the limelight
Yes Oscar. Its other idea, but I havent got money for one camera and one lens... I need a rapid lens, no other great body... Im not a collector, ojala tambien pudiera! And the CL ´only´ meter hasta 1600
F
Frank Granovski
Guest
I can't compare my 40mm 'cron-c's bokeh with those other 2, but I can say that my 'cron's bokeh is magical. I've never seen such nice bokeh coupled with this level of sharpness, though my 45mm Zeiss comes close in terms of bokeh.
Question: will my 'cron-c perform just as well on a Bessa R3A? 😕
Question: will my 'cron-c perform just as well on a Bessa R3A? 😕
Beniliam
Out of the limelight
Why not Frank... There are people that uses the CL lens in M´s, and the Bessa R3A have M mount. Probably you enjoy more with the composition of the photo, because is very nice the viewfinder of the R3A. And the perform, I dont think that affect in nothing the election of the camera...
F
Frank Granovski
Guest
Thanks. I'm ".." (this) close to buying a Bessa. The black one. Some of my CL's shutter speeds don't work right.
Beniliam
Out of the limelight
Yes, the Bessas have at leats guarantee. I prefer one new camera with guarantee that and older "myth" camera without guarantee. Here in Spain, there arent have many repair shops of cameras... And its difficult find one site with good service, not very expensive, and near to home...
summaron
Established
Joel & Beniliam,
I shoot at night with (my rff namesake) the 2.8 35mm Summaron & the rigid 50mm Summicron on a M3 and the 40mm 2.8 Sonnar on a Rollei SE at 1/5 or 1/10 sec on 800 Portra and 200 Kodachrome and, mix and match, get pretty good results. The 2.8 Summaron is simply incapable any bad behavior as far as rendering direct lightsources such as out of focus tail lights, traffic signal lights, neon signs. All these old lenses seem capable of very fine rendering of color hues.
I am tempted to leap into the future and buy a 40mm Nokton, but in examples posted on various websites, it seems that background objects look very restless, like a opened pandora's box of odd shapes. A part of me says, but look at Gustav Mahler, what great music he made from all those screaching Witches Sabbath sounds in his symphonies (especially the 3rd). And what freedom you'll have to shoot almost anywhere at all.
So I go back and forth between the subtle but slowish M-version Sonnar and the crisp but slightly rude Nokton.
I shoot at night with (my rff namesake) the 2.8 35mm Summaron & the rigid 50mm Summicron on a M3 and the 40mm 2.8 Sonnar on a Rollei SE at 1/5 or 1/10 sec on 800 Portra and 200 Kodachrome and, mix and match, get pretty good results. The 2.8 Summaron is simply incapable any bad behavior as far as rendering direct lightsources such as out of focus tail lights, traffic signal lights, neon signs. All these old lenses seem capable of very fine rendering of color hues.
I am tempted to leap into the future and buy a 40mm Nokton, but in examples posted on various websites, it seems that background objects look very restless, like a opened pandora's box of odd shapes. A part of me says, but look at Gustav Mahler, what great music he made from all those screaching Witches Sabbath sounds in his symphonies (especially the 3rd). And what freedom you'll have to shoot almost anywhere at all.
So I go back and forth between the subtle but slowish M-version Sonnar and the crisp but slightly rude Nokton.
Palaeoboy
Joel Matherson
Hi Tom, I am compiling some stuff comparing a number of 40mm lenses including some in 70's fixed lens compacts. When I get that all together I will post a link. Im months behind, every time I think Im ontop of it I add another camera/lens and change things around. Take a look at the Japanese comparison of four 40mm lenses there is a whole variety of examples there and various apertures. I posted a link earlier in the thread.
Biggles
My cup runneth amok.
I have no experience with modern Voigtlander, but I've been dragging a 40mm Summicron around for a couple of months. Just made my first black & white prints of its pictures last night. A few impressions...
The lens is very, very stubby. It has a focusing tab or lever, but no other gripping surface for focusing whatsoever. Not the easiest lens to focus quickly from hands off; one first has to find the damned lever, wherever it may be from the last shot or prise de vue.
On my CL, it's next to perfect for carrying around all day or evening. Whole camera even fits into a café racer jacket pocket, with the lens on it.
As for its optics...
I've mostly shot it at f8 and f11, though I clearly remember a specific picture I took at f5.6, a snap of a friend sitting across a café table. I printed that picture last night. The bokeh is pretty smooth; nothing jarring about it. The real surprise, though, was how crazy-sharp the in-focus areas of that picture turned out. I mean, it's just nuts.
Showed the picture to a camera shop manager at my photo club; he's owned, rented, borrowed or used everything ever made at some point. His words: "That's not sharp. No, that's f###ing sharp."
I'm a fan of Fuji Neopan films, and I really like how this lens and Neopan seem to work together. Simultaneously crisp and warm; imagine a whole-wheat Carr's table water cracker. Tasty pictures.
Summing up: kinda hard to focus quickly, but the pictures you do get will be starting off right.
The lens is very, very stubby. It has a focusing tab or lever, but no other gripping surface for focusing whatsoever. Not the easiest lens to focus quickly from hands off; one first has to find the damned lever, wherever it may be from the last shot or prise de vue.
On my CL, it's next to perfect for carrying around all day or evening. Whole camera even fits into a café racer jacket pocket, with the lens on it.
As for its optics...
I've mostly shot it at f8 and f11, though I clearly remember a specific picture I took at f5.6, a snap of a friend sitting across a café table. I printed that picture last night. The bokeh is pretty smooth; nothing jarring about it. The real surprise, though, was how crazy-sharp the in-focus areas of that picture turned out. I mean, it's just nuts.
Showed the picture to a camera shop manager at my photo club; he's owned, rented, borrowed or used everything ever made at some point. His words: "That's not sharp. No, that's f###ing sharp."
I'm a fan of Fuji Neopan films, and I really like how this lens and Neopan seem to work together. Simultaneously crisp and warm; imagine a whole-wheat Carr's table water cracker. Tasty pictures.
Summing up: kinda hard to focus quickly, but the pictures you do get will be starting off right.
