nokton 50/1.1 VS summarit 50/2.5

[Krosya]

Regarding the finding of the OP, I think this is an unfair comparisson. Like apples and oranges. One of the lenses is basic standard speed standard lens, the other is a special purpose low light lens and should be taken as such. Try to compare the Summarit with 50/2.5 Color Skopar and the Nokton 1.1 with Noctilux 1.0.

Well, when this Nokton first came out it was described as "do-it-all" lens as it was supposed to be great wide open and stopped down. And now it looks like its getting same rep as Noctilux as an "special purpose" lens. So which is it? 😉

 

[rxmd]

Well, when this Nokton first came out it was described as "do-it-all" lens as it was supposed to be great wide open and stopped down.

Actually both are true nevertheless, I guess - it's good wide open, and I don't think it's bad stopped down. Wide open it has the same tradeoffs as any high-speed lens (spherical aberrations/focus shift, curvature of field, etc.)

The question is what you expect from a "do-it-all" lens. If you also expect no vignetting, no distortion, flat field of focus, and no aberrations, I guess you'll be disappointed. A slower lens is always going to be better in these respects. Of course it's frustrating when you find that your $1000 Nokton 50/f1.1 has worse distortion than your $10 50/f2.8 Industar. However, if the OP's exhibition prints depend on these features, the superfast lens that does the job simply doesn't exist. If that's what you want from a do-it-all lens, there are no do-it-all lenses.

And now it looks like its getting same rep as Noctilux as an "special purpose" lens. So which is it? 😉

And there's people who keep Noctiluxes on their cameras as "do-it-all lenses". I guess they just get used to the lens' behaviour.

 

[Garfink]

To make the comparison fair:

To make the comparison fair:

Try using the Summarit in candle light and compare that with the 50/1.1. You will find lots of noise and extreme handshake blur.

That is what it mean by specialty lens.

If you read many of the professionally done review, there are so many variables for a good lens test that makes your quick test really unscientific and subjective.

From a sample of one lens it is hard to conclude any generalization that will relate to other people's experience with the same lenses. So readers should seriously take these ad hoc reviews with a grain of salt.

Eric Lai
Antfarm photographic gallery
http://lynette-and-drericlai.smugmug.com

 

[glchua]

In any case, I think it is a very useful piece of information to me.

Every lens will have different performance at different distances. In addition, focus shift etc should not be an excuse for poor performance.

I guess we all agree that the Nokton is a low light lens. It is good to know that it will not perform equal to a summarit stopped down.

I did the same test (film) for 35 cron ASPH and 35/1.2 at close distance and I found that the 35/1.2 at 5.6 is poorer than 35 cron at 2.8. But that doesn't mean it is a useless lens. Just that now I know which to grab in what situation.

 

[ulrikft]

I have seen far sharper samples than that from the 50 1.1 at 1.1 and at 5.6. So either you are misfocusing, or something else is wrong. I would guess focus shift.

 

[Uwe_Nds]

I have seen far sharper samples than that from the 50 1.1 at 1.1 and at 5.6. So either you are misfocusing, or something else is wrong. I would guess focus shift.

I would guess Voigtländer QC.

Cheers,
Uwe

 

[Alnitak]

I think you probably have one of two problems: Focus shift and/or Voigtlander QC. I have had more than my fair share of CV lenses with decentered elements. Luckily I just return them and the next one has always been fine, but its clear that one way the cut costs is to let the customers do all the QC (and most will never notice).

Here is a series of brick wall images from my Nokton 1.1 on an Olympus E-P1. This allows me to eliminate focus shift by focusing using Live View. Click on the link for "Original" to see it in full size. You can see that the Nokton is really very sharp on center by f/1.4, and is quite nice at f/1.1.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/jhapeman/3734340716/sizes/l/

Jeff

 

[aldobonnard]

The test is poorly conducted as the natural focus shift of the Nokton (as with the Noctilux) is not handled with a reasonable degree of skills and practice.
I've got 2 lenses with focus shift, 50/1.1 and 50/1.5, and I have had to learn how to compensate for the natural error. I guess that sort of lens is not for point-and-shoot users.
Sorry, no offense, but it is a specialist's lens, a connoisseur lens.
The Summarit 50/2.5 is one of the sharpest lens, the Nokton will not try to compete on that aspect, but who cares (I don't). The aim of the Nokton is not to compete in terms of sharpness, but in terms of flare reduction and large aperture. On these aspects, the summarit 50/2.5 is not very good: it shows flare, and its modest opening limits its use to good lighting conditions.
It is not a question of "Nokton OR Summarit", it's a question of "Nokton AND Summarit"...

 

[DominikDUK]

Looking at the pictures it seems to be a focussing issue and not a lens sharpness issue. Both are usually good lenses. But since you used one lens wide open and the other stopped down a bit it could als be your hand causing unsharpness.Have you used a tripod?
For that speed the Summarit seems to vignette a lot.

Dominik

 

[Lss]

In case you didn't notice, this thread is over 2 years old.

The Nokton sample is not in focus. The lens has strong focus shift and field curvature. It is an okay general purpose lens, but definitely not the optimal tool for landscapes.