Nokton 50/1.5 or Zeiss ZM Sonnar 50/1.5

[pizzahut88]

I can't make up my mind.
I simply don't know how to choose.:bang::bang::bang:

The Zeiss ZM C-Sonnar costs twice as much as the Nokton 50mm F1.5.
The question is . . . is it really better?
I want to use it wide open at F1.5
Looking for creamy images . . . and lovely brokeh.

The choice is so difficult to make.
I have been thinking about it for the past few days.

If only I could test both . . . then I would know what I want.
Not being able to do so . . . is really tough.

 

[zuikologist]

My Nokton should arrive today. Very much looking forward to the same - creamy bokeh and low light. I would also be interested in comparison comments of these two lenses.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Well, I have both, and I use only the Sonnar. The Nokton is a much more 'neutral' lens -- far less distinctive. Technically, the Nokton is probably better in every way. Artistically: the Sonnar wins, at least for me. The Sonnar is also smaller, lighter and sweeter-handling.

This question is a bit like asking "Which will I prefer, scrambled eggs or an omelette?" No one can really answer it for you.

Cheers,

R.

 

[pizzahut88]

Finally went to the store after work today.
I handled all three lenses.
The Nokton 50/1.5, ZM 50/2, and ZM 50/1.5
And I picked the C Sonnar.

The Nokton 50/1.5 is good for value, but the Sonnar feels simply superb in my hands.
Not exactly the best way to pick a lens,
but I love it!

 

[Roger Hicks]

Finally went to the store after work today.
I handled all three lenses.
The Nokton 50/1.5, ZM 50/2, and ZM 50/1.5
And I picked the C Sonnar.

The Nokton 50/1.5 is good for value, but the Sonnar feels simply superb in my hands.
Not exactly the best way to pick a lens,
but I love it!

There are worse ways. Increasingly I believe you get the best pictures with the equipment you're happiest with; ultimate resolution, vignetting, etc., are of secondary importance unless you always shoot test charts. In which case, switch to a bigger format...

I love mine too. Use it in good health, and have fun.

Cheers,

R.

 

[yoyo22]

Looking for creamy images . . . and lovely brokeh.

Perhaps something like this? Took that with the Sonnar in low light - I don't recall if it was actually at 1.5...

 

[Benjamin Marks]

I would not call the 50/1.5 Nokton's bokeh "creamy" - not bad, but not like the Sonnar. I bought a Nokton because I couldn't believe that such a good lens could be had for so reasonable a price. In actual use though, I reach for the C Sonnar or the Lecia 50 Asph. But I can't bring myself to actually part with the Nokton. In the end, the question you asked about the relation of cost to quality can't really be answered in an objective way. In my opinion, the lens that is most useful is the one you use the most. And the factors that determine this are too numerous to count. In the absence of a local store where you could test both, I would spend some time on a website like Flickr that will give you a flavor of the images that each lens can produce. Even with the obvious limitations that viewing images over the Web carries, I think some valid comparisons may be made.

Good luck in your choice -- in the end you are unlikely to go really wrong with either of these lenses.

Ben Marks

 

[mfogiel]

If you want lovely bokeh at f1.5 then the C Sonnar is the best lens ever made to show this. However, if you also want to get sharp pictures at f4.0, then the Nokton could be better, because you will have to make sure, you get the C Sonnar "optimized" for f 1.5. When this is the case, this lens is useable between f1.5 and f2.0 with no problem, and then from f8.0 onwards, the other f stops are impaired due to the focus shift. My solution to this has been to get 2 C Sonnars - the first working well at f1.5 and f2.0 and the second from f2.8 onwards. Two C Sonnars still cost less than 1 Summilux 🙂

 

[tonal1]

That Sonnar is a charming little lens-never handled one-but you gotta love the compact nature of Sonnars. Got a little nub of a tab too doesn't it; just enough for us tab lovers; not too much for tab haters(you know who you are).

I used to use a Cannon 50/1.5. Personally I think Sonnar types are great, I think that the real value of these types is the apparent depth of seperation of in and out of focus areas, as apposed to the raw quality of the OOF areas which can, IMO, get a little messy sometimes.

The 50mm Nokton is popular and I've seen some nice work from it. Seems fine in every way, maybe great, but I just can't stand the feel of the thing. The shape and purchase of the scalloped focus ring, and just the whole appearance(looks count too)just doesn't do it for me.

All things equal ($$, I wish they were), at the end of the day I'd opt for a pre-asph 50 'lux. But that's just me.

 

[kshapero]

I tried all three Nokton C Sonnar and Planar. Somehow I went with the C Sonnar, very happy with it.

 

[raid]

Well, I have both, and I use only the Sonnar. The Nokton is a much more 'neutral' lens -- far less distinctive. Technically, the Nokton is probably better in every way. Artistically: the Sonnar wins, at least for me. The Sonnar is also smaller, lighter and sweeter-handling.

This question is a bit like asking "Which will I prefer, scrambled eggs or an omelette?" No one can really answer it for you.

Cheers,

R.

On the other hand, if you like scrambled eggs and omlettes, and if the omlettes cost twice as much as scrambled eggs, and if your resources are limited, and if you use reason and logic more than dreams for guidance, then most likely your choice is the Nokton. I have neither.

 

[raid]

Finally went to the store after work today.
I handled all three lenses.
The Nokton 50/1.5, ZM 50/2, and ZM 50/1.5
And I picked the C Sonnar.

The Nokton 50/1.5 is good for value, but the Sonnar feels simply superb in my hands.
Not exactly the best way to pick a lens,
but I love it!

You have chosen an omlette over scrambled eggs! 😀

 

[xayraa33]

the creamy bokeh part sells me on a lens.

 

[Tuolumne]

the creamy bokeh part sells me on a lens.

Have you ever tried using the blur filter in CS3 or in Picassa? Great Bokeh, and it comes free with the software. Totally free in the case of Picassa.

/T

 

[xayraa33]

Have you ever tried using the blur filter in CS3 or in Picassa? Great Bokeh, and it comes free with the software. Totally free in the case of Picassa.

/T

thanks for the heads up.
this world needs more creamy bokeh, any way it can be achieved . 🙂

 

[Tuolumne]

thanks for the heads up.
this world needs more creamy bokeh, any way it can be achieved . 🙂

Wouldn't it be a kick if some software company came out with a kit of filters that mimic the oof view of different lenses? That way you could use sw to make your cheap digicam photos look like they were shot on Kodachrome 25 with an f1.5 Sonnar. Way cooooool. Wouldn't that drive the Leica guys with $10,000 worth of gear for producing oof blur crazy!? 😱

/T

 

[lewis44]

I have not used the Planar, but Did have a Nokton and C-Sonnar. Settled on the Sonnar. I'm sorry, Fell in love with the Sonnar. This is not @ f1.5, but this was 1st shot, first roll using the Sonnar. Never looked back

 

[aad]

They sort of have it already, don't they?

 

[kshapero]

I have not used the Planar, but Did have a Nokton and C-Sonnar. Settled on the Sonnar. I'm sorry, Fell in love with the Sonnar. This is not @ f1.5, but this was 1st shot, first roll using the Sonnar. Never looked back

real nice, real.