Nokton 50/1.5 vs Nokton 50/1.1

Nokton 50/1.5 vs Nokton 50/1.1

  • Nokton 50/1.5

    Votes: 89 46.8%

  • Nokton 50/1.1

    Votes: 101 53.2%
  • Total voters
    190
M

mdspace

Established
Local time
2:43 AM
Joined
May 14, 2007
Messages
142
1.- Why?
2.- Is the performance of them so different?
3.- Is relevant the mount type?
4.- About the weight, size and built quality
5.- About price
 
1.5, cos it's the one I already have, works great, and not looking to gain half a stop for $1K. And I do a lot of low light work. But I'd take the 1.1 if someone wanted to give it to me.
 
I have both, I never did like the LTM mount of the 1.5. PITA to switch between M mount and LTM. A stop is a stop and makes a difference.
 
slumry said:
I have both, I never did like the LTM mount of the 1.5. PITA to switch between M mount and LTM. A stop is a stop and makes a difference.
Click to expand...


Never had any trouble with the adapter, it jus lives on the Nokton, a red dot or a clear mark on either objetiv or adapter would make mounting easyer tough.

  1. I feel no need to obtain the 1.1 the performance of the 1.5 is good enough for me and the way I work.
  2. Dont know.
  3. Having a lens with an M mount is surely easier but no dealbreaker.
  4. The 1.5 just feels good in my hand. I had to have the focus adjusted once but since then no more problems.
  5. Here is where you can not go wrong with the 1.5, I bought it with the adapter for 300$ from a member here on RFF Wich is a great price performance ratio.
If I had no 50mm lens and had enough money I would consider the 1.1 weight and bulk and price might steer me towards the 1.5 once again tough.

Cheers,
Wim
 
Last edited:
May not be much point in comparing these two lenses. They are aimed at different uses and, more important, different users.
 
Pablito said:
1.5, cos it's the one I already have, works great, and not looking to gain half a stop for $1K. And I do a lot of low light work. But I'd take the 1.1 if someone wanted to give it to me.
Click to expand...

I think to my calculations it's more like one stop and one stop may make the difference between a frozen/blurry shot or nice ISO 640/noisy ISO 1250 shot......for $1K, the f/1.1 is a bargain and will be mine next week.
 
My choice is the 50mm f/1.1, because it is a full and usable stop faster. It is in fact the first really usable fast 50mm rangefinder lens.

Erik.
 
The Nokton 1.5 ............ I have 3 screw mount Leicas and 2 M's. I wouldn't give up this lens BECAUSE it is an LTM mount. I don't feel the advantage of the 1.1 is worth not having the 1.5 for the Barnacks.

However if someone gave me a 1.1 well.....:)
 
Erik van Straten said:
My choice is the 50mm f/1.1, because it is a full and usable stop faster. It is in fact the first really usable fast 50mm rangefinder lens.

Erik.
Click to expand...

How's so? WHat about Canon 50/1.2? Or Hexanon 50/1.2? They are not usable? How about Noctilux? I see some people put it to some really good use. Plus CV 50/1.5 is a very good lens with better bokeh than 50/1.1 to my eyes and costs Wayyyyy less.
 
Krosya said:
How's so? WHat about Canon 50/1.2? Or Hexanon 50/1.2? They are not usable? How about Noctilux?
Click to expand...


The Canon 50mm f/1.2 is a very soft lens and is about 50 years old. The Hexanons are not obtainable. The Noctilux produces ugly images (see the thread "Noctilux Diary"), completely black corners and no good sharpness. I prefer the Nokton.

Erik.
 
Wide open, frame fully printed.

Erik.
3867644940_06dc3c73b6_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
You've posted this picture before and I still can't figure out what you're trying to say. Is it supposed to show how good the lens is, amazing enough to not support it by a sentence describing just how good it is?

confused, martin
 
martin s said:
You've posted this picture before and I still can't figure out what you're trying to say. Is it supposed to show how good the lens is, amazing enough to not support it by a sentence describing just how good it is?

confused, martin
Click to expand...

At least it seems to show very little vignetting for an f1.1 lens wide open.
 
martin s said:
You've posted this picture before and I still can't figure out what you're trying to say. Is it supposed to show how good the lens is, amazing enough to not support it by a sentence describing just how good it is?

confused, martin
Click to expand...

I did not want to say anything, but I wanted to show that the Nokton f/1.1 at full aperture produces sharp images in a normal tonal range. The Noctilux is at full aperture very soft; it is not possible to make at full aperture sharp images in a normal tonal range with it, you have to print them "hard", wich does not contribute to the quality of the images. Besides, it has a spectacular light fall-off in the corners. The Nokton f/1.1 has no such problems.

Erik.
 
Hi Erik,

how about distortion ? Your picture seems to indicate some pin-cushion effect.

Thanks !

Roland.
 
Erik van Straten said:
The Canon 50mm f/1.2 is a very soft lens and is about 50 years old. The Hexanons are not obtainable. The Noctilux produces ugly images (see the thread "Noctilux Diary"), completely black corners and no good sharpness. I prefer the Nokton.

Erik.
Click to expand...

Well, Canon may be 50 years old, but one I used to have was sharp - so I'm not sure what you base your opinion on. Hexanons are not obtainable? Why? I just got one not long ago. Several other people here on RFF have them. THere are at least 3-4 on ebay right now. I dont follow you here. :confused:
Ugly images from Noctilux - well , this is a personal taste thing here. I, for one - like them, and than again, I think out of all/most 50/1.0-1.2 lenses I have seen, Nokton has the ugliest bokeh. But thats personal taste too, right? ;) Also, for a $1200 lens it just doest perform like one to me - Nokton 50/1.5 looks much better to my eyes. But anyway - if you like it - great, I'm glad you are happy with your lens. I think, however, that if Coosina was able to design some great lenses like CV 35/1.2 and 50/1.5 - this should one should have been better or at least cheaper.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom