Nokton 50mm f/1.5 & Zeiss Planar 50mm f/2.0 ZM: Why Both?

[bwcolor]

I got lucky with my Nokton copy. It is sharp wide open, but it is on the largish side. I was thinking of getting the Planar for times when I don't need the Nokton's speed, but is it really that much smaller? Are there any other pluses to buying the Planar? thx

 

[ferider]

0.7m min focus. Less flare.

 

[mfogiel]

For the price of the 2 you could buy the Summilux pre-asph. I have not used the Nokton, but frankly, with the Planar you should get enough MTF wide open, to use a faster film and get better results than with the Nokton. The rendering then might be a different story. If you like the Nokton rendering, then a Collapsible Summicron could give you a compact old style look companion.

Summilux pre asph

Planar

Summicron Collapsible

 

[bwcolor]

I gather that the Collapsible Summicron is smaller than the Zeiss. I would guess a bit less sharp and a lens that most be purchased with some caution due to age.

I'm new to 35mm rangefinder and over the last few months have purchased the CV 28mm f/2.0 Ultron, Zeiss 35mm Biogon f/2.0 ZM, Nokton 50mm f/1.5 and Leica APO 95mm Summicron-M Asph. I have two items that I was wanting. One was a smaller 50mm and the other was a 21mm lens and I've been debating which would be more useful. Well, I have never had a 21mm equivalent in 35mm, or medium format. If I go out with one lens, it is usually the 35mm, or 50mm and I'm happy with the Zeiss in 35mm. So, I'm thinking that I'll get more use out of a smaller 50mm than adding a 21mm. Maybe foolish. Perhaps it would be better to just keep one 50mm and get the 21mm. I won't have the funds for both.

I gather that the Zeiss isn't that much smaller than the Nokton. Results aside, it sounds like I'm not gaining much in portability. Perhaps my 45mm on my Contax G2 has spoiled me.

 

[kywong]

The Planar is smaller, but not significantly, not worth having both. I really liked the Nokton, the size is an issue, but it is a little smaller without the hood.

If you want something small, the smallest 50mm lens F/2 or faster that comes to my mind is the ZM Sonnar 50, wonderful signature, but the front focusing issue means it may not suit everyone's taste. There is of course collapsible Summicron 50, but I've read it has very fragile coating and prone to haze, plus I found it tedious to collapse a lens before and after use. There's also a VC Heliar 50, also collapsible, also F/2, but modern. It's a limited edition lens, but I think there's one in the RFF classifieds.

If you don't mind something slower, the new Summarit 50 and Elmar 50 (collapsible) are quite compact. The Elmar has a wonderful signature, collapsible lenses can be tedious, but without the hood, it's small even when it's not collapsed. It'd make more sense to have both the Nokton and the Elmar than the Nokton and the Planar.

If you don't mind something a bit wider, the Nokton 40 is very compact and very fast, though the bokeh is a bit harsh.

 

[andredossantos]

I have the planar and love it. I too had and loved the 45mm planar for the contax g and I find the ZM to be very close in look. Close enough that I don't really regret selling my contax. In my experience and to my eye, the planar is tack sharp and emmanates that zeiss "look".

As for the size, the planar is a bit smaller than the nokton. I've never found the f/2 to be limiting but then again I shoot at 5.6 and above 90% of the time. YMMV, of course.

These are all scans from a flatbed epson:

 

[bwcolor]

It looks like my only option is to keep an eye open for a Collapsible Summicron. I don't think that any of the other options will be much of an improvement.

The Leica 50mm f/2.5 Summarit-M might be a good solution, but I don't know much about this lens.

Maybe plan 'B' for now and go for the 21mm option.

Thanks for all of your help.

 

[wgerrard]

I got lucky with my Nokton copy. It is sharp wide open, but it is on the largish side. I was thinking of getting the Planar for times when I don't need the Nokton's speed, but is it really that much smaller? Are there any other pluses to buying the Planar? thx

You can look up their exact weights and dimensions, but I have both and the Planar is definitely and noticeably smaller and lighter.

 

[Turtle]

in the technical sense, Puts has the CV 50 1.5 significantly outperforming the pre-asph lux at wider apertures. If wide open performance matters to you, and you have a good copy, I would not recommend trading it and the money for a second lens for the lux pre asph as you will effectively lose the wide open bite (if you need it). A second lens with more classic character and smaller size might suit better. I have the planar and it is an incredibly performer, but if you need f1.4/1.5 it can't compete. Its the same size as a Leica cron, and light, so if I add a faster lens it will be staying.

 

[Hephaestus]

If you're looking for a compact 50, I would consider the Voigtlander 50mm f2.5 Color Skopar. It's a sweet little lens, only half a stop slower than the Planar and did I mention that it's really little? Reasonably priced, too! I don't understand why it's not more loved...

Ryan

 

[bwcolor]

Oooops It's a Hexanon-M 50mm f/2.0

Oooops It's a Hexanon-M 50mm f/2.0

I was hurrying off to an appointment and intended upon looking at this lens when I got back home, but instead I clicked purchase on Ebay. It is an absolutely pristine copy, but I know nothing of this lens and it required immediate payment and I didn't want a bad rap on Ebay, so I purchased it from a vendor in Japan. I don't even have a clue as to how small it is. Anyway, that is that. I did own some of their lenses years ago.

Many hours later I've had time to research this lens and it might not have been such a bad choice. It is heavier than the Nokton and Zeiss, but smaller in both diameter and length and it seems to have generally good reviews. I'm sure that I didn't get the best price, but I'll use the lens and forget the price.

Thanks for all of the great responses. Time to use the equipment and learn how to properly scan.