jett
Well-known
Any opinions on this lens?
I have a 60/2.8 Elmarit and I like it very much, but I find f2.8 a bit limiting. I love the focal length and don't a macro, so I a sweet 58mm will be sufficient.
I figured that a Nikon F is the closest thing to a Leicalflex, so I'm interested in the 58/1.4 Nokton because I like my CV RF lenses. I've generally heard great things about this lens in other forums. I'm definitely not considering the Noct-Nikkor (too $$) but I am considering the 58/1.4 Non AI lens.
I have a 60/2.8 Elmarit and I like it very much, but I find f2.8 a bit limiting. I love the focal length and don't a macro, so I a sweet 58mm will be sufficient.
I figured that a Nikon F is the closest thing to a Leicalflex, so I'm interested in the 58/1.4 Nokton because I like my CV RF lenses. I've generally heard great things about this lens in other forums. I'm definitely not considering the Noct-Nikkor (too $$) but I am considering the 58/1.4 Non AI lens.
Larry H-L
Well-known
I've had one for about 2 years, use it on a dSLR. Very happy with it.
Good build quality, nice bokeh. Chipped for modern cameras. Manual focus only, very smooth.
Nice focal length for both full frame and APSc.
Not my best example, but the only one at my finger tips:
http://www.hamel-lambert.com/illustration/content/illustr-29_large.html
Good build quality, nice bokeh. Chipped for modern cameras. Manual focus only, very smooth.
Nice focal length for both full frame and APSc.
Not my best example, but the only one at my finger tips:
http://www.hamel-lambert.com/illustration/content/illustr-29_large.html
x-ray
Veteran
Consider the 55mm f1.2 non AI or newer 50mm f1.2 AIS. They're a bargain and much better than the 1.4. I have both and rarely use the 1.4. The 1.2 has a bit of glow at 1.2 and decreases rapidly until 2.8 where it's becomes killer sharp. It's very creamy and beautiful in rendering at wider apertures and very shallow DOF. I think it's Nikons most versatile lens and best all round 50mm.
The 50mm AIS version is still made. My wife gave me a new one last Christmas. I think they're in the $600 range new. Used examples can be bought in the mid $200 range.
You might even look at tge Zeiss planar 1.4. Popflash has had some refurbished ones refurbished by Zeiss for less than typical used prices. I bought two refurbs for my MP and both are in perfect condition. You can't tell they had ever been on a camera. I used Rollei 3003 cameras in the 80's and had 1.4 planars and thought they were excellent.
The 50mm AIS version is still made. My wife gave me a new one last Christmas. I think they're in the $600 range new. Used examples can be bought in the mid $200 range.
You might even look at tge Zeiss planar 1.4. Popflash has had some refurbished ones refurbished by Zeiss for less than typical used prices. I bought two refurbs for my MP and both are in perfect condition. You can't tell they had ever been on a camera. I used Rollei 3003 cameras in the 80's and had 1.4 planars and thought they were excellent.
matoqui
Member
I took a few shots to compare the Nokton to my Fuji 60/2.4 on the x-e2. They are simple shots taken on my yard, but if you want you can check them at
https://flic.kr/s/aHsk3h9e1a
https://flic.kr/s/aHsk3h9e1a
Mark C
Well-known
You're not getting much feedback on the Nokton, and I'm not going to be able to help on that either. I do second what x-ray said about the 1.2 Nikkors, and some of the 1.4's can be pretty decent. I don't think this is sample variation, but slight changes over the years.
Still, I prefer the 50/1.4 Zeiss Planar. Mine is in C/Y mount, but the Nikon version will be very similar. For me, this lens beats out all of the fast normals I own, have owned, or tried with the exception of the Summilux 50. My Summilux is M, but the R has quite a good reputation too, so is actually the most obvious choice if the price is prohibitive.
Hopefully someone will have some experience with the Nokton and can serve up a comparison.
Still, I prefer the 50/1.4 Zeiss Planar. Mine is in C/Y mount, but the Nikon version will be very similar. For me, this lens beats out all of the fast normals I own, have owned, or tried with the exception of the Summilux 50. My Summilux is M, but the R has quite a good reputation too, so is actually the most obvious choice if the price is prohibitive.
Hopefully someone will have some experience with the Nokton and can serve up a comparison.
Dirk
Privatier
I have owned the 58/1.4 Nokton, 1st version. Great lens, nice bokeh, I have no complaints whatsoever. I sold it, though, because I used it on film, and chose to invest in much more cheaply available used lenses, such as the Minolta MD 58mm 1.4 and the Konica 57/1.4. Those lenses are not as sharp, but have the same great focal length and more "character" for a fraction of the price.
kshapero
South Florida Man
I actually found the Nokton 58/1.4 much sharper than the 50mm AIS lenses except one. The Nikkor 50mm 1.8 AIS (not the E) is the sharpest of them all. IMHO.
Benjamin Marks
Veteran
I own this lens in Nikon F Mount and I like it a lot. I do a lot of portraiture and the combination of speed and just-longer-than-normal focal length really works for me. I have attached photos of the same boring scene that I took a moment ago with each of the Nokton 1.4, the Micro-Nikkor 2.8, the Zeiss 1.4 and the Nikon 1.4 (manual focus version). I would love to say that the images are unmanipulated, but of course they have gone through whatever defaults I chose in Lightroom, they have been converted to jpg by that same program and they are the result of the Nikon D3's default metering etc. FWIW, they were all taken with a D3, ISO 200, on tripod, all lenses wide open (where they will show their differences most profoundly), the day is overcast. So here goes. First the Nokton 1.4:
(over exposed slightly)
Micro-Nikkor 2.8:
Zeiss 50 1.4:
Nikon 1.4 (manual focus):
There are some differences that I can see, at least on the SmugMug host site. The Nikor 1.4 does have busier bokeh, which I don't particularly like for this sort of picture. Look at the out-of-focus apple tree in the upper right hand corner of the picture.
Note that at least on my monitor, the rendering of the Nokton 1.4 wide open exhibits many characteristics that are common to value engineered C/V lenses. I don't love the look wide open in the kind of setting I chose for this lens. Actually, that is sort of the point, show the lens at its worst, and you can go from there.
(over exposed slightly)
Micro-Nikkor 2.8:
Zeiss 50 1.4:
Nikon 1.4 (manual focus):
There are some differences that I can see, at least on the SmugMug host site. The Nikor 1.4 does have busier bokeh, which I don't particularly like for this sort of picture. Look at the out-of-focus apple tree in the upper right hand corner of the picture.
Note that at least on my monitor, the rendering of the Nokton 1.4 wide open exhibits many characteristics that are common to value engineered C/V lenses. I don't love the look wide open in the kind of setting I chose for this lens. Actually, that is sort of the point, show the lens at its worst, and you can go from there.
jett
Well-known
Thanks all.
It sounds like the Nokton is a good lens.
In regards to the f1.2 Nikkors. I would consider the 55mm f1.2 lens but not the 50mm f1.2 because I want a long 50 for portraits. My 60/2.8 Elmarit is sweet, but slow, and so I figured that a 58/1.4 (or faster) would do the trick. Regardless, I feel that 50/1.4 lenses are usually "better" than their 50/1.2 counterparts (ofcourse there are exceptions) which is why I'm "settling" for an f1.4 lens. This is just internet speculation as I've never owned a 50/1.2 lens.
There are probably other sweet long 50's out there, like from Minolta and Konica, however, I'd prefer to not mess with too many mounts. Nikon F, Olympus OM, and Leica R is enough.
It sounds like the Nokton is a good lens.
In regards to the f1.2 Nikkors. I would consider the 55mm f1.2 lens but not the 50mm f1.2 because I want a long 50 for portraits. My 60/2.8 Elmarit is sweet, but slow, and so I figured that a 58/1.4 (or faster) would do the trick. Regardless, I feel that 50/1.4 lenses are usually "better" than their 50/1.2 counterparts (ofcourse there are exceptions) which is why I'm "settling" for an f1.4 lens. This is just internet speculation as I've never owned a 50/1.2 lens.
There are probably other sweet long 50's out there, like from Minolta and Konica, however, I'd prefer to not mess with too many mounts. Nikon F, Olympus OM, and Leica R is enough.
michaelwj
----------------
I had one on my DX Nikon DSLR, really enjoyed it as a nice portrait lens. Nothing bad to say about it, I got it when my girl was born, got some of my favorite baby shots with it.
Michael
Michael
Robert Lai
Well-known
50-60mm lenses that I've known
50-60mm lenses that I've known
For Nikon, I have owned the 50 1.2 AIS, 50 1.4 AIS, 50 1.8 AI, the 55 2.8 AIS Micro, and the 60 2.8 Micro AF-D. Of these, the only two that I have kept are the 50 1.8 AI and the 55 2.8 Micro. These two are usable wide open, though the 1.8 has a bit of contrast loss wide open. The Micro has no visible distortion. The 50 1.8 has a slight bit of barrel distortion at minimum focus, but at infinity it has no distortion. The 60 Micro was above reproach, except that I'm manual focus only, and the angular rotation required to reach infinity focus is very short.
The remaining Nikkors all had very hazy / cloudy renditions wide open. They also had gobs of barrel distortion, quite obvious if you ever photograph someone standing in a doorway. The 50 1.2 did appear to be sharper than the 1.4 and 1.8 lenses from 1.4 to about f/4. Thereafter, the others were equally sharp or sharper. The bokeh of the 50 1.4 AIS is truly ugly.
Enter the CV 58 1.4. I love this lens! It renders just how I would like it. There is moderately high (not extreme) contrast wide open, and very minimal barrel distortion. It really is not visible unless you are pixel peeping, similar to what I would get with the Nikkor 50 1.8 AI. Aperture calibration is spot on, as exposures on my F3 and F2 are perfect. In my view it is superior to the other manual focus Nikkor 1.2 and 1.4 lenses (excepting the 1.2 Noct, with which I have no experience). I don't really have the curiosity to explore the Zeiss 50 1.4, as I'm happy with the CV 58.
If you do buy the CV 58 1.4 (I have the 2nd version with the scalloped metal focusing ring), DO NOT BUY THE Voigtlander LENS HOOD. Not only is the CV hood outrageously expensive, it is too short for the focal length.
BUY THE 58MM TELE LENS HOOD MADE BY B+W (the filter people). I bought mine from B&H. Not only is this hood less expensive than the CV hood, it is made in Germany and beautifully finished. It is very deep, but the advantage of the 100% frame coverage of the Nikon F series viewfinders is that I can verify that there is NO VIGNETTING with this deep telephoto hood by B+W. A 64mm Kalt push on cap goes over the hood when you want a lens cap.
In terms of 58mm lenses, my first such lens is actually the Canon 58 1.2 FL that came with my Canon FX camera (both 1964 vintage). I just like the look of this focal length. However, the Canon 58 wide open does lose contrast, and looks dreamy. However, I just corrected that by acquiring the 50 1.2 L in New FD mount this weekend
This circa 1980 high end lens combines an ASPH lens element, floating element close up correction, and exotic glass - just like the Leica Summilux 50 1.4 ASPH.
50-60mm lenses that I've known
For Nikon, I have owned the 50 1.2 AIS, 50 1.4 AIS, 50 1.8 AI, the 55 2.8 AIS Micro, and the 60 2.8 Micro AF-D. Of these, the only two that I have kept are the 50 1.8 AI and the 55 2.8 Micro. These two are usable wide open, though the 1.8 has a bit of contrast loss wide open. The Micro has no visible distortion. The 50 1.8 has a slight bit of barrel distortion at minimum focus, but at infinity it has no distortion. The 60 Micro was above reproach, except that I'm manual focus only, and the angular rotation required to reach infinity focus is very short.
The remaining Nikkors all had very hazy / cloudy renditions wide open. They also had gobs of barrel distortion, quite obvious if you ever photograph someone standing in a doorway. The 50 1.2 did appear to be sharper than the 1.4 and 1.8 lenses from 1.4 to about f/4. Thereafter, the others were equally sharp or sharper. The bokeh of the 50 1.4 AIS is truly ugly.
Enter the CV 58 1.4. I love this lens! It renders just how I would like it. There is moderately high (not extreme) contrast wide open, and very minimal barrel distortion. It really is not visible unless you are pixel peeping, similar to what I would get with the Nikkor 50 1.8 AI. Aperture calibration is spot on, as exposures on my F3 and F2 are perfect. In my view it is superior to the other manual focus Nikkor 1.2 and 1.4 lenses (excepting the 1.2 Noct, with which I have no experience). I don't really have the curiosity to explore the Zeiss 50 1.4, as I'm happy with the CV 58.
If you do buy the CV 58 1.4 (I have the 2nd version with the scalloped metal focusing ring), DO NOT BUY THE Voigtlander LENS HOOD. Not only is the CV hood outrageously expensive, it is too short for the focal length.
BUY THE 58MM TELE LENS HOOD MADE BY B+W (the filter people). I bought mine from B&H. Not only is this hood less expensive than the CV hood, it is made in Germany and beautifully finished. It is very deep, but the advantage of the 100% frame coverage of the Nikon F series viewfinders is that I can verify that there is NO VIGNETTING with this deep telephoto hood by B+W. A 64mm Kalt push on cap goes over the hood when you want a lens cap.
In terms of 58mm lenses, my first such lens is actually the Canon 58 1.2 FL that came with my Canon FX camera (both 1964 vintage). I just like the look of this focal length. However, the Canon 58 wide open does lose contrast, and looks dreamy. However, I just corrected that by acquiring the 50 1.2 L in New FD mount this weekend
This circa 1980 high end lens combines an ASPH lens element, floating element close up correction, and exotic glass - just like the Leica Summilux 50 1.4 ASPH.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Nokton 58mm f1.4 on a Nikon FE (cost me all of $20 and works fine!). Ilford Pan 100 in Harvey 777 for 7 mn.
kxl
Social Documentary
I just ordered the newer SLII N version -- same glass as the previous version but with a metal focusing barrel. Planned use is with D800e and with F100.
Frontman
Well-known
I wish I had some examples, maybe I do somewhere, of the 5.8cm f/1.4. I got one of these a couple of years ago to shoot on my favorite F camera. I have heard both good and bad about this lens, but in my case, I was impressed by it. I still have it, but it is not AI converted, so it won't fit on my D700, otherwise I would take and post a few photos with it. I'll see if I have any photos on my PC when I get home,
Frontman
Well-known
Looking in my files, I found a few images which I shot with the Nikkor 5.8cm f/1.4. Funny that while on this walk, I was approached by an executive who worked at the Nikon company, he was quite interested in the old F I was using with this lens, and the 2005 SP I had in my bag.
This image was shot wide open, and on the move, I didn't want to miss out on a shot of the famous Japanese salaryman combover
Next is a sushi deliveryman on his way back to his restaurant, this one was shot at f/8
My dog at f/1.4 and 1/1000, a little over-exposed, but my old F won't shoot any faster. Interesting "swirly" bokeh.
Another shot of my dog at f/8
Overall, I think the Nikkor 5.8/1.4 is quite a good lens, I am quite happy with mine.
This image was shot wide open, and on the move, I didn't want to miss out on a shot of the famous Japanese salaryman combover
Next is a sushi deliveryman on his way back to his restaurant, this one was shot at f/8
My dog at f/1.4 and 1/1000, a little over-exposed, but my old F won't shoot any faster. Interesting "swirly" bokeh.
Another shot of my dog at f/8
Overall, I think the Nikkor 5.8/1.4 is quite a good lens, I am quite happy with mine.
kshapero
South Florida Man
I have 2 FE's (not the FE2). Wonderful.
Nokton 58mm f1.4 on a Nikon FE (cost me all of $20 and works fine!). Ilford Pan 100 in Harvey 777 for 7 mn.
rutxer
Member
I have the SL II (metal focusing ring with the distinctive ribs) for Nikon F mount and I love it. I use it moslty in my F4s (with the K focusing screen) and in the D800.
An X-E2 just joined the family and I'll try it as adapted portrait lens with Fuji's APS-C.
When i have some time and a computer (it's painful to get Flickr's bcc code from an iPad) i'll post some shots of the Nokton and with the Nokton.
An X-E2 just joined the family and I'll try it as adapted portrait lens with Fuji's APS-C.
When i have some time and a computer (it's painful to get Flickr's bcc code from an iPad) i'll post some shots of the Nokton and with the Nokton.