Nokton classic 35 f1.4 MC or SC for R-D1?

[mdspace]

I'm thinking in buy the new Nokton classic 35mm f1.4, there are two options, MULTI coated and SINGLE coated.
We can find the same option with the Nokton classic 40mm f1.4, somebody have the experience with this, which one will be better using a digital rangefinder camera.
How important are the SC and MC differences depending if your camera is digital or film?

 

[DwF]

Multi vs Single Coat 0n Voigtander lenses

Multi vs Single Coat 0n Voigtander lenses

The single coat is not as high in contrast as the multi coat version. I have the 40mm 1.4 MC and really like it for B&W with the R D1. I have seen images with both versions and prefer the MC myself.

Many film (and now digital) shooters keep older version Leica glass around for the look it provides. One could argue that the look of photos shot with newer lenses has "evolved" with the newer glass designs.

So it is really quite subjective. And it is pretty cool that Cosina has provided this alternative SC in a new lens design. But luck of the draw I got the newer design and never looked back

Below is a shot taken with the Nokton 40mm f1.4 MC

http://www.pbase.com/bitonal/image/75308722

David

 

[Doug]

There seems to be a large segment of Cosina's domestic customers who prefer the softer, gentler look over the hard/asph/contrasty modern look. And several of the Cosina lenses offer that: 50mm Skopar, 50mm Heliar Classic, for example, and perhaps the Cosina-made Zeiss 50mm C-Sonnar addresses that segement too. I'll guess the 40 Nokton SC is directed to those, too, who like some aspect of the old-time look.

I have the 40 Nokton SC, not because I preferred that version, but because that's the version I was offered used at a good price. But in backlight it does exhibit more veiling flare as we see with older lenses, and especially in B&W this gives it a somewhat vintage rendition. Due to the modern coatings, the MC apparently has a more modern resistance to this kind of flare, for a more modern brilliance and contrast.

I expect the same distinctions will be evident in the 35/1.4 Nokton versions. With very similar optical arrangement, it may be addressing an oriental reverence for the 35mm f2 Summicron version 1. I have one of those, bought new in 1967, so I might prefer the MC version of the Nokton to distinguish it more. One main reason for my interest is the extra stop in speed.

 

[Platinum RF]

SC version is the killer of solicon sensor, more flare will be seen, why get a SC to get an old lens' looking just buy a 60's lens to get real.

 

[Didier]

SC version is the killer of solicon sensor, more flare will be seen, why get a SC to get an old lens' looking just buy a 60's lens to get real.

I owned the 40 SC Nokton and for me it is not only a simulation of an old lens. It's significantly sharper than the old 35/1.4 Summilux, for instance. The flare problem was not so much an issue for me, as I mostly avoid these situations anyway. And the b&w pictures, especially portraits, were really very gentle. Alas, the lens had troubles with the sometimes harsh rendering of unsharp background highlights, if MC or SC. I hope Cosina has worked on that. Nevertheless, I will likely buy the 35/1.4 Nokton, in MC version, as I have several old lenses like the Canon 35/2 and 50/1.2, Nikkor 50/2, Summicron collapsible, Ju-3 and others to produce that "old" look.

Didier

 

[sleepyhead]

I think if you're going to use the lens only on the RD-1, then I would get the 40mm Nokton (either Mc or SC) as the 35mm lines on the Rd-1 fit the 40mm lens much better than 35mm lines and 35mm lens.

You would also save some money in the process.

 

[ampguy]

Not sure about the new VC 35./1.4, but the 40 Rokkor works great with the 35 lines on the RD1. I'm not fond of the CV 40/1.4 wide open, but wouldn't mind picking one up for a bargain price. Can't wait to see how the new CV 35/1.4's are wide open.

 

[rxmd]

To be honest I have never seen any set of two shots where I could point out what the difference between the SC and MC versions is.

I have seen "harsh" pictures taken with the MC, and "soft" ones with the SC, and vice versa, but the harshness or softness or whatever consistently seems to have been a result of scene, lighting, material used, postprocessing more than one of the lens. Whenever there was a direct comparison of the same scene shot with both lenses I've never seen a difference between the two. My conclusion is that the difference is overrated and that it mainly serves to get some extra revenue from collectors; if you're not a collector, get whatever is cheaper.

Philipp

 

[Nigel Meaby]

Philipp
are you refering to prints or web pictures you have seen from these lenses? I know it's an "old chestnut" but you are not going to see the subtleties of these lenses from a monitor image. I'm sure Tom will come in on this thread with his opinion as he has both versions and prints from film in the darkroom.

 

[sevres_babylone]

Nevertheless, I will likely buy the 35/1.4 Nokton, in MC version, as I have several old lenses like the Canon 35/2 and 50/1.2, Nikkor 50/2, Summicron collapsible, Ju-3 and others to produce that "old" look.

I was in the opposite situation when I bought my Nokton 40; the lenses I owned were "modern." Hence, I opted for the SC. I'm happy with it, but I've never had the MC to compare it to, so I don't know what difference that would have made in the end.

In terms of framelines on the R-D1, if the 35mm had been available, I would have likely opted for it. At closer distances, I have to make a conscious effort to leave a little room in the frame, otherwise I lose parts of what I thought I had in my image.

 

[Ron (Netherlands)]

Not sure about the new VC 35./1.4, but the 40 Rokkor works great with the 35 lines on the RD1. I'm not fond of the CV 40/1.4 wide open, but wouldn't mind picking one up for a bargain price. Can't wait to see how the new CV 35/1.4's are wide open.

Indeed, if you prefer to use the 35 mm frames, then take the 40mm and not the 35. I prefer the SC for its sharpness and its somewhat vintage look.

 

[cosmonaut]

I have the SC and love it. It gives you that old B&W look but is sharper than some of my other old lenses. I have very few flare issues, mostly on night time exposures. Good luck.

 

[edodo]

The previous tandem of SC and MC was the VC 40mm 1.4. Samples showed marginal differences between the two. Really, the single coated version looked in no way like the pre 80's classic glasses. It just look like any other modern lens, just a very touch less contrasty than its MC twin. Get the best deal in order to choose between those two, the difference in results is trivial IMO.

 

[hamish_gill]

i have the mc im happy with it, it is the lens i use the most out of all my rf glass and i am rarely unhappy with the results! i shoot digital and film but amost always post process in lightroom if i want less contrast i do that digitaly. i know it is nice to have a more 'pure' image but sometimes it is more realistic to be more practical and realisticly the mc is a damn silght easier to come by, certainly in the uk! if you want lower contrast or a older lens look buy the mc and a 35mm 3.5 elmar from the 30's for about £40-£75 off ebay. this is what i have done and im more than happy with my 35mm shots

 

[jonmanjiro]

As this thread was started nearly a year ago, I'm guessing mdspace has already decided, but if was going to use the lens on an R-D1 I would go for the MC version for the simple reason that its more flare resistant (a desirable feature for lenses used on digital cameras). Plus the contrast etc. can easily be adjusted in post-processing if needed.

 

[back alley]

i have the 40 sc and have not seen any flare yet.

 

[Flinor]

I'm quite satisfied with the 35 MC

 

[umcelinho]

SC here, have seen some flare when shooting against a strong light source. But then again I never compared the MC in the same situation, so no idea if it'd behave the same.

 

[Doug]

I too have seen some veiling flare against a bright sky with the 40SC... I think this is the retro look that was desired in the single-coated version. Though otherwise the lens is modern-sharp, and this all is true for the 35SC as well. My 35SC is 6-bit coded, and use on the M8 has revealed it to be an impressive performer.

 

[rxmd]

The SC version has a higher resale value because some people think it takes better (or for that matter different) pictures, which it doesn't.