Tom A
RFF Sponsor
The Lux 35 pre-asph is a bit flare-prone wide-open. It is a late version (late 80's early 90's. There is no sidelight as such - illumination is provided by skylights over the table the tripod is standing on.
ampguy
Veteran
Hi Tom
Hi Tom
Here is my '80s lux @ 1.4 with lighting at the upper right of frame, and sidelight from the left with stock 12504 hood.
If you look carefully with a very bright light through yours, you'll probably see some haze. Mine was sent to Sherry K, and then on to Solms and back.
Hi Tom
Here is my '80s lux @ 1.4 with lighting at the upper right of frame, and sidelight from the left with stock 12504 hood.
If you look carefully with a very bright light through yours, you'll probably see some haze. Mine was sent to Sherry K, and then on to Solms and back.
Rob-F
Likes Leicas
I use the 40mm MC Nokton, mostly as a workaround for the markedly undersized 50mm framelines on M6 and MP cameras. I reground the cam to bring up the 35mm framelines. As these are also a little undersized, they are an excellent fit to the 40mm FOV. I find the 40mm to be an excellent walkaround lens, with a FOV that suits me more often than that of the 50. On the M2, I'm more likely to use one of my 35's, as its 35 framelines are a bit larger and more suitable for my usual shooting distances.
I find the 40 Nokton to be a very sharp lens. Its Bokeh and distortion have not, so far, troubled me. Contrast is excellent. I find it to be a great low-light lens, very usable wide open.
I find the 40 Nokton to be a very sharp lens. Its Bokeh and distortion have not, so far, troubled me. Contrast is excellent. I find it to be a great low-light lens, very usable wide open.
bidnez
Established
Agreed! And that's a lovely snow shot.Really a lovely lens - and versatile.
(On the M8 - Silver Efex Pro)
ChrisLivsey
Veteran
Delighted to be in the smallest group, 40 SC.
Perfect for me as a grab and go single lens. I see as a 35mm but as Tom has said elsewhere: you take two steps back
Then I sometimes, say 20%, need a 50 and the two steps forward is a lot quicker than walking home for a 50 lens or fiddling to change. SC, Just to see as all others in the box are MC, other than a Summar which wears no coat at all , and it's nice to be different.
Serious work is two bodies one 35 then either one longer or one shorter depending on what I think I will need, always room for a spare in the pocket, got to love the M glass for that portability.
Perfect for me as a grab and go single lens. I see as a 35mm but as Tom has said elsewhere: you take two steps back
Then I sometimes, say 20%, need a 50 and the two steps forward is a lot quicker than walking home for a 50 lens or fiddling to change. SC, Just to see as all others in the box are MC, other than a Summar which wears no coat at all , and it's nice to be different.Serious work is two bodies one 35 then either one longer or one shorter depending on what I think I will need, always room for a spare in the pocket, got to love the M glass for that portability.
bidnez
Established
Snow ...
Snow ...
Thanks Doug!
Snow ...
Thanks Doug!
Vincent.G
Well-known
I love this shot. The flare around the head just looks good in this pic. LOL! OMG, what's wrong with me? I am looking for flared shots?!
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Strangely nobody mentions the Ultron 35mm f/1.7. The best 35mm of all.
Erik.
Erik.
Erik van Straten
Veteran
Leica MP, Ultron 35mm f/1.7, Tmax400 printed on Ilford MGIV fb.
Erik.
Erik.
RobertB
Established
Just bought the 35 nokton classic MC. No great images yet, but wanted to share this one.
The out of focus looks good to me and I like the rendering:
I use it with a leica m8. I took the 35 over the 40 because of the Focal lengths of my other lenses (28 and 50), 35 will fit great in between. And because the m8 doesn't have the 40mm frame lines.
The out of focus looks good to me and I like the rendering:
I use it with a leica m8. I took the 35 over the 40 because of the Focal lengths of my other lenses (28 and 50), 35 will fit great in between. And because the m8 doesn't have the 40mm frame lines.
Drewus
Established
I grabbed the 40mm SC as the first lens for my new M6 (Thanks Pete), and i've gotta say, this lens is awesome for the price. I used a dremel to bring up the 35 lines and framing is pretty much spot on now.
I went for SC because I mainly use B&W, and i've heard good things. I'd like to use more colour, but as an amateur I like to play around with developing my own film.
I went for SC because I mainly use B&W, and i've heard good things. I'd like to use more colour, but as an amateur I like to play around with developing my own film.
Ramersdorfer
Member
I bought the 35/1.4 MC when I first ventured into RFs with an R2A. The 35 because of the R2A framelines, the 1.4 because I wanted to do available light, and the MC to reduce flare and because i want to do colour as well as b/w. It´s a great little lens and looks cool with the hood! As for the supposed distortion, I don´t take too many pictures of bookshelves.
Hi-- I agree... though I expect there's only a minimal difference between the two versions due to the coating. Certainly the SC does fine with color...
Attachments
Finder
Veteran
Andre, it appears your question was not answered.
Lens coatings increase lens transmission and reduce flare. Multiple coatings are better than a single coating for doing this. The single coating is a throw back to an earlier age and some black and white photographer prefer the look. Since traditionally there is easier control over contrast in black and white printing, single coatings are not that bad. However, a photochemical color print had fewer or more difficult options for controlling contrast and so multicoated optics were really important.
Technically, multicoatings are much better. Aesthetically, whatever blows your hair back. If you are unsure, go with a multicoated lens--it is harder to get rid of flare than to reduce contrast.