Ok! Nokton classic 35... SC vs MC

[rxmd]

this decision is not getting any easier...

Did you post the poll to help you decide?

Philipp

 

[Doug]

I wonder if the SC would be slightly preferable on a digital RF due to the reputed lower contrast.

 

[back alley]

Did you post the poll to help you decide?

Philipp

not really.
more to extend the conversation about the lens to ease the impatience of the long wait till they are shipped.

 

[rxmd]

not really.
more to extend the conversation about the lens to ease the impatience of the long wait till they are shipped.

Good. I was getting worried.

Philipp

 

[back alley]

i've decided which version i'm going for.

but i can't tell anyone in case i change my mind...

 

[Cron]

make your choice and afterwards many pictures!
have fun!
I will wait, read your comments and make my choice then
;-)

 

[Bingley]

This is slightly OT, but does anyone know how the new CV 35s differ optically from the Ultron 35/1.7?

I apologize in advance if this subject was mentioned in another thread and I missed it.

 

[ferider]

Steve,

you can see lens diagrams of both lenses in

http://www.cameraquest.com/voigtlen.htm

Very different designs. Similarly to the Summilux the 35/1.4 Nokton
is highly symmetric.

Roland.

 

[Bingley]

Steve,

you can see lens diagrams of both lenses in

http://www.cameraquest.com/voigtlen.htm

Very different designs. Similarly to the Summilux the 35/1.4 Nokton
is highly symmetric.

Roland.

Thanks, Roland. It's been awhile since I checked out the lens pages there, and I'd forgotten about the lens diagrams.

 

[Trius]

i've decided which version i'm going for.

but i can't tell anyone in case i change my mind...

joe has just decided to re-define decision

or maybe joe is really Jo. Ooops, was that sexist?

 

[back alley]

joe has just decided to re-define decision

or maybe joe is really Jo. Ooops, was that sexist?

well, it's workin' so far!

 

[Haanes]

I've been looking for a decent prize Summilux 35 pre-asph for a while now, and because such a thing evidently doesn't exist I just ordered this beauty from Stephen Gandy. I actually haven't specified whether I want SC or MC because i forgot, and I don't know which to choose anyway.

I really, really hope the bokeh will be nice wide open. I exclusively use my pre asph 35 'cron on my m8, and hence am a bit spoiled bokeh-wise. Have anyone heard anything about the optical performance of this lens? If it's shipping mid february there should be reviews, or at least sample pics from cv out by now, no?

 

[pfoto]

Bokeh may not be so nice wide open...

Bokeh may not be so nice wide open...

In another thread member maddoc comments on a Japanese magazine article. Seems like this lens may have inherited some of the CV 40/1.4 DNA. Link below:

post #35 by maddoc

 

[Haanes]

Thanks, I'll head over to that thread.

 

[lawrence]

I can never decide between things like that, so I have ordered one of each! I have the 40f1.4 both as MC and SC. The difference is subtle and does not really show in scanned images. If you are printing bl/w there is a difference. Shadows appear less blocked up with the SC, but at the penalty of having lightsources look a bit "smeared". Well, as I like that look it is no problem - it reminds me of old 50's bl/w movies.

Tom, I so agree with you but it can backfire. A few months ago I took a portrait which included a bare florescent light behind and slightly to the side of someone's head. I was using an Ultron 28mm (at f4-f5.6) and it produced a little flare, giving a slight halo effect to the side of the head. Personally I thought it looked great but was requested to remove this unsightly blemish!

 

[Sonnar2]

I estimate flare will be a problem with any classical Gaussian fast wideangle lens, only to reduce with the best coating possible - MC.
I will try this even if my experience with the "modern designed" Ultron 35/1.7 wasn't the best. the backlite ghost pictures were pretty ugly, and the color balance wasn't particular pleasent as well.

have fun