SC vs. MC

[peepete77]

Hi!
I have just purchased a brand new RD-1s from Noriaki in Japan. Thanks to all of you guys with good suggestions on where I should buy it,I followed your advise 😀

Now, it's time to start thinking about the first lens. Noriaki offered a great price at the 35mm/2,5 Color skopar, but somehow it just feel a little low-light for a normal... I am dreaming about the 35/1,2 from Voigtlander, but it is a bit pricy. So I am turning my eyes against the 35mm/1,4 or the 40mm/1,4 from VL. It is little and very transportable to carry around too 😉

I see that it sometimes says that these lenses have singular coating, and that some prefer these over multi coat.

I am wondering what's the difference, and if some of you have views and experiences with using SC or MC lenses...
Why should I choose the one over the other, and what's the benefit of using a SC over a MC lens?

I am so looking forward and hoping for replies! You guys are the best, and I hang on to your every word :angel:

Thanks

 

[mdspace]

In my opinion owning the R-d1s a 35mm lens is my suggestion. You can also buy a 50mm lens later to have a good combo.
The 40mm is very similar to the 35mm, but by the same time will be more close to the 50mm...
I prefer to have two clear options of framing (35-50).
Something important to remember is that for the R-D1s a 35mm lens is equivalent to 50mm for film camera, and the 50mm lens is equivalent to 75mm for film camera (aprox...).

Talking about the SC or MC, depends... I prefer the SC lens for film B&W, but using a SC lens on the R-D1 you will notice that can give you a very special and beautiful color pictures.

 

[O. Pyykkö]

I am wondering what's the difference, and if some of you have views and experiences with using SC or MC lenses...
Why should I choose the one over the other, and what's the benefit of using a SC over a MC lens?

Multi-coated (MC) lenses are leff flare-prone and exhibit higher contrast. Single-coated (SC) lenses show a bit "aged" and low contrast look. They are preferred by people shooting B&W film and seeking different kind of aesthetics.

I have the MC version of CV 40/1.4 lens and I'm happy with it. To be honest with you, the difference between MC and SC in real-life situations is quite small IMO. I'm not able to tell apart shot's taken with the MC version or the SC version of CV 40/1.4.

 

[yanidel]

I own both the 35mm skopar and the 40mm SC. IMO, the difference in contrast is huge. I believe it is better for IQ to go for the SC version and add contrast in post processing if needed then do the reverse (remove contrast).
The 40mm is a great lens on the RD1 and matches very well the framelines, yet it is a 62mm equivalent which is a bit tight. I use it mainly for low light/close shots.

 

[pfoto]

I don't own a digital but I have read internet lore that says a low contrast lens (SC) is preferable to a higher contrast lens (MC) for digital. I've no idea if that is true but the first hit on Google for "lens contrast digital" produced the link below. You might want to do a bit of research.

http://www.auspiciousdragon.net/photowords/?p=1173

 

[gohaj]

i have the Nokton 35/1.4 SC, it is quite good. See http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=58545

 

[peepete77]

Thank you for the good advices! I will take them with me all into the desicionmaking process 🙂

 

[kxl]

I have an R-D1s, a CV 35/1.2 and CV35mm/1.4 SC.

1) If the CV 35/1.2 is too pricey, SAVE UP for it. It is my favorite lens on the R-D1S.

2) Before considering any other option, see #1.

3) The 35/1.4 MC would be my second choice.

4) I am not particularly fond of the 35/1.4 SC on the R-D1S. This is just my own opinion and as stated, I do own this combo. I personally like the SC verion for B&W only -- on my R3A, this lens shines.

5) See #1.

 

[35mmdelux]

A 28mm/2.0 VC will give you approx 40mm FoV on the R-D1s. Great reviews the lens is fast enough.