SC vs. MC

peepete77

Established
Local time
5:11 AM
Joined
Jul 24, 2008
Messages
110
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
 
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.
 
Last edited:
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.
 
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.
 
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.
 
Back
Top Bottom