Sell or keep my Planar 50/2? (fomerly: Planar vs. Nokton)

[efix]

I had originally posted a thread in "Optics and Lenses", but that got deleted since I neglected to read the forum rules before posting ... 🙁 Anyway, I was debating whether or not to exchange my 50 Planar ZM with a 40 Nokton. Reasons: more speed, more compact, more like a 50mm on the M8, the 67mm-equivalent field-of-view being somewhat quirky. Downsides: nowhere as nice in rendering as the Zeiss.

Here I am now, still debating whether or not to keep my 50 Planar or to sell it in favor of a more 50mm-ish lens for my M8. Here are my options:

1) 40/1.4 Nokton
2) 40/2 M-Rokkor or C-Summicron
3) 40/2.8 Sonnar

In the long term, I would like to own one of each (for the fact that I love 40mm lenses and that each has its unique character), but for the moment, I'll have to make do with one.

I am also debating whether to extend my focal reach to 75 or 90mm (100 / 120 equivalent on M8) with either a 75/2.5 Heliar or a 90/4 Elmar/M-Rokkor. Judging from the going prices of second-hand Planars, this is what I could get if I manage to find one or more good deals:

Option 1: 40/1.4 + 40/2
When I give up my 50 Planar, I give up its nice colour rendering and gentle bokeh. The 40 Nokton does not render either as nicely. The 40/2 'cron and Rokkors though have a good reputation. Any intel on how they compare to both the Planar and Nokton?

Option 2: 40/1.4 + 90/4
This would effectively give me a low light + a tele option, which would be nice. The 90/4 should also work well for portaiture, albeit only in good light.

Option 3: 40/2 + 90/4
Like Option 2, only with the 40 'cron/Rokkor instead of the Nokton. Less preferred.

Option 4: Either Option 2 or 3 but with 75 Heliar instead of 90 Elmar/Rokkor. Slightly shorter, so not as much of a stretch from 40mm as a 90, and also slightly faster. But also slightly more on the used market. Has a very good rep, but so does the 90/4.

Option 5: Skip all of the ahead and go directly for the 40 Sonnar, which I know I would love for its rendering. MAJOR downside: I'd have even less speed than with my 50 Planar. And I do want one lens that I can use in low light without having to go to 2500 ISO.

Option 6: Sell a kidney. Joking of course 😛

I cannot think of parting with either my 28 Biogon or my 15 Heliar, as I just love both lenses too much. The 50 Planar, however nice its rendering, is a lens that I like but that also doesn't excite me overly much. Yes, it has the typical Zeiss look going on, but with its equivalent focal length on the M8 it is kind of an oddball. Also, its rendering is sometimes too gentle, although I must say I have taken some wonderful pictures with it in the past.

Alright. What do I do? Sell the Planar? I WILL regret it. On the other hand, I WILL appreciate a lens with better low-light capabilities. This is really difficult for me, so I hope a little input from your side can help me come to a decision.

Btw, the decision is not to be made instantly. For my upcoming trip to NYC (on which I will embark this Friday), I'll take my current kit consisting of a 15 Heliar, 28 Biogon and 50 Planar. It is a nice kit, and the spread is also quite balanced. We'll see, maybe when I come back I will have come to a conclusion on my own ... 🙂

 

[segedi]

You may upgrade your M8 at some point to an M that is full frame and has better high ISO. So, I recommend keeping the Planar. I really love that lens!

 

[efix]

You may upgrade your M8 at some point to an M that is full frame and has better high ISO. So, I recommend keeping the Planar. I really love that lens!

While that particular point is probably very far into the future (and, to be honest, I love what I get from my M8 so I currently see no reason to upgrade), I am indeed contemplating an M2 or CL at some point. The M2 would of course ask for a 50mm lens ... but then again, it would work with a 40 just as well. But you have a point there, and was thinking about that possibility as well.

 

[gavinlg]

I really think that you're over thinking this. If you want a 40mm for the focal length, get the nokton. It's better than the summicron in a lot of ways. (sharpness, faster, same size, cheaper - as tested by dcwatchimpress.co.jp) If you want ultimate IQ keep the planar. If you don't care about speed at all and want a nice smooth soft lens, get the sonar.

Ultimately, the 40mm nokton at f2 is at least as smooth as the summicron 40mm...

 

[efix]

I really think that you're over thinking this. If you want a 40mm for the focal length, get the nokton. It's better than the summicron in a lot of ways. (sharpness, faster, same size, cheaper - as tested by dcwatchimpress.co.jp) If you want ultimate IQ keep the planar. If you don't care about speed at all and want a nice smooth soft lens, get the sonar.

Ultimately, the 40mm nokton at f2 is at least as smooth as the summicron 40mm...

Thanks for the input! EDIT: right, I read the article on DC Watch once, I think I'll have to take another look at it.

 

[Scheelings]

Some Great lenses there - I also have an M8, the 28mm Biogon and a 50mm (but the Summilux). I am likely to sell the Summilux and replace it with a Planar because like you, I like the Zeiss look. I think I'll wait until I get the M9 however and then re-evaluate the Summilux again.

I also agree with you that 50mm is just weird on the M8. As such I rarely use it - although I discovered its a great focal length on the M8 for portraiture (but I'm guessing your planar is too sharp and clinical for that!)

Why don't you consider swapping two lenses. Get the 25mm Biogon and the 35mm biogon (f2.0).

So then you have 15, 25 and 35 (effective 50mm).

Personally I think anything longer than 75mm effective on the M8 is too long.

Then if you ever upgrade to an M9, you sell the 15 and buy a 50 🙂

 

[ChrisC]

.......I also agree with you that 50mm is just weird on the M8.........Why don't you consider swapping two lenses. Get the 25mm Biogon and the 35mm biogon (f2.0).......

Hmmmm.-- I tried very hard to get a good '40' and finally gave up after testing an 'as new' 'perfect' M-Rokkor which had hideous veiling haze. Instead I got a Zeiss 35mm C-Biogon and it is simply phenomenal. With a 1.15 Megapearls/Japan Exposures variable dioptre magnifier the combination is perfect for me on the M8. The 28mm framelines can still be comfortably used with the magnifier.

I understand that the Zeiss 25mm is a very good lens, but I'd be reluctant to use it on the M8. I had a Leica 24mm lens for the M8 and the intrusion of the twinned 35mm framelines plonked in the middle of the 24's framing field was a ghastly intrusion for me; personally, a 28mm lens is a much better user experience on the M8.

And yes, I too think that 50 is a little 'weird' on the M8.

.............. Chris

 

[elmer3.5]

Hi, the 50mm lens on the m8 is simply unusable, it´s too narrow with 1.3 crop factor.

I used the sonnar 40mm wich is a gem...and will give you 53mm fov exactly.

The nokton isn´t a bad alternative and you can play much more with dof.
the cron flares a lot and is not as good as the nokton 40...

anyway the best of all is the sonnar 40mm, btw i just repurchased another one recently!

Bye!

 

[LCT]

- If you like 40s, don't overthink, choose a 40 and shoot. 🙂
- If you have an M8 (not M8.2), 40mm lenses are the only ones to be accurate at long to medium distance with the 35mm framelines. You'll have to file the flange out a bit to bring up the latters though. Not a big deal at all. See http://photo.net/leica-rangefinders-forum/00CcwG.
- Which 40? Matter of tastes but keep in mind that the CV 40/1.4 produces some focus shift contrary to its Leitz and Minolta counterparts.
- Leitz or Minolta? I own both. Getting UV/IR filters is a bit difficult for the Leitz. For a DIY see http://tinyurl.com/7ktucvn. Also beware that the Leitz has a sloping focus cam contrary to that of M lenses. It does not make the least difference with my samples but this can cause some issues in theory.
- The Rokkor 40/2 (for Minolta CLE) results are nearly the same as those of the Leitz and has not the same focus issue but you'll have to find out a 40.5mm UV/IR filter. Inexpensive ones can be found here: http://tinyurl.com/btsxv6h. The rubber hood of the Minolta is not easy to find out by the way.
- Sonnar 40/2.8? No experience sorry.

 

[efix]

Thanks for all your input! For the moment, my mind is set on the 40 Nokton + 90 Rokkor/Elmar combo. However, that may change 🙂

To those who recommended a 24/25 + 35: I owned the 35/2 Biogon, and while it is truly a fantastic lens, it doesn't fit the bill for me, since I'd be with an f/2 lens again -- and I really want that f/1.4 🙂 Also, it's too close to my 28.

The 25 Biogon is highly praised, but I prefer the 28 since it's a) slighty closer to a 40mm on full frame, and thus not exceedingly wide, b) much smaller and c) the 28mm framelines are much easier to see. Also, I really love it and will not part with it as long as I've got the M8.

Since I'll be stuck with the M8 for a while (I don't see me upgrading or switching to film any time soon), I won't worry about what lenses I could possibly want in the future, but rather what I want/need now.

 

[jazzwave]

I'have M8 with Nokton 35/1.4 and Sumicron Rigid 50/2, mostly I'm using 35/1.4 for daily shot. I use 50 cron for portrait only, to tight for street photo.
I bring 45/2 planar with Contax G on my bag as well.


~ron~

 

[PatrickCheung]

I guess the 40/1.4 Nokton's rendering isn't everyones cup of tea, but I absolutely loved it when I had one. It does have short comings,though I've always seen them as part of the "nokton look". 😛 My Nokton backfocused a little on my M8, but my girlfriend's Nokton works fine... strange huh? Despite the backfocusing, I highly recommend the Nokton! The speed is much appreciated, the rendering is like no other (not even the 35/1.4 Nokton which people often compare it to), and it can be had for a good price, saving you a little cash for whatever else you feel like! My girlfriend got a sweet deal on hers, $390 shipped, mint condition, with a UV filter (not that we use one), and the LH-6 Hood included 🙂. Seeing her photos with it makes me wish I had one again.

Maybe Option 1 is best for you, if you like 40s. Just sell the one that you don't think you'll use as much, and use the money for a 90/4 or 75/2.5.

As a parting note, I only sold my 40 because I found it's focal length a little too limiting for my purposes, not because of image quality 🙂

Best of Luck!

 

[jsrockit]

For the M8, I'd go 40mm over 50mm.

 

[Bob Michaels]

................. I owned the 35/2 Biogon, and while it is truly a fantastic lens, it doesn't fit the bill for me, since I'd be with an f/2 lens again -- and I really want that f/1.4 ......................

I suggest getting some opinions from others about the 40mm Nokton at f1.4. I have one and find f1.4 is "usable where absolutely necessary" but not desirable. I will admit that the only times I use f1.4 is when there is no other option because it is so dim. If another 35mm f2.0 Biogon come along at the right price, I will replace the one I previously had and dispose of the 40mm Nokton.