My M8 usually has a J-3 on it. I am lucky that I took up collecting cameras and lenses when it was "cheap". $95 Nikkor 5cm F1.4, $200 Canon 50/0.95, and many similar bargains. The two cameras were paid for by selling gear. Wife has no complaints.
The M9 is very useful for setting the shims in J-3's for the Leica standard...
But most of the time the M9 has a 1935 or 1939 Sonnar on it.
1935 5cm F1.5 Sonnar, converted to LTM, wide-open on the M9:
The modern Sonnar has higher contrast, and is sharper. It captures the Sonnar "Look" for sure.
The M9 is very useful for setting the shims in J-3's for the Leica standard...
But most of the time the M9 has a 1935 or 1939 Sonnar on it.
1935 5cm F1.5 Sonnar, converted to LTM, wide-open on the M9:
The modern Sonnar has higher contrast, and is sharper. It captures the Sonnar "Look" for sure.
Last edited:
zozio32
Member
My M8 usually has a J-3 on it. I am lucky that I took up collecting cameras and lenses when it was "cheap". $95 Nikkor 5cm F1.4, $200 Canon 50/0.95, and many similar bargains. The two cameras were paid for by selling gear. Wife has no complaints.
The M9 is very useful for setting the shims in J-3's for the Leica standard...
But most of the time the M9 has a 1935 or 1939 Sonnar on it.
1935 5cm F1.5 Sonnar, converted to LTM, wide-open on the M9:
The modern Sonnar has higher contrast, and is sharper. It captures the Sonnar "Look" for sure.
Completely agree about the comments on the lenses. It's just that I found it a bit hard to read something along the lines of: "forgot about the poll, get both!" when I am wondering if I'll offer myself this c-sonnar that I have looking at for some time when I'll get my first salary now that I've finished my PhD
Congratulations on finishing the PhD- I would go for the C-Sonnar.
A comparison of the c-Sonnar, KMZ Jupiter-3, and Uncoated 1936 Sonnar:
http://www.ziforums.com/album.php?albumid=285
Jupiter-3 and pre-war Sonnars fascinate me, just amazing optics for their time. Taught myself how to convert the Sonnars to LTM and how to CLA the Jupiters.
with that stated, the prices of both the Nokton and c-Sonnar will climb if they are discontinued. I've seen the prices of the Canon 50/0.95 go up by more than 10x in the last 6 years. Crazy!
A comparison of the c-Sonnar, KMZ Jupiter-3, and Uncoated 1936 Sonnar:
http://www.ziforums.com/album.php?albumid=285
Jupiter-3 and pre-war Sonnars fascinate me, just amazing optics for their time. Taught myself how to convert the Sonnars to LTM and how to CLA the Jupiters.
with that stated, the prices of both the Nokton and c-Sonnar will climb if they are discontinued. I've seen the prices of the Canon 50/0.95 go up by more than 10x in the last 6 years. Crazy!
Last edited:
jmkelly
rangefinder user
I'm with Brian on this - I chose the Sonnar in the poll because I am a fan of the image character it produces, and because it is more of an all-around lens. In real life I did not choose - I have both, as well as a number of older Sonnar designs I enjoy using.
On film I use 75-90mm for portraits. I was not so fortunate as Brian in my gear trades over the years so I am content using the GF1 and RD-1 digitals. On these bodies 50mm is fine for portraits, and I generally use a Sonnar.
On film I use 75-90mm for portraits. I was not so fortunate as Brian in my gear trades over the years so I am content using the GF1 and RD-1 digitals. On these bodies 50mm is fine for portraits, and I generally use a Sonnar.
jawarden
Well-known
Just piling on a few more Sonnar shots. The first two were probably taken at 2.8. I like the effect I'm getting here, but usually I do not like the results I get when I'm using a wide aperture with a heavily detailed background (vegetation for instance). I don't know if it's the Sonnar or not, but the oof areas are not to my liking. when the oof areas are simple like here, I'm usually happy with the results.
ZI with Portra160:
This one is HP5 and was either wide open or 2.8. Don't like the far trees all that much:
ZI with Portra160:
This one is HP5 and was either wide open or 2.8. Don't like the far trees all that much:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Well, I had both the Nokton and the Sonnar, but almost never used the Nokton after I got the Sonnar, so when someone else REALLY wanted it... I don't miss it.
All these discussions are intensely personal, but revolve around two things.
First, you see the 'magic' of one lens or the other, or you don't. If you don't, and you can afford it, and you can spare the time piddling around with two 50/1,5 lenses, buy/keep both.
Second, if you begin to suspect that the quality of your pictures depends more on your talent than on which of two excellent lenses you choose, why worry about using one or the other? Consider the time you'd otherwise waste on choosing between the two, and spend it on trying to become a better photographer with whatever lens you chose.
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Nokton 50f1.5 (this is the Nikon Rf Mount version - same optical formula as the LTM version.
Arista Premium 400/ Xtol - Rodinal combo.
JayM
Well-known
Voted Sonnar.
I had both and liked the Nokton well enough. I don't like how 50mm looks, but like the fun and challenge of shooting with them. Just not enough to have more than one. So when the time came, size won.
Not that it was all about size
I had both and liked the Nokton well enough. I don't like how 50mm looks, but like the fun and challenge of shooting with them. Just not enough to have more than one. So when the time came, size won.
Not that it was all about size
paapoopa
Established
heres one with the contax mount carl zeiss sonnar with a amedeo adaptor shot with my m6..
user237428934
User deletion pending
After using it now for some month I have absolutely no problems with focus shift on my Zeiss Ikon with film. With my M8 I have sometimes problems at f2 or f1.5. I think this is because of the crop factor, but I'm not really sure.
It's because digital is more demanding...
klapka
Established
Ok, here is my little word for Nokton (since every body seems to like the c-sonnar):
1. I have never used a c-sonnar but I do have Jupiter-3 and love it. My J-3 example:
2. Have no doubt C-sonnar is also a great lens.
3. Do love my Nokton 1.1 - it is fun to shoot with and delivers the results I like. I can recomend it - yes - a great lens!
Some pics from my Nokton at f1.1:
And it is sharp wide open every time I don't fail focusing. Love the Nokton.
And just one more pic to show how it renders background focused close at 1.1:
1. I have never used a c-sonnar but I do have Jupiter-3 and love it. My J-3 example:
2. Have no doubt C-sonnar is also a great lens.
3. Do love my Nokton 1.1 - it is fun to shoot with and delivers the results I like. I can recomend it - yes - a great lens!
Some pics from my Nokton at f1.1:
And it is sharp wide open every time I don't fail focusing. Love the Nokton.
And just one more pic to show how it renders background focused close at 1.1:
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
This got eliminated for some reason - I am a newbie in this posting game and still have trouble with it occasionally!
Stockholm, Zeiss C Sonnar 50f1.5 1/30 and f1.5.
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Our neighbors on the top deck of the building we live in. Nice sunny evening too.
Nokton 50mm f1.1.
I kind of like the shadow self portrait on Matt's T-shirt.
The 50f1.1 Nokton is in many ways a better lens than the Noctilux. It might not have the "character" of the Leica lens - but it is technically better. Very sharp center, slightly weaker edges than a 0.95 Noctilux. Remember that the current Noctilux cult extols the "flaws" of the Nocti - and only 10 or 15 years ago these were the same flaws that had us swearing at it!
Tom A
RFF Sponsor
Nokton 50mm f1.1 at f1.1 1/60 s. Double XX @ 320 iso - semi stand development in Rodinal 1:100 for 25 min.
anerjee
Well-known
xp2, c-sonnar@f/4 I think, handheld at 1/2 sec.
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6210/6160397945_91cdacd368_z.jpg
Another one at f/1.5 I think
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6177/6160391803_17f933eb7c_b.jpg
I did not get the focus on this one 100% right, but I am pleased with the result.
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6210/6160397945_91cdacd368_z.jpg
Another one at f/1.5 I think
http://farm7.static.flickr.com/6177/6160391803_17f933eb7c_b.jpg
I did not get the focus on this one 100% right, but I am pleased with the result.
brbo
Well-known
c sonnar 1,5/50, bessa r3a, ektachrome e100g:
wildling by boachi, on Flickr
good morning by boachi, on Flickr
sorry ladies... by boachi, on Flickr
wildling by boachi, on Flickr
good morning by boachi, on Flickr
sorry ladies... by boachi, on Flickr
Shade
Well-known
The sonnar. It has a very beautiful rendering and sharper wide open than the Nokton. And it's MUCH lighter too anyway.
uhoh7
Veteran
Well just when you think you have the nokton pidegon holed, it surprises you:
a couple stops down it is a very vivid lens
as to the sonnars, the old ones are so friggin good and varied in character, the ZM seems almost superfluous.
nikkor 5cm f/1.4:
a couple stops down it is a very vivid lens
as to the sonnars, the old ones are so friggin good and varied in character, the ZM seems almost superfluous.
nikkor 5cm f/1.4:
Last edited:
ziengler
Member
I just bought a new ZM f1.5, 1560.. serial, shop mention its's new, seems like new stock are back on .. at least in singapore
tried focus on 1.5 and 2.8 seems dead sharp on , no back focus issue..
tried focus on 1.5 and 2.8 seems dead sharp on , no back focus issue..