Stopped dreaming....about the Lux

[kevin m]

I had both the 35 Aspherical Lux and the Nokton SC 40 at the same time. The lux is noticeably better at f1.4, but stopped down it's a wash.

The IQ of the Nokton is fine, it's the build quality that's the Achilles heel of the VC line, in general. I've had two copies of the Nokton and they both had stiff, uneven focus throws.

 

[Ben Z]

Interesting. Has anyone made the choice between the ASPH 35mm Summicron & Summilux?

I actually had the ASPH-SUMMICRON before I got the ASPH-SUMMILUX and sold the Cron once I'd seen for myself that I couldn't tell one apart from the other, except the Lux was a stop faster. That was all back when I had a bad case of tech-spec/lens-test fever. Once I sat back and saw how much I'd sunk into Leica lenses I about fell off my chair. It felt great once I had all that cash back in the bank, and went back to my good old Leica lenses that I fortunately hadn't sold. Looking back now though, I wish I'd kept those ASPH/APO's because I could've easily doubled my money on them selling them today. And they say Leica's aren't an investment

 

[Joshua]

Sorry, but while everyone is, of course, free to express their personal preferences, the above statements are objectively wrong. In fact, the exact opposite is true. The Noctilux produces a particularly smooth OOF area, and that VC example looks nothing like it.

Well I think the key is that any given lens can exhibit different styles of bokeh for any given shot. I've been able to produce smooth and choppy bokeh from the same lens.

I guess my point was more that it doesn't produce it but is capable of producing it, which I think a lot of lenses aren't.

As for your shots, yes, the bokeh looks smoother there, although I am with another poster that the first shot looks very odd, especially with the bucket, its very disrupting. Here's a couple shots just for comparison with the choppier "watercolor" bokeh I was referring to (all from a Leica+Noctilux combo):

And just to be CRYSTAL CLEAR for all the nocy faithful out there, I'm not saying in any way the CV40 is comparable on image quality or bokeh quality as the 50/1. Not at all. I'm simply stating that the 50/1 can produce a certain *type* of bokeh that's really cool because its a bit more messy than the typical smooth bokeh of many other lenses. And the 40/1.4 happens to do the same type of thing. It may not be of the same quality, but they both can do interesting things with bokeh that other lenses simply just don't do.

 

[pfoto]

I'd ignore the fourms, and go shoot with both of them with a tripod using the same camera and film, and swap the lens, make notes, and review some large prints where you will easily see subtle differences not easily seen on-screen. It's tedious, but in the end, you will be satisfied with your decision.

Good advice, and I have tried this to a certain extent. The problem is that it is tedious and so I haven't done it in an organized enough fashion. But from what I've done I can't tell a difference except for the extra stop, just like Ben in the quote below.

I actually had the ASPH-SUMMICRON before I got the ASPH-SUMMILUX and sold the Cron once I'd seen for myself that I couldn't tell one apart from the other, except the Lux was a stop faster. That was all back when I had a bad case of tech-spec/lens-test fever. Once I sat back and saw how much I'd sunk into Leica lenses I about fell off my chair. It felt great once I had all that cash back in the bank, and went back to my good old Leica lenses that I fortunately hadn't sold. Looking back now though, I wish I'd kept those ASPH/APO's because I could've easily doubled my money on them selling them today. And they say Leica's aren't an investment

Yes if you can't tell a difference then you keep the smaller unit and buy faster film. I was interested in knowing if others could see a difference between them. Apparently not.