The 35mm f1.4 Nokton @ f2.0 on the M8 ?

dcsang

dcsang

Canadian & Not A Dentist
Local time
4:35 PM
Joined
Jun 16, 2005
Messages
4,548
Location
Toronto Canada
View My Gallery
I know people have passed on this lens but I'm curious what people think of the lens on the M8 @ f2.0 - it looks "pretty good" at f1.4 to me based on what I've seen but how about at f2.0 ?

How does it compare to the 35mm Summicron ASPH? (do I dare to commit blasphemy in the sight of the Leicaphiles? 😀)

Curious as always,
Dave
 
Florian1234 said:
This is - well not on the M8, but on M4 or M6 - nearly exactly what I am looking for:
A "comprehensive" test of the Nokton 35/1.4 and the 35/2 cron (pre-ASPH favourably) side by side. :angel:
Click to expand...

Well Florian, you may get what you ask - I'm looking at this lens as one that has potential - I didn't see much difference b/w the 35 cron and the 35 ZM but I wonder what the 35 Nokton @ f2.0 would produce... hopefully, worse case scenario, that it's just slightly "less desirable" than the 'cron... but until I hear (and or get one) I'll not know for sure.

Dave
 
I don't have a 35mm Summicron to compare with the CV 35/1.4 but before I bought the 35 CV I sold my 40mm Summicron and kept the CV 40/1.4 because I liked it better. Maybe I got a good example of the CV 35/1.4, but I like it as well.

I will admit that it is my third favorite lens out of the three 35mm lenses I own: #1: Summilux ASPH, #2: UC Hexanon, #3: CV f1.4 Nokton. Still, it is the right lens for the job when I need compactness and an extra stop.
 
ooh ooh, this topic excites me. I'm looking into one of these...well i'd like a 35mm pre-aph summilux but they're a tad hard to come by and the CV 35/1.4 is just soo deliciously tiny. I'm eagerly awaiting some test images to pop up in this thread.
 
The thing is... I want to see some good images with it. Not images of the corner of someone's house or a photograph of a drink sitting on a table.

I want to see top quality images (both in content and asthetics) taken with this lens.
 
jbf said:
The thing is... I want to see some good images with it. Not images of the corner of someone's house or a photograph of a drink sitting on a table.

I want to see top quality images (both in content and asthetics) taken with this lens.
Click to expand...
Chris Weeks has posted some nice b/w photos with the CV f1.4 Nokton in this uber post halfway through and here too. Really useful to see how it performs in real world situations.
 
Last edited:
cirque said:
Well, someone has to mention it: Sean Reid has tested this lens on the M8. In fear of getting my head chopped off I'm not going to say anything about the results.
Click to expand...

Ya.. I think I've heard a lot about his tests with this lens on the M8 - most of them turned out to be horrible if memory serves correctly.

That said, I have considered subscribing to his review site but I have not as of yet. I have noted his comments surrounding this lens on the M8 (and his review of it) by checking out threads here and over at the Leica Forum.

I think I'm going to have to suck it up and order one myself; do the tests / unscientific review, and then go from there.

Dave
 
Dave, if you get it before the 16th we could set up a more revealing test than the last one, since I've still got the Summicron. If you get it later, we can also meet later for beer & shots (which might work better anyway). I'm likely to sell the Cron, as I don't think it makes a lot of sense for me to have that and a pre-asph Lux. Some do, I know, but I've got too much stuff and need to shuffle the cabinet. I'll bring it to the meeting, as I'd like to hear an opinion or two on a fair price for it.
 
I've both the ZM Biogon F2 and the CV 35 1.4 SC. The bokeh is a bit different between the two, but the biggest difference seems to be field curvature, distortion and flare, with the Biogon beating out the CV in all three. Of course the CV is half the size and a stop faster, so you wouldn't expect the same level of correction. For people photos and shots with . . . atmosphere . . . the CV is a winner in my mind.

04910029.jpg


M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY2

The above was probably taken at F2 or F2.8. If you want to see more samples, you can plug CV 35 1.4 SC into the search page of my website or just go here.
 
Competition

Competition

Hi all,- the VC beats the 35 Summicron 6-element version in an almost unbelievable way. It shows much better off-center sharpness and resolution at 1.4 than the cron at 2.0 to 2.8!
Best regs Wolfhard
 
Matt(1pt4) said:
I've both the ZM Biogon F2 and the CV 35 1.4 SC. The bokeh is a bit different between the two, but the biggest difference seems to be field curvature, distortion and flare, with the Biogon beating out the CV in all three. Of course the CV is half the size and a stop faster, so you wouldn't expect the same level of correction. For people photos and shots with . . . atmosphere . . . the CV is a winner in my mind.

http://www.1point4photography.com/images/04910029.jpg

M6TTL, CV 35 1.4 SC, TMY2

The above was probably taken at F2 or F2.8. If you want to see more samples, you can plug CV 35 1.4 SC into the search page of my website or just go here.
Click to expand...
Amazing photos, Matt. That's definitely more contrast than I expected from the single coated version. I'm wondering what scanner you're using and if you do any post-processing at all (curves, blacks, brightness?).
 
Thank you Matt - I checked out the photos - it is, as I expected, a stellar performer based on what I see, on film.

My concern is the M8.
The "focus shift" and all that other mumbo jumbo that can turn a stellar lens on film into a hard to tame beast in the digital realm.

I've done some searching on Flickr; on the M8 group I belong to and there are some good examples there too - posted full size as well. I would like to use this @ f1.4 during wedding coverage and if it is good; then, obviously the ASPH 'cron is going to to go the way of the dodo.

Cheers,
Dave
 
Dave,
I just read Sean Reid's review and saw the sample images he shot with the lens on the M8. He compared it with the CV 35 1.7 and the 1.7 was much better in every image. There looked to be no contest. He had two samples, then two more for a follow-up and it still did not fair as well.
You may want to subscribe and take a look. It may save you a few bucks in the long run
 
lewis44 said:
Dave,
I just read Sean Reid's review and saw the sample images he shot with the lens on the M8. He compared it with the CV 35 1.7 and the 1.7 was much better in every image. There looked to be no contest. He had two samples, then two more for a follow-up and it still did not fair as well.
You may want to subscribe and take a look. It may save you a few bucks in the long run
Click to expand...

Hey Randy,

Ya, I know it got a dog of a review from Sean.
Chris Weeks, if you can wade through the stream of thought and various expletives 😀, offered a "it's not that bad" sort of review.

I don't see too many other full reviews online - lots of sample photos on film (i.e. Matt Alof's post here) and a few on Flickr full size. I can only imagine how bad or good it can be.

Cheers,
Dave
 
I'm a subscriber to ReidReviews, and they are generally very thoughtfully done, but I think he sometimes misses the point. Resolution is only one aspect of lens performance, and one that I find pretty much irrelevant beyond a certain level. I'm much more interested in things like flare resistance, bokeh, speed and handling. From my perspective, he failed to comment on the 1.4's biggest weakness, its profound distortion.

That aside, you have to keep in mind that if focus shift really is a problem, the 1.4's performance on an M8 is going to be no worse relative to its performance on film. Rather, the performance on the M8 will be worse relative to other lenses on the M8. I think folks keep forgetting this point; the M8 doesn't create focus shift problems, but its sensor is sensitive enough to reveal problems that have always been there.

To put it another way, if the performance is good enough on film, why isn't the same level of resolution sufficient on film.
 
Mike Kim, I scan on a ScanDual IV with VueScan set to create RAW scan files (actually tiffs). I invert these files in PS and then adjust contrast on the with curves. I've got a batch action that applies a levels adjustment, but that's just to give me a rough estimate of the file's characteristics, and I usually discard that adjustment before going further.

The SC version seems to have plenty of contrast. Not sure how it compares to the MC, but wide open it does exhibit some veling flare and some occasionally crazy internal reflections:

04680015.jpg


Hexar RF, CV 35 1.4 SC, Wide Open
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom