the new Voigtländer Nokton 1,4/40mm

M

Marko

Established
Local time
10:10 PM
Joined
Dec 6, 2005
Messages
84
Hello,

iam new to this great Forum. I will purchase a Voigländer Bessa R3a with the new Nokton 1,4/40mm next time.

My problem is, that i can´t find any tests about the Nokton 40mm lens! :bang:

Have anyone something experience with this lens?

Thank you,

Marko
 
Last edited:
I have one, really sharp, but boke really hurts.
So if you plan to shoot wide open with only a small portion of the frame in focus you might be disappointed.
For any other use is a great lens.
 
I felt just the way Francesco does. I bought the Nokton 40mm, found it incredibly sharp (really really really sharp), but I couldn't live with the bokeh. I do like to shoot wide open, so the lens had to go. I replaced it with a 50mm Hexanon which I like a lot, but the whole reason for getting the R3a over the R2a was the 40mm framelines, which are now somewhat redundant. I should probably have got an R2a. On the other hand, the R3a is great for a 50mm lens, so I'll just stick to 1 lens and all will be well :D

This may also explain why you see more R3as being sold on eBay than R2as. Just my thoughts.
 
For me, the R3a is better for using a 50 than for using a 40 since you don't have to look around to see the framelines. Haven't got my Nokton pics back yet...
 
Thank you.

One question to wintoid..

What is the problem with the bokeh from the 40mm? I also like to shot wide open with my Nikon lenses and i enjoy the wonderfull bokeh. So the bokeh is a important factor for me!

What is the "best" bokeh lens for you, on the Bessa R3a? Better say, what is the "best" Bokeh lens from Voigtländer?

The Picture below is shot with my Nikkor 2.0/35mm D on Nikon F80. Is the Bokeh from the Nokton 40mm better?
 
Last edited:
Bokeh is pretty subjective. I can only offer my personal opinions.

At its worst, I found the background on shots from the Nokton looked a bit like wiggly worms. Attached is a shot from the Nokton that I was pretty pleased with. I think the bokeh is rather distracting though.

Personally, I don't like the bokeh from the Nikon shot you've posted, although I would say it's better than the Nokton. (I'm not trying to be rude, these are my personal opinions).

I'm happy with the Hexanon. I love my Canon EF 50mm f/1.4 rather more though. The best bokeh I've ever seen is from the Canon EF 85mm f/1.2L, which I don't own (unfortunately).

I really do think it's personal, so you should try to view as many shots as possible. Sockeyed has a pretty huge collection of Nokton photos on Flickr, but they tend to be great shots taken in sunshine, so the aperture is less likely to be wide open etc etc.
 
Marko,

Are you definitely buying the R3a and 40 Nokton? I really like the boke of my 35 Ultron but if you got the 35 route an R2a is probably a better body. I've also heard that the boke of the 50 Nokton is not ideal wide open (although I can't say from personal experience).

On the other side of the spectrum the pictures I've seen from the 75 2.5 are sharp, contrasty and have great boke (IMHO). 35 and 75 are a great combo so you might want to keep an open mind regarding the R2a.
 
Welcome to RFF, Marco! In the "normal-wide" lens range it seems the 35mm Ultron is admired, and for that matter the 35 Nokton and 35 Skopars as well, and I can say the 50mm Skopar is quite pleasant too. I've not used the Ultron but it's said to be reminiscent of pre-asph Summicrons, which is a big compliment in my book!

The 75 Heliar is lovely, agreed, but maybe outside the "normal" range. If you want a 40 with nice bokeh, there's the 40 Summicron and 40mm Minolta Rokkor (which I have and like) and 40/2.8 Rollei Zeiss. The 40 Nokton is pretty jarring wide open from what I've seen, different but not necessarily better I think than your Nikkor, yet it's said to get much more pleasant stopped down a couple stops.
 
The 40mm f1.4 Nokton comes in two versions: multicoated (like almost every other modern lens) and singlecoated (like lenses in the 1950's).

The singlecoated is touted as the one for B&W and for portraits. But I like it for all round work.

You may differ.
 
Bokeh is very subjective. SLR lenses with "auto-aperture" (opposed to preset or manual) cannot have many aperture blades. They must be stopped down quickly, and the 10 or more blades from an RF lens would give too much resistance. So the out-of-focus highlights in the background are hexagons, pentagons, or a shape that is formed by the closed down blades. The other factors are astigmatism (Summarit Swirlies) and over/under correction for spherical aberration. The Nikkor 35mm F2 does well on the optical trade-offs, but the number of blades is necessarily lower than an RF lens.

Of course you can always shoot wide open.
10.5cm F2.5 wide-open, close-up on Nikon F Photomic.
 
Last edited:
RF lenses have enough blades to make the OOF areas into circles.

Nikkor-P 8.5cm F2 at ~F4 on the Nikon S3.
 
Marko said:
Thank you.

One question to wintoid..

What is the problem with the bokeh from the 40mm? I also like to shot wide open with my Nikon lenses and i enjoy the wonderfull bokeh. So the bokeh is a important factor for me!

What is the "best" bokeh lens for you, on the Bessa R3a? Better say, what is the "best" Bokeh lens from Voigtländer?

The Picture below is shot with my Nikkor 2.0/35mm D on Nikon F80. Is the Bokeh from the Nokton 40mm better?
Click to expand...

The bokeh shown in that picture is pretty OK IMHO, on the nokton classic the OOF points of light are significantly darker at the centre than at the edge, this has a distracting effect.

My CV 28mm Ultron has a more neutral Bokeh, while the 75 Summilux has a really nice and smooth one.

I am still waiting for a 35 Summicron 4th that allegedly has the best bokeh ever, but I did not have a chance to try it.

Here are three examples of the Nokton classic Bokeh, so you can decide for yourself if you like it.

http://www.pbase.com/fgianni/bad_bokeh

Cheers
 
Brian Sweeney said:
Bokeh is very subjective.
Click to expand...

Brian, I am not sure about the VERY, if OOF points of light have a centre significantly darker than the edge, that is bad bokeh, if instead the OOF circle is more luminous at the centre, and smoothly darkens going towards the edge, that is definitely more pleasant to the eye.

About the shape, unless we have funny things, I am not too fussy, octagons are ok for me, providing that luminosity decreases nicely from the centre towards the edges, unfortunately the Nokton classic behaves in the opposite way.

So bokeh is subjective, but only up to a point, there are objective elements in it.
 
Brian Sweeney said:
RF lenses have enough blades to make the OOF areas into circles.

Nikkor-P 8.5cm F2 at ~F4 on the Nikon S3.
Click to expand...

Were you trying to demonstarate the ability of RF lenses to make the OOF areas into circles or the ability of McDonalds food to make kids into circles? :D
 
i thought there was also something about the OOF areas that has to do w/ the number of aperture blades in relation to odd vs. even. like an odd number of plades produces the shape of aperture, and an even number produces a starburst with 2 times the amount of blades. i could have this backward, or wrong...but i thought i remembered reading something about that somewhere. does anybody know what i'm talking about? am i just crazy? ok...don't answer that last one.
 
Nokton vs Rokkor-M/Cron

Nokton vs Rokkor-M/Cron

I own the MC Nokton 40/1.4 and a 40/2 Rokkor-M. I used to own the 40/2 Cron as well. My experience is that the Rokkor-M and the Cron-C are essentially identical in bokeh characteristics. It is also my experience (and that of others who own both) that the Cron/Rokkor have the same character of bokeh as the Nokton.

What *I* see that they have the same character of bokeh, except that when the Nokton is opened up to f1.4, it is made more extreme. If you stop them down, then in fact, the Nokton is smoother at the same given aperture (look at the f2.0 photos).
So, if you do not like the bokeh of the Nokton, it is a mistake to buy a Rokkor-M or Cron-C instead. If you buy a slower 40mm lens like the sonnar, in order to get better bokeh, then you should make sure that the bokeh of nokton at 40mm is actually so bad (I don't think so myself).

Rather than argue by assertion, I'll try to include 5 photos I just shot on the R-D1:
The MC Nokton shot at f1.4, f2.0 and f2.8
The Rokkor-M shot at f2.0 and f2.8
 
enochRoot said:
i thought there was also something about the OOF areas that has to do w/ the number of aperture blades in relation to odd vs. even. like an odd number of plades produces the shape of aperture, and an even number produces a starburst with 2 times the amount of blades. i could have this backward, or wrong...but i thought i remembered reading something about that somewhere. does anybody know what i'm talking about? am i just crazy? ok...don't answer that last one.
Click to expand...

Congrats, you aren't crazy after all: :D
http://www.nikon.co.jp/main/eng/portfolio/about/history/nikkor/n02_e.htm
 
Try the so called "Pancake lens" on the R3A. It is slightly wider, but is very flat and makes the R3A alot more pocketable. I used to own that exact combo (R3A + Nokton 40), and really liked the setup. I did not find the bokeh to be as bad as others have said here, but it is not as soft as leica glass or zeiss. BUT, the Nokton is very fast, and very sharp, as they say. If you shoot with it stopped "down" to F2.8, that nasty bokeh cleans up nicely.

But, for the price of a new Nokton, you may find a used Leica 50mm that would be even better.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom