Those f/0.95 Noktons for m4/3 - how are they?

M

Matus

Well-known
Local time
11:35 PM
Joined
Jan 23, 2008
Messages
1,837
By now there are already 4 of these super cool super fast lenses, but I failed to find any recent thread discussing them. Since I have just recently entered m4/3 system and will be at some point looking for a fast prime these lenses definitely sound interesting.

So - are they really worth the dough? Please share your experience and opinions :)
 
They are EXCELLENT.

I cannot say enough good about them. Amazing build quality, beautiful optics, 0.95 SUCKS the light in, focus throw is perfect distance, and silky smooth.

I have the 17.5, and even tho I've now got an M9, I can't bring myself to sell my m43 kit because of this lens.
 
I have the 25 0,95 and it is indeed a wonderful lens. It’s solidly and beautifully built - it feels as nice as a Leica or Zeiss lens in use - and I’m often astonished at how much light it finds in a dark room compared to what I see with my own eyes.

It does have some barrel distortion, which is mostly noticeable getting close to the subject, and naturally there’s some chromatic aberration when shooting wide open, but the lens is still amazingly sharp at 0,95 and I love the look it gives - even the glow that surrounds any bright light sources in the shot.

All in all, the lens is a joy to use: both the ‘haptics’ of a fully manual, solidly built lens, and the frankly gorgeous way it renders a scene.
 
I have all three. They are a joy to use and are very much like F1.4 glass on full frame. My OM-D kit also includes two Panasonic F2.8 autofocus zooms (12-35 & 35-100). What more could you ask for?

And by the way, these were made for video! That's what M4/3 is all about, isn't it?
 
mani said:
I have the 25 0,95 and it is indeed a wonderful lens. It’s solidly and beautifully built - it feels as nice as a Leica or Zeiss lens in use - and I’m often astonished at how much light it finds in a dark room compared to what I see with my own eyes.

It does have some barrel distortion, which is mostly noticeable getting close to the subject, and naturally there’s some chromatic aberration when shooting wide open, but the lens is still amazingly sharp at 0,95 and I love the look it gives - even the glow that surrounds any bright light sources in the shot.

All in all, the lens is a joy to use: both the ‘haptics’ of a fully manual, solidly built lens, and the frankly gorgeous way it renders a scene.
Click to expand...
Wonder how it compares to the Speedmaster 25mm f/0.95 Lens?
 
Here are a couple from the 25: a pic of my friend Mary playing music, and a portrait of my mom. These were on an old camera, I think the GX1. I don't have this lens right now and am hoping to be able to afford it again soon.



 
I have the 25mm, 17.5mm and 42.5mm. All of them are sharp wide open, but the sharpness is also slightly hazy. They aren't soft, but they have a glow. The glow largely disappears by f1.4, which is where I tend to shoot.

Bokeh highlights are cats eye wide open, and faceted when stopped down. They are capable of wonderful sunstars at f8 and above.

Rendering is very gentle and organic, nothing like a modern Zeiss or Leica lens. If you've shot with the Voigtlander RF lenses, you'll notice that rendering is quite similar, particularly the Nokton 50mm f1.1. The character of the m43 Noktons is completely different from Olympus and Panasonic m43 lenses, which render in a very 'digital' way.
 
I don't manual focus with m4/3rd for still photography. The oly 12, 17, 45, 75 and pana 25 are all more than good enough for me.

But 98% of my video is done through the four lens. They can be clickless and the images are so much more than enough for my amateur eye. They are my video kit.
 
robert blu said:
Well, it seems they are doing very well! Any comments about focusing? Thanks
robert
Click to expand...

Focusing is smooth and easy, as long as your vision is good enough to clearly see the LCD screen. The focusing rings are very smoothly damped, on a par with good legacy lenses from Minolta and Pentax.

The focusing ring goes slightly past infinity, which Voigtlander says is intended to account for temperature-based variation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom