Unit variation in Nokton 50mm f1.1?

V

Vickko

Veteran
Local time
1:58 PM
Joined
Oct 14, 2005
Messages
2,827
So, are you seeing a lot of unit variation in the Nokton 50mm f1.1 lenses?

I'm reading that the entire Cosina line is affected by unit variation, and there seem to be enough threads on VC quality that it worries me a bit.

I'm thinking of getting a used 50f1.1 (again), but....

Vick
 
I do wonder about that too. I have a new 50 1.1 and wide open performance i've been a bit jekyll and hyde about. I get quite a halo around high contrast areas - now i know i'm supposed too, but sometimes i wonder whether i'm getting more than others.

Unit variation amongst lenses is one of the most unclear areas. How often do you see a lens test with 3 or more of the same lens being compared for example? Exactly how much variation is acceptable?

This made even more difficult by being on different bodies, different usage patterns etc,.

cheers
paul
 
If you are worried about variation, buy new. Chances are the people that are unhappy with the lens will sell it. A new lens has a warranty, and can be exchanged more easily.

No problems with my 50/1.1 Nokton, or 35/1.2 Nokton.
 
Some unit variation, but not much more than Leica from my experience. The problem with the 1.1 is more to do with it's sometimes ugly bokeh and rendering wide open. Depending on the situation, you may get great or horrible bokeh.
 
Brian Sweeney said:
If you are worried about variation, buy new. Chances are the people that are unhappy with the lens will sell it. A new lens has a warranty, and can be exchanged more easily.

No problems with my 50/1.1 Nokton, or 35/1.2 Nokton.
Click to expand...

Oh i did. The issue is quantifying whether what i'm seeing is normal or not. Or whether the degree of halo is correct and that would require a comparison with another lens in the same situation. That's the tough question for me. Sometimes i love the images, sometimes i just think they're not as good as they should be.

cheers
paul
 
paulcurtis said:
Oh i did. The issue is quantifying whether what i'm seeing is normal or not. Or whether the degree of halo is correct and that would require a comparison with another lens in the same situation. That's the tough question for me. Sometimes i love the images, sometimes i just think they're not as good as they should be.

cheers
paul
Click to expand...

Paul what you are describing is EXACTLY what most people are reserved about when it comes to this lens. It's bokeh and rendering is unpredictable, and often surprisingly messy. There are also those that enjoy those qualities too, but what you are describing is all too familiar with this lens.
...ultimately though, its a great value lens with decent performance thats a full stop (more/less) faster than a Summilux for under $1k.

You either accept it's quirks or move on to something slower or something 7-10x the price for no gain in sharpness, but more predictable rendering qualities.
 
50/1.1 Nokton wide-open.

1/90th at F1.1:



1/30th at F1.1:



1/90th at F1.1



100% crop:





You can see the effects of the multi-colored light source in the shadows, where only the dark blue lights illuminate the subject. These are all at ISO2500.

1/60th at F1.1



All shots are hand-held,
 
Last edited:
Brian, thanks. Do you have any crops of those. The issue i'm most aware of is shown in the one with the soldier in the green cape. Where the cape meets the ground. I can see the halo at the edge there.

I will have to find somewhere to host a couple of test images and pop them up to show exactly what i mean. Perhaps others can chime in and tell me whether it's worse than they've seen.

leicashot - you're right, it could well be the nature of the lens. I don't think i've shot enough with it yet to truly understand it's capabilities. There's a temptation with 1.1 to *always* shoot wide open!

thanks
paul
 
EDIT: Crops uploaded with full-frame shots above.


The Halo is probably there- at F1.1 the cape meeting the ground is out of focus. This is from a display at the Marine Museum at Quantico, with programmed multi-source, multi-color lighting that is timed to simulate a nightime battle. So the colors may be due to off lighting.
 
Last edited:
Here's an attempt at linking some images from flickr

This first is a crop from venice, you can see the halo very clearly against the dark sections of the gondola. The purple fringe is there too.

When i first saw it i though that's a bit over the top and this is the photo that started me wondering whether i'm seeing more than most.


DSC06074 - Version 2 by paul at inventome, on Flickr

Now this is much better though, daylight again and you can see the halo on the white on black


DSC07597 - Version 2 by paul at inventome, on Flickr

That's perfectly acceptable really.

And in the interests of balance, overall the lens allows me to get some shots i couldn't otherwise achieve like this from the other evening.


DSC08082 by paul at inventome, on Flickr

cheers
paul
 
In recently bought a Nokton 1.1 from KEH that was described as LN- ... and when I got it, the focus ring would keep turning even though I was at the minimum focus distance. If you kept turning it, it would feel like the lens was coming apart. :) Scared me away from this lens temporarily.
 
paulcurtis said:
Here's an attempt at linking some images from flickr

This first is a crop from venice, you can see the halo very clearly against the dark sections of the gondola. The purple fringe is there too.

When i first saw it i though that's a bit over the top and this is the photo that started me wondering whether i'm seeing more than most.


DSC06074 - Version 2 by paul at inventome, on Flickr

Now this is much better though, daylight again and you can see the halo on the white on black


DSC07597 - Version 2 by paul at inventome, on Flickr

That's perfectly acceptable really.

And in the interests of balance, overall the lens allows me to get some shots i couldn't otherwise achieve like this from the other evening.


DSC08082 by paul at inventome, on Flickr

cheers
paul
Click to expand...

Paul I really can't see what you're complaining about. I think you should research lenses before looking for problems in your pictures. Firstly, there is nothing wrong with the files you've shown. Secondly, not even the $10.5k (now $14k) Noctilux is perfect.

Also, the 'halo' you think you're seeing in Brian's picture is a shadow from the light above.

When you shoot wide open with ANY lens, there are always going to be inconsistencies and deformaties in the image. Just accept it or move on to another lens. But this pixel peeping exercise is only going to give you headaches, and never improve your pictures.
 
leicashot said:
Paul I really can't see what you're complaining about. I think you should research lenses before looking for problems in your pictures. Firstly, there is nothing wrong with the files you've shown. Secondly, not even the $10.5k (now $14k) Noctilux is perfect.

Also, the 'halo' you think you're seeing in Brian's picture is a shadow from the light above.

When you shoot wide open with ANY lens, there are always going to be inconsistencies and deformaties in the image. Just accept it or move on to another lens. But this pixel peeping exercise is only going to give you headaches, and never improve your pictures.
Click to expand...

I have talked myself out of there being an issue really in the images i posted, perhaps that didn't come across properly.

It was the first image, one of the first i took with it that gave the halo around the edges which isn't something i'd seen in *any* other lens i own. It was quite obvious full size too. I had researched the CV1.1 quite a bit and i don't remember seeing that halo elsewhere, to that degree. I wondered if there was something up on my copy.

The next 3 were from the last weekend and i only really looked at them when getting ready to post hence talking myself out of being a real problem.

I wonder if the additional purple halo is sensor bloom, seeing as it is such a high contrast area - i suspect it is.

I can see the same highlight along the edge of Brians photo too, it's not a shadow.

I don't as a rule pixel peep, just with a new lens and seeing that effect for the first time made me wonder and it fitted in with this thread.

I've just gone and found the same image at f1.4 (i think) and you can see the difference between wide open and stopped down a little. I personally thought that difference was quite extreme. What do you think?


DSC06073 - Version 2 by paul at inventome, on Flickr

thanks
paul
 
Last edited:
Paul, the purple fringing is there wide open even on film. The halo might be from residual coma, which is worse at the outer zones of the picture. Some people would call it glow and value the lens more because of it ;). I'd check for focus accuracy wide open and at minimum distance, check for decentering, check for any mechanical problems, etc. But I don't think the halo is unusual for this lens. FWIW mine seeps a very tiny bit of lube around the exterior screws... not a big deal I hope.

Given what it produces for what it costs, the Nokton 1.1 is simply unrivaled. You just have to understand its weaknesses and play to its strengths.
 
Bruin said:
Paul, the purple fringing is there wide open even on film. The halo might be from residual coma, which is worse at the outer zones of the picture. Some people would call it glow and value the lens more because of it ;). I'd check for focus accuracy wide open and at minimum distance, check for decentering, check for any mechanical problems, etc. But I don't think the halo is unusual for this lens. FWIW mine seeps a very tiny bit of lube around the exterior screws... not a big deal I hope.

Given what it produces for what it costs, the Nokton 1.1 is simply unrivaled. You just have to understand its weaknesses and play to its strengths.
Click to expand...

Not sensor bloom then! That halo is pretty close to the centre of the image, so it's not a edge thing. I think it's because it's a well defined blurred edge, rather than what i'd call a glow, that made me wonder.

Focus is fine, i'm using it on a NEX so there's no rangefinder coupling to worry about. Focus is pretty good going with peaking. Looking forward to the EVF of the NEX7 with peaking too.

However at the end of the day f1.1 for that cost is pretty amazing so there are bound to be some compromises. I have no issues with lube though, so thankful for that. Mechanically it seems fine.

Just wondering about the 35 f1.2 now...

cheers
paul
 
it's a natural fact to see unit variations in any series production. Then handling and usage will play their role too, modifying alignments and positioning of all elements.
About halos, the Noctilux f1 is miles worse than the Nokton, on digital cameras. It shows terrible fringing, the Nokton is much more controlled.
I have not experienced worrisome occurrences myself with my VC 50/1.1, either on film or with a R-D1, shooting mostly wide open.
Beware that if you shoot film then scan the film, the scanning process can generate halos in transition areas where contrast is high. This is somewhat unavoidable. (FYI: my Minolta 5400 is much better than my Nikon 5000ED on that aspect).
I'd say, the VC 50/1.1 is a great lens, I have had it for almost 2 years.
Buy one with a warrantee if you are worried.
 
I still stick to my initial conclusion that this is THE style of the Nokton 1.1. Any lens wide open is going to exhibit slight 'problems'. With the Noctilux, those problems are valued by most users. This is most certainly the attributes of the Nokton 1.1, and you either have to accept it or move on.
 
leicashot said:
Some unit variation, but not much more than Leica from my experience. The problem with the 1.1 is more to do with it's sometimes ugly bokeh and rendering wide open. Depending on the situation, you may get great or horrible bokeh.
Click to expand...

You nailed it! Exactly what I would have wrote, based on my shooting experience with this lens.

Dave (D&A)
 
Just to add some more.

I've since discovered that there are sensor issues at play here too. Different sensors create different amounts of the purple bloom which is sensor overload on high contrast areas.

I also found a comparison of the CV 35 f1.2 on different cameras which quite clearly show some of these issues.

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/read.asp?forum=1042&message=39336987

(I hope it's okay to link to that forum on here!)

cheers
paul
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom