VC 35mm f1.4 VS f1.2 ?

[davidtth]

hi,

i'm a xpan user, its my 1st time owning a Leica M camera, i came across many lenses and i find VC is one of my best choice. i'v been struggling between both 35mm f1.4 and 1.2, how much different between this two lens i may ask? best if any one have photo for comparison ?

worse come to worse, i may just get the 35mm f2.5 PII (if not much diff with 1.4) and save up for 35mm cron in future...

would love to heard some PRO opinion from here, thanks 🙂

 

[anabasis]

I have the 35 f1.2 VC and a 35mm Summicron Asph. I will admit that the summicron usually ends up on my M7 rather that the VC unless I know I'll be in low light. The VC is just very large and not to my liking for a street kit if there is enough light for a f2 lens (which is really tiny).

I'd look on flickr for lens groups to compare images. I know there is one for the f1.2 lens. There is probably one for the f1.4. VC's tend to have harsh BOKEH so I'd look at that for sure. I think the f1.2's BOKEH is fairly good, but I'm not sure abt the f1.4.

Wide open, I think the VC f1.2 is sharper than both my 35 f1.4 nikkor and 50mm f1.2 Nikkor. Still, stopping down a bit certainly helps.

I think that image wise, the VC f1.2 is an excellent performer for the price, but you will have to decide if the size is what you want to carry around.

JCA

 

[SimonSawSunlight]

the wetzlar M4 always felt a little heavier than most M6's I've held, I think the 1.2/35 matches the M4 without rapidwinder perfectly =)

 

[ferider]

Heavy or not, smooth bokeh or not, realize that the 35/1.2 will cover about 30% of your viewfinder area.

For pic comparison, have a look at the flickr M-mount forum.

Roland.

 

[davidtth]

thanks guys for the great tips 🙂

realize that the 35/1.2 will cover about 30% of your viewfinder area.

yes.. this will be the biggest issue for this lens which i think i may void, i had my xpan + cokin holder, its quite annoying for me, yup, maybe just me... 😛

 

[photobizzz]

I had a 35/1.2 Nokton and loved it, wish I had never sold it...It is a big beast but the bokeh is amazing. I currently own the 35/2.5 P II and it is a great lens as well. Super sharp and small. I love it on my M4-2 and especially love the focussing tab since it has such a short focus throw it makes it super quick to focus in on your subject...

 

[fotomeow]

I have the 1.4 but havent seen much attention paid to it on the forums, but the 35/1.2 has an 11 page thread going with pictures at http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72649&highlight=nokton+35%2F1.2
the 1.2 appears to be pretty amazing, but its often referred to as "the beast" for a reason, being so large.
I opted for small, light, less intrusive, and affordable myself, which is why I went with the 1.4. Having said that, Im pretty happy with the 1.4, except I think I may be having some focus shift issues at minimum focus distance, but I need to do more tests to confirm. Otherwise, when the aperture is 4+, or I am not at close focus distance, I am very happy with this lens. Some dont like the 1.4s bokeh, but I like it on film, as well as will my RD-1s, where the bokeh produced is s/w creamy, which I like very much....Search the threads for more input on the 1.4, they are out there somewhere................

 

[chrishayton]

If you can cope with the size then get the 35mm f1,2. Its outstanding ( i own one). Very sharp and wonderful renditioning.

 

[ktmrider]

35 1.2 a Favorite

35 1.2 a Favorite

Had both 35 f2.5 and 35 f1.2. Have sold the 2.5 and the 1.2 pretty much lives on my M4 unless I need a different focal length. It is big but not overwhelming so, especially if you grew up with Nikon F's. Of course my daughter who grew up with digital thinks all Leica gear is huge and heavy.

I use it a lot with Ektar 100 so am not even using the 1.2 capability that much. I really like the look of the lens.

 

[Vincent.G]

I think both lenses are good.

I used the 35 f1.4 sc with my M2. It was my friend's lens. He was kind enough to lend it to me to let me decide whether to get it or not. The lens is light and compact. It does not intrude into the vf. I used it with a vented hood. The sc gives more gradual tones and is less contrasty than the mc version fyi. It also produces some veiling flare like the 35 lux. After 1 week of using it, I am convinced and is currently saving up for one.

I have not used the 35 f1.2 before so it is not fair for me to comment on the handling of this lens but there are lots of feedback from fellow RFF members. It sure looks big on a M body, at least in my opinion since I think a rf camera system should be small and compact. The images from flickr and in RFF shows that this lens produces creamy bokeh and is a lens that rocks in low-light. I was pretty much seduced by the images this lens can produce but it is more expensive than the 35 f1.4. Some time ago, a member used his handphone camera to show the amount of vf intrusion by the 35 f1.2 lens. Go search for it in M-mount forum and see whether you are bothered by it or not.

If both are presented before me and I am asked to choose one, I will go for the 35 f1.4 sc.

 

[Doug]

I've had the little 35 f/1.4 Nokton SC for 20 months, using it only on the M8. I also have a v.1 Summicron, f/2 Biogon, and Summilux ASPH. I won't attempt comparison, but... They're all fine lenses, and the Nokton holds its own; very sharp. I admit to being a bit surprised it is so good. 🙂

 

[Johann Espiritu]

I am a 35mm lover and have/used the VC 35/1.2, VC 35/1.4, VC 35/2.5 Color Skopar Classic, Zeiss Biogon 35, and the Leica Summicron 35 ASPH.

In the end, I ended up parting with the 1.4 and Biogon and keeping the rest, with the following "assignments::

'Cron - B/W film
Skopar - Color film
Nokton 1.2 - Low Light

I find that the Nokton 1.2 balances much better when I use the optional grip on my M7. Otherwise, it's not bad, but doesn't feel as agile as the 'Cron. The Skopar is delightfully small and does a great job on color film.

The Nokton 1.2 does significantly block the finder, but it's the price for speed. Never really bothered me.