mr_phillip
Well-known
Hi
I recently bought a beautiful CLE body from another user on this forum, and I'm loving it. I've always fancied one as a smaller 'snapshot' companion to my Leica Ms, and just couldn't resist the temptation when I saw a recently CLAd example for sale.
So, my question. Currently I'm using the CLE with either the Voigtänder 28mm Ultron (with a 35/135 adaptor), Voigtländer 35 Skopar Classic (in a 50/75 adaptor) or 90mm Elmarit-M and that's fine, but ultimately I'd like to pick up a 40mm optic. What I'm curious to know is how folks here have got on with using any of the 40s available on the CLE. Partly the choice will come down to image quality, but I'm also interested in handling characteristics, hoods blocking finders, etc.
The lenses I'm looking at are:
Summicron-C
Rokkor 40/2.0 (multi-coated CLE version)
40/1.4 Nokton
Rollei 40/2.8 Sonnar
Opinions?
I recently bought a beautiful CLE body from another user on this forum, and I'm loving it. I've always fancied one as a smaller 'snapshot' companion to my Leica Ms, and just couldn't resist the temptation when I saw a recently CLAd example for sale.
So, my question. Currently I'm using the CLE with either the Voigtänder 28mm Ultron (with a 35/135 adaptor), Voigtländer 35 Skopar Classic (in a 50/75 adaptor) or 90mm Elmarit-M and that's fine, but ultimately I'd like to pick up a 40mm optic. What I'm curious to know is how folks here have got on with using any of the 40s available on the CLE. Partly the choice will come down to image quality, but I'm also interested in handling characteristics, hoods blocking finders, etc.
The lenses I'm looking at are:
Summicron-C
Rokkor 40/2.0 (multi-coated CLE version)
40/1.4 Nokton
Rollei 40/2.8 Sonnar
Opinions?
ferider
Veteran
I have experience with the first three and they are all good. I recommend to pick
based on availability and price. BTW, newer Summicrons are multi-coated, too.
The biggest difference between the Summicrons and Rokkors is the handling
of the last one, and the RF cam.
The 40 Nokton and the 28 Ultron form a great pair on the CLE.
Roland.
based on availability and price. BTW, newer Summicrons are multi-coated, too.
The biggest difference between the Summicrons and Rokkors is the handling
of the last one, and the RF cam.
The 40 Nokton and the 28 Ultron form a great pair on the CLE.
Roland.
Monz
Monz
I'd be interested in people's opinion on this as well as I'm in the same boat ie I have a nice CLE body but no 40mm lens to put on it. I am looking at the Summicron-C and Voigtlander 40/1.4.
--
Monz
--
Monz
RayPA
Ignore It (It'll go away)
Like Roland, I have used the first three in your list, and you really can't go wrong with any of them. They will give you quality and speed in a very compact kit. Add the CV 28/3.5 for even greater compactness. If you get the Nokton, you may need to get the more narrow Heavystar hood. IIRC, the 40/1.4 hood blocked the RF window (anyone?)
.
BTW, congratulations on your CLE. It's a great camera.
.
BTW, congratulations on your CLE. It's a great camera.
gyuribacsi
Established
Hello guys,
For my two CLEs I have the 40/2 Rokkor as well as the 40/1,4 VC Nokton. Both are wonderful and very sharp lenses, maybe the bokeh of the Rokkor is nicer than that from the Nokton, but it is very relative to the lighting situation (daylight or candescent).
The original LH5-Hood on the Nokton does not block the RF-patch it is a vented hood. Hard to make a decision, but if you need the extra stop speed, i would go for the Nokton.
For wideangle I use a 28/2,8 Elmarit (III) and I am really happy with it.
The 90/2,8 Elmarit is well usable, but hard to focus with the CLE nearer than 3 Meters wide open. But if you can use f4 or f5,6 it is fine down to the limits.
I hope my hints were useful.
George
For my two CLEs I have the 40/2 Rokkor as well as the 40/1,4 VC Nokton. Both are wonderful and very sharp lenses, maybe the bokeh of the Rokkor is nicer than that from the Nokton, but it is very relative to the lighting situation (daylight or candescent).
The original LH5-Hood on the Nokton does not block the RF-patch it is a vented hood. Hard to make a decision, but if you need the extra stop speed, i would go for the Nokton.
For wideangle I use a 28/2,8 Elmarit (III) and I am really happy with it.
The 90/2,8 Elmarit is well usable, but hard to focus with the CLE nearer than 3 Meters wide open. But if you can use f4 or f5,6 it is fine down to the limits.
I hope my hints were useful.
George
ferider
Veteran
The LH hood didn't bother me, Ray.
Two notes on the Nokton:
- at f2, it's bokeh is very similar to the 40/2s, in fact., in my tests it behaved better. Usually, complaints come from its behavior wide open, but as said above, it's very controllable.
- the Nokton has sligly less min. focus distance. The CLE focuses down to .8m, the Nokton
can focus 10cm less.
Roland.
Two notes on the Nokton:
- at f2, it's bokeh is very similar to the 40/2s, in fact., in my tests it behaved better. Usually, complaints come from its behavior wide open, but as said above, it's very controllable.
- the Nokton has sligly less min. focus distance. The CLE focuses down to .8m, the Nokton
can focus 10cm less.
Roland.
lic4
Well-known
I haven't found it very contrasty. My enlargements (11x14) with the Rokkor-M lead me to wonder if the Nokton would yield similiar results. Reason being, the Rokkor-M is unsurpassed for me in b/w prints than by most of the lens I've used in that regard, including CV lenses (ultron 28 and ultron 35).
mr_phillip
Well-known
ferider said:
Really? Do you have any examples, because in truth the bokeh I've seen from the Nokton is the only thing that's putting me off it. I'm not too keen on the bright 'rings' it exhibits on bright highlights, but I guess those shots are likely to be taken at 1.4.
back alley
IMAGES
my plan is to get a cv 40/1.4 single coat for my cle.
but any of those mentioned would be good.
but any of those mentioned would be good.
ferider
Veteran
mr_phillip said:
Here you go:
http://ferider.smugmug.com/gallery/2727734
background foliage is always the worst.
Also check the M mount group in my sig. Includes examples of all lenses that you mention.
Best,
Roland.
Graham Line
Well-known
chikne said:
I use the M-Rokkor 40/2 and don't notice excessive contrast -- I see more differences between films than lenses. The Voigtlander 28/3.5 exhibits stronger contrast but I don't find either of the lenses is uncontrollable. My usual films are 160NC (lots left in the freezer) and Delta 400, which aren't contrasty at all.
mr_phillip
Well-known
Hey ferider, that's a fascinating test. The comparison of the four lenses at f2 is a real eye-opener – you're right, at that aperture the Noktons actually display smoother bokeh than the other two. Is it my imagination, or does the MC version also have slightly better bokeh than the SC at both 1.4 and (to a lesser extent) at f2?
Hmmm, the Nokton is making a better and better case for itself, especially if you look at it as an f2 lens, with an extra stop of speed if you really need it in an emergency. And Robert White are offering 25 Pound off until Christmas...
Looks like I might have some thinking to do this week.
Hmmm, the Nokton is making a better and better case for itself, especially if you look at it as an f2 lens, with an extra stop of speed if you really need it in an emergency. And Robert White are offering 25 Pound off until Christmas...
Looks like I might have some thinking to do this week.
Palaeoboy
Joel Matherson
All of the 40's are pretty good and you cant go wrong with any of them. You would choose between them based on your needs rather than any real difference in image quality. For example if you need speed then go for the Nokton or if you want to keep things compact go Summicon/ Rokkor or Rollei (Zeiss). In a pinch overall though the Nokton has slightly greater resolution at f2 than than Summicron/Rokkors. The Summicron/Rokkors are incredible value in compact 40's. The use of Series 5.5 filters held on by a perishable rubber hood does bother some with the Summicron but its easy just to get a Rokkor instead if you anticipate this being a problem.
Sorry but this isn't quite true. The LH-5 does block part of the rangefinder patch from 0.7 (0.8)m to 1.5 m. You can sort of focus using the top of the patch still but if your shooting within that distance just remove the hood for accurate focusing.
The CLE Rokkor does have slightly more contrast than the Summicron and first Rokkor but it certainly isn't high compared with modern Leica lenses. The MC Nokton is quite noticeable in this respect and with certain films can be quite excessive.
A forum member (Captain) has 2 40's for sale a Summicron and a CLE Rokkor but he is too lazy to advertise them in the classifieds
if you want to send him a message if your after one of these.
Sorry but this isn't quite true. The LH-5 does block part of the rangefinder patch from 0.7 (0.8)m to 1.5 m. You can sort of focus using the top of the patch still but if your shooting within that distance just remove the hood for accurate focusing.
The CLE Rokkor does have slightly more contrast than the Summicron and first Rokkor but it certainly isn't high compared with modern Leica lenses. The MC Nokton is quite noticeable in this respect and with certain films can be quite excessive.
A forum member (Captain) has 2 40's for sale a Summicron and a CLE Rokkor but he is too lazy to advertise them in the classifieds
if you want to send him a message if your after one of these.
Krosya
Konicaze
ANother vote for the Minolta M-Rokkor. Nice, compact, sharp, good bokeh.
here are a couple:
here are a couple:
Gabriel M.A.
My Red Dot Glows For You
whoa whoa whoa -- that'd be a minimum focusing distance of 1.8m!ferider said:
(or -0.2m, if deducting the "other" way)I just saw a 40mm Nokton first-hand this last weekend, and I remember seeing the minimum focusing distance at 0.7m
Are there variants (other than "Classic" and "Multicoated") of this lens?
vrgard
Well-known
chikne said:
Actually, I think both are amazing shots. Well done Krosya!
-Randy
Last edited:
raid
Dad Photographer
I have the Summicron-C and I like it very much. I have tested the Sonnar 40mm/2.8 and found it to be an amazingly good lens.
If you will use your lens often in low light conditions, you might as well get a 40mm/1.4. If the 40mm/2 is fast enough, then get the Rokkor or the Summicron.
If money is not an issue, get the Sonnar and also get the 40mm/1.4.
If you will use your lens often in low light conditions, you might as well get a 40mm/1.4. If the 40mm/2 is fast enough, then get the Rokkor or the Summicron.
If money is not an issue, get the Sonnar and also get the 40mm/1.4.
lic4
Well-known
raid said:
My theory exactly. I've habituated myself to need nothing faster than f2. I borrowed a Summilux ASPH for a day and felt it was like a revelation, but then, I looked at the price tag.
Anyhow, i also like the Rokkor because of how well and solid it is built. It's an all around dependable lens.
mr_phillip
Well-known
Yeah, all my other rf lenses are f2 (well, f1.9 in the case of the Ultron) so I don't really NEED the extra speed of the Nokton. And, having seen examples of its bokeh at f1.4 vs f2, if I did get one I'd try to stick to f2 as a maximum anyway – it just has a much nicer look at that aperture.
I think I'll just wait and see what comes up in the new year.
Nice to hear a few positive comments about the Sonnar though. What really appeals to me most about that lens is its screw mount. It means it could be used with a 50/75 adaptor on the CLE to bring up the 40mm brightlines, but also using a 35/135 on my M6 and M2 so it brought up the 35mm lines.
I think I'll just wait and see what comes up in the new year.
Nice to hear a few positive comments about the Sonnar though. What really appeals to me most about that lens is its screw mount. It means it could be used with a 50/75 adaptor on the CLE to bring up the 40mm brightlines, but also using a 35/135 on my M6 and M2 so it brought up the 35mm lines.