Which is sharper at 2.8, 35mm Color Skopar or Nokton 35 1.4?

bonatto said:
Not sure which one is sharper, I no longer have the 2.5 pancake but both are excellent. Colors skopar had too much bite for my taste at the time, but maybe it was the high sun environment I shot it in. I now have a 35 Nokton s.c 1.4 which is my go-to nighttime lens. With a wide base rangefinder, it really makes a difference, and I have yet to notice or lose a shot because of any optical characteristics of the lens. If I lose a shot, I like to think it was my fault. I shoot it on film though, so on a digital body, try it out. I also never bought into the sample variation ordeal, especially on new high end Japanese lenses. Get one with a warranty and don't worry yourself. The Nokton is a phenomenal lens, handles beautifully, and I'm glad I gave it a proper chance. I'm happy with my sunny day 35s, so the Nokton stays in the bag. I consider it a low light lens. Here are a couple of samples on arista premium 400
Click to expand...
Why losing a shot due to shift focusing should be your fault? Lens such any other tool is a tool and primarily it should work well. Then we see sharpness, bokeh, character, etc
 
I'm not sure why people get so offended by those of us that don't want to use a lens that has focus shift.
Click to expand...
No one's getting offended. It is a fact that there are good lenses with significant focus shift. Anyone is free not to use any or all of them. It's just useful to understand the ways of working and lens characteristics. The term focus shift is sometimes used to scare people off nice lenses. I don't see the point in that.

Even in this discussion focus shift is made out to be a major concern that limits the speed of shooting. It can, depending on the lens. The thing is, most such lenses are anyway slow to shoot. The Nokton has a fairly short and effortless focus throw. It can be used to shoot fast. I shoot it fast all the time. And for me it's not the Nokton that loses shots, it's the RX1R.
 
shortstop said:
Why losing a shot due to shift focusing should be your fault? Lens such any other tool is a tool and primarily it should work well. Then we see sharpness, bokeh, character, etc
Click to expand...

That's not what I said, but maybe It wasn't clear. A lens is indeed like any other tool, and I agree, it should work well, especially at the prices we pay for this gear. The 35 s.c. works well as a tool, and that's all I can really ask of it. If you want to try the lens, by all means give it a go. If not, that's ok too. It's all subjective anyways :)
 
shortstop said:
Why losing a shot due to shift focusing should be your fault? Lens such any other tool is a tool and primarily it should work well. Then we see sharpness, bokeh, character, etc
Click to expand...
I had misunderstand. apologizes for the error. from what you say, so you are fully satisfied with your Nokton. I'm considering whether to buy one or wait for a summilux.😎
 
I had read about the focus shift issues before I bought the 35 Nokton SC,
but I have never seen any evidence of this mythical focus shift in any of my pictures in these 3 years I had it.
 
KM-25 said:
As the headline implies, I am wondering which is the sharper lens at 2.8. I have the Skopar and it is truly stellar even wide open. But given the Nokton Classic is only a tiny bit bigger I am wondering how it stacks up at 2.8?
Click to expand...

I've directly compared both these lenses on film (several samples of both actually). At f/2.8 sharpness is much the same in the center, but the Nokton is definitely softer in the corners. I think that's intentional by the designers though, and probably partially why the Nokton got its "Classic" designation. So if you want sharp corners stick with your Skopar. If you don't mind sacrificing some corner sharpness for the extra speed, then the Nokton is a good choice.

meso said:
I had read about the focus shift issues before I bought the 35 Nokton SC,
but I have never seen any evidence of this mythical focus shift in any of my pictures in these 3 years I had it.
Click to expand...

Ohh the focus shift is no myth... it's definitely there. But you probably wouldn't notice it on film unless you do a controlled test (tripod etc.) and then go pixel peeping (after scanning your film).
 
shortstop said:
I'm considering whether to buy one or wait for a summilux.��
Click to expand...

When I was doing a project for about 6 years, I had the 28 Summicron, 35 Lux Asph, 50 Lux Asph and a TE 90 2.8. If you are at all considering ponying up for the 35 Lux, do it, the lens is simply in another league. I would get one again if I were not working with mostly a 50 Lux Asph on my M3.

jonmanjiro said:
I've directly compared both these lenses on film (several samples of both actually). At f/2.8 sharpness is much the same in the center, but the Nokton is definitely softer in the corners. I think that's intentional by the designers though, and probably partially why the Nokton got its "Classic" designation. So if you want sharp corners stick with your Skopar. If you don't mind sacrificing some corner sharpness for the extra speed, then the Nokton is a good choice.

Ohh the focus shift is no myth... it's definitely there. But you probably wouldn't notice it on film unless you do a controlled test (tripod etc.) and then go pixel peeping (after scanning your film).
Click to expand...

Thanks for this. I think what it basically boils down to is what one's specific needs or wants are from any gear. In my case, the 35 gets used on my M3 with a small piece of tape over the frame line window and I use it "Full Frame". So it only gets used about 10% of the time. So far the Skopar has been great in that mode due to how tiny it is and how it does not protrude into the viewfinder hardly at all. The Nokton will afford me the same unobstructed view, lenses like the Ultron or ZM F2 Biogon will start to be rather intrusive...

And as it stands right now, the 50 Lux Asph is the "low light" lens while the 35 is medium to bright light, even with 400 speed films. So hypothetically speaking, if I can put on the CV 35 1.4 and use it at EV 12-17 at F4 and up and it will pretty much do what the Skopar does, then it becomes a lot more versatile if I can go indoors and then I use it at 2.8 and wider for general documentary and people work. F2 is where I wish the Skopar was and 1.4 is pure gravy. All I ever use in this camera is 400 speed film, so I hardly ever use or need to use a meter anymore, I know that F2 gets to be right on the edge for lower light and 1.4 seals the deal...

Ideally a 35 Summicron Asph would be the ticket, but 2K for a lens I only use 10% of the time starts to look a bit excessive on the balance sheet, not that a new chrome 50 lux asph did not...

I guess I will just have to try it to make the final call....
 
KM-25, you'll find that a wide a aperture 35 is a very versatile lens, and it might push your use above 10% of the time...heck, it might even prompt an M2/M4 purchase!

The 35 is a nice lens to use indoors where it's not always possible to take one step back to get the desired framing, and indoors, typically the light hovers around 1/30 2.8 at iso 400, so being able to get a couple stops extra speed, is very useful.
 
froyd said:
KM-25, you'll find that a wide a aperture 35 is a very versatile lens, and it might push your use above 10% of the time...heck, it might even prompt an M2/M4 purchase!

The 35 is a nice lens to use indoors where it's not always possible to take one step back to get the desired framing, and indoors, typically the light hovers around 1/30 2.8 at iso 400, so being able to get a couple stops extra speed, is very useful.
Click to expand...

Preaching to the choir mang, I used a 35 Lux Asph a ton when I had an M6 / MP3. I have and use a Nikon 35mm 1.4G on my D800/F100, fixed 35 on my X100S.

The difference between a 35 and 50 is huge so the overall style of a body of work can change a lot because of it, I am trying to mostly use a 50 for this reason.
 
jonmanjiro said:
Ohh the focus shift is no myth... it's definitely there. But you probably wouldn't notice it on film unless you do a controlled test (tripod etc.) and then go pixel peeping (after scanning your film).
Click to expand...

jsrockit said:
It's not mythical... it's more apparent in digital.
Click to expand...

I only shoot film, I am not saying it is purely myth, just that I have never encountered it :)
 
My first CS was LTM, black, no focus tab version, on Bessa R.
It was crazy sharp from wide open. And provided very high contrast.
But I couldn't get around the absence of focusing tab. Sold Bessa R, sold CS.
Was looking at Nokton, but bokeh sometimes is not pleasing.
Went with PII version of CS. Better in construction, but my M-mount copy doesn't seems to be so incredibly sharp as LTM version of same lens I sold.
 
KM-25 said:
When I was doing a project for about 6 years, I had the 28 Summicron, 35 Lux Asph, 50 Lux Asph and a TE 90 2.8. If you are at all considering ponying up for the 35 Lux, do it, the lens is simply in another league. I would get one again if I were not working with mostly a 50 Lux Asph on my M3. Thanks for this. I think what it basically boils down to is what one's specific needs or wants are from any gear. In my case, the 35 gets used on my M3 with a small piece of tape over the frame line window and I use it "Full Frame". So it only gets used about 10% of the time. So far the Skopar has been great in that mode due to how tiny it is and how it does not protrude into the viewfinder hardly at all. The Nokton will afford me the same unobstructed view, lenses like the Ultron or ZM F2 Biogon will start to be rather intrusive... And as it stands right now, the 50 Lux Asph is the "low light" lens while the 35 is medium to bright light, even with 400 speed films. So hypothetically speaking, if I can put on the CV 35 1.4 and use it at EV 12-17 at F4 and up and it will pretty much do what the Skopar does, then it becomes a lot more versatile if I can go indoors and then I use it at 2.8 and wider for general documentary and people work. F2 is where I wish the Skopar was and 1.4 is pure gravy. All I ever use in this camera is 400 speed film, so I hardly ever use or need to use a meter anymore, I know that F2 gets to be right on the edge for lower light and 1.4 seals the deal... Ideally a 35 Summicron Asph would be the ticket, but 2K for a lens I only use 10% of the time starts to look a bit excessive on the balance sheet, not that a new chrome 50 lux asph did not... I guess I will just have to try it to make the final call....
Click to expand...

I meant summilux 35 preasph. Obviously asph version is superior
 
Lens ordered from Camerquest, I'll see how it does. Hopefully it hits the bullet points of the Skopar and gives me a little extra speed if needed, that's all I am really hoping for. I know it won't be no Lux Asph...:)
 
My 35mm lens progression was:

Jupiter 12
Voigtlander 35mm 2.5
Voigtlander 35mm 1.4
Zeiss 35mm 2.0

The J12 was a flaring mess. It could take good photos but I lost way too many frames to flare where I didn't want it, even with a hood on the lens. It also caused problems with one my camera bodies.

I jumped on a CV 50mm 2.5 when I had the chance. Loved the lens but I had a difficult time with it during the winter here, particularly as I generally pull film.

I moved on the CV 35mm 1.4 for the speed. I love it and still use the lens. I was using it as a general lens for street work with a bit of architectural work thrown in. It didn't work for the latter due to the distortion. Evidently even in my street stuff I shoot a lot of straight lines in the background which I really wanted straight. That lead to the purchase of the Zeiss.

I go back and forth between the Zeiss and CV 35/1.4 now depending on the lighting conditions and what I expect to be shooting. I love the handling of the CV 35/1.4 and have no qualms with the image quality.
 
KM-25 said:
Lens ordered from Camerquest, I'll see how it does. Hopefully it hits the bullet points of the Skopar and gives me a little extra speed if needed, that's all I am really hoping for. I know it won't be no Lux Asph...:)
Click to expand...

Please let us know how it goes. I've been struggling with some low light situations and just haven't been able to make a decision about the 35 Nokton. I'd like just a touch more sharpness than the 35 Summilux has at 1.4, and a lower price.

I also wonder if the Nokton is less susceptible to ring flare than the Summilux.

Good luck with the new lens.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom