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

One lens that seems to have been forgotten here is the Zeiss C Biogon 35mm f2.8. I have the Skopar 35f2.5 in all its various versions, as well as Nokton 35f1.4 (MC and SC), pre-asph Summilux 35 etc - and of the medium speed 35's the C-Biogon is at the top as a performer. Sharp, very sharp at 2.8 and my experience is that it has no or neglible focus shift.
We should also remember that all lenses are a compromise between size, speed and price - just look at the Asph Summicron 50mm f2.0 @ $7000.
I have had two Summilux 35 Asph's - got rid of both. To flare prone (one would opaque out the image with direct sun in it - and the other was better, but still flared - and they do have focus shift!
I tried the 35f1.4 FLE - better, but still not perfect - and for $5000 i want perfection!
 
Tom A said:
One lens that seems to have been forgotten here is the Zeiss C Biogon 35mm f2.8. I have the Skopar 35f2.5 in all its various versions, as well as Nokton 35f1.4 (MC and SC), pre-asph Summilux 35 etc - and of the medium speed 35's the C-Biogon is at the top as a performer. Sharp, very sharp at 2.8 and my experience is that it has no or neglible focus shift. We should also remember that all lenses are a compromise between size, speed and price - just look at the Asph Summicron 50mm f2.0 @ $7000. I have had two Summilux 35 Asph's - got rid of both. To flare prone (one would opaque out the image with direct sun in it - and the other was better, but still flared - and they do have focus shift! I tried the 35f1.4 FLE - better, but still not perfect - and for $5000 i want perfection!
Click to expand...
Hi Tom, and the nokton?
 
Tom A said:
One lens that seems to have been forgotten here is the Zeiss C Biogon 35mm f2.8.
Click to expand...
And what a stellar lens that is. I have also used it alongside the Nokton, and there is no doubt which is technically the better lens. But it is two stops slower, and I continue to prefer the handling of the Nokton.
 
To directly quote Bill Pierce: "Never ever confuse sharp with good, or you will end up shaving with an ice cream cone and licking a razor blade."
 
Tom A said:
My standard set up for travel is a 21 of some kind, a 50 and always, the Leica MP with a SC Nokton 50mm f1.4.
Click to expand...
thanks Tom. I have a Summicron 50 and a Color Skopar 28 on my MP. In a 35mm 1.4 I do not give importance to high sharpness (I would use the MF) but ti the roundness and three-dimensionality of the image that has for example the Summicron I have and that I like a lot (can not appeal to others.) For this reason, and because I want a fast 35 I thought the Summilux preasph.
In terms of classical rendition of image and three-dimensionality is Nokton a good lens comparsble to preasph Summilux?
Thanks again
 
5763248603_daa9532c81_z.jpg

This the Zeiss C Biogon 35mm f2.8 at 2.8. A couple of years ago - The All British Field Meet and it rained and rained even more. Light was bad - 1/60s and f2.8
Leica MP, C Biogon 35f2.8, Tmax 2-400, developed in HC 110, dilution 1:60 for 12 min.
 
If you're willing to settle for an f2.8 lens, the Leica Summaron f2.8 is very nice -- sharp and really compact. It's better than most Summicrons at identical aperture settings. Seems like the Biogon 2.8 is probably its closest competition, and I wish I had first hand experience comparing the two, but I don't. Would be a nice shootout.
 
The 2nd one is the Nokton.

Of course, not a shot you'd normally do at 2.8, and the Nokton might well be somewhat better at closer distances.
 
KM-25 said:
Skopar again, lack of barrel...
Click to expand...

And the better edge sharpness. But hard to tell much from that shot, and it would be nice to have the same framing for comparison shots.

It is nice to see the comparisons, but I'm finding they don't always mean much for my actual shooting. I mentioned in another thread that I've gotten rid of several 6 element 35 Summicrons over the years after doing test/comparison shots. The 8 element 1st version has much better edge performance. This time around I'm just shooting with my "new" 6 element and this issue has yet to appear in real life. I'm not saying I like it better than the version 1, but just that the tests don't always reflect results in actual useage.

Does the 35 Nokton have less problem with ring flare at 1.4 than the 35 Summilux?
 
If you need the speed, pick the Nokton or the Summilux. If not the Color Skopar represents awesome value in a very svelte package.
 
here are some shots stopped down....

https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5046/13771548553_4579fda3c6_o.jpg

https://farm8.staticflickr.com/7421/13771552633_52e6175855_o.jpg


We have a nice thread going here, with many experienced shooters---much more than me, as I've only had my M9 since January.

What would be the best landscape 35?

What I've learned today is that none of my 35s are at the level of the 50 cron, ZM18, SEM21 etc. for Landscapes.

There's obviously lots of kinds of shooting and these two lenses are both good. But I do alot of backcountry landscape shooting and I'm trying to optimise my kit.

Is the little Biogon C 35/2.8 really at the level of the Cron asph at 5.6 or 8 infinity with distant details?


One of my sharper shots with.....(f/8)

PS I suspect my CV 35/1.2 v1 will outdo both of these lenses at 2.8 But I'm not lugging it into the outback.

Here it is at around f/2 on the Sony A7:
https://farm6.staticflickr.com/5507/11542067126_b3a1b641cb_o.jpg
obviously more pixels and not as clean a file like the M9, but consider the edges.
 
I bet either the Biogon 2.8 or the 35 cron asph are what you need for landscapes with an M9. I had the cron asph and aside from the lux asph it was about the best 35 I had used for RF. For what it is worth, my most used lens on 4x5 for landscapes is a 135mm Apo Sironar S, about equal to a 35mm in small format roughly. Seeing how you use an M9 I would sell all your other RF 35's and get the cron asph. I see waaaaay too much gear collecting on here and not enough dedication to vision. Keeping it simple can really help one concentrate. I only have one 50 for my M3, the 1.4 Lux Asph, what more does one need, right?

I might just find my way back to the cron asph to tell you the truth if I find I am using a 35 a lot more, it is the best combo of size and speed in my opinion.. darn expensive though and I would likely get an M2, 4 or 6 to use with it at that point.

Nokton gets here tomorrow, looking forward to seeing what I come up with...
 
TY KM-25 :)
The asph is over my budget till I reduce the collection, but the biogon-c I see for around 575......
I'm saving for the 135 apo. You are right on the money regarding a distracted lenset. I have way too many, but not exactly the right ones. LOL

I'll post one more f/2.8 shot which I took a close look at.



https://farm3.staticflickr.com/2835/13772438513_f087f00f12_o.jpg

This shot sort of explains to me (which most here may have already known) why the CV 35/1.4 is so controversial.

when you see a blurry edge you have to ask, is it just not in focus? What the shot above shows very clearly is a very high spherical aberration of the Nokton at 2.8 on the M9.

On film it may not be the same way--you guys tell me. But you can see foreground edges with pretty good detail while the center is in focus at much greater distance.

So the Nokton can certainly show decent edges at wide apertures, but they will not be at the same distance as the center.

A shooter very familiar with the lens might turn that disadvantage into something very interesting, with the right framing :)
 
That is a good shot for me to see, that wonky distribution of sharpness is curvature of field. I can deal with that on this lens but could not on my main lens, the 50. I had a mint copy of a version 2 pre-asph 50 Summilux that is also well known to have curvature of field and mine certainly did. So I sold it and spent big bucks on a 50 1.4 asph which does not suffer from that.

I have never owned more than 4 lenses for my M's at one time and even then I had 4 bodies. Now with only one I really only need one 50 and one 35, keeping it simple and of a high level of quality pays off big time in my opinion, I could travel the world for years with a 35 and a 50, a couple hundred rolls of TMY2 and just crush it...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom