Which of the 40mm do you like more?

[ionianblues]

Hi to everybody.
I've been reading the RF forums for some time but I am new posting here.
Also sorry if my english sounds strange at some point, I'm spanish and this is not my mother language.
I'm thinking on getting my first rangefinder camera. After shooting film for some years with Nikon FM and FE cameras, I moved to digital (compacts and dslrs) and I've been using those for the last three or four years, always with some dissatisfaction. I miss the look of film (b&w specially), and don't get used to the "too clean and perfect" digital look. I like more how film looks, even if the way I work on the pictures is scanning them with a film scanner and working on the computer. So I've been thinking on getting a rangefinder instead of a slr because I'd like a quieter and smaller camera. For now, I just want a 35mm (or 40mm) lens. I have always used a 28 and a 50, and always felt one was a bit too wide and the other a bit too long, so I think a 35 or 40 is what I need. Also some of the photographers I like most, like Koudelka, or Salgado, have used this focal length a lot and I find something very special in the way a 35 renders the scene. Of course they are masters, and they made the pictures, not the lens!
I've been thinking on three options for the camera: a Minolta CLE, a Leica M2 or an Hexar RF. For the lenses: either one of the 40s, or the new Nokton 35/1.4 (depending on what camera I pick, to have the right framelines).
I'm not sure if I would get an Hexar RF. I have handled one, and while I really liked the density of the camera and the viewfinder, I didn't like the short shutter lag it has (I know it's minimal, but it's there) and the electrical winding noise.
Since I have a limited budget, and the M2 + Nokton 35/1.4 is quite more expensive than a CLE + any of the 40mm, I'm leaning for this option.
I'd like to know which of the 40s do you like more and would choose if you could only have one of them. I've seen this comparison
http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2004/12/03/466.html
and the Noktons seem sharper, and many prefer them to any of the 40/2. But others seem to like the Summicron-C or the M-Rokkor and think they are sharp enough, or like more their character, handling or build quality...
Thank you and take care


Dani

 

[Huck Finn]

My favorite is the Rollei 40/2.8 Sonnar. Beautiful rendition of color, flare resistant, nice bokeh, very compact, & exceptionally well built. This lens also has the advantage of being LTM, so you can choose whatever adapter you prefer to match the frame lines you like to work with best, such as 35 mm frame lines to go with the 40 mm lens. Works perfectly.

 

[kshapero]

I love the Nokton 40 MC. It is a gem. Loved the results but did not care for the knobs. I guess I like a bigger lens w/o knobs. Personal preference.

 

[ferider]

I've tried them all. If you want something compact, I recommend the CLE Rokkor. If speed matters more than size, I recommend the 40/1.4 SC.

Roland.

 

[Ronald M]

If you need 1.4, get the 40 Nokton. Otherwise a 2.8 Rollie

Since no camera except the Besa have proper 40mm frames, that is what I would get or at least a 40mm finder.

28 on my Nikon D200 is the same as a 40 on film and is a great combo. I find 35 to wide for a do everything lens.

 

[biomed]

Dani,
¡Su Inglés es muy Buena! If I could write in Spanish half as well as you do, I would be very happy. My wife and I have just started studying Spanish.

I have only used a CV 40/1.4 briefly. It was OK. I prefer a 35mm lens. The CV Color Skopar 35/2.5 is a great lens, well made and inexpensive. The only fault is that it is a bit contrasty with BW film.

Mike

 

[Hacker]

My favorite is the Rollei 40/2.8 Sonnar. Beautiful rendition of color, flare resistant, nice bokeh, very compact, & exceptionally well built. This lens also has the advantage of being LTM, so you can choose whatever adapter you prefer to match the frame lines you like to work with best, such as 35 mm frame lines to go with the 40 mm lens. Works perfectly.

Second the Rollei also.

 

[ionianblues]

Thanks for the recommendations. I didn't know about the Rollei 40mm.
It seems hard to find one... at least there is none on Ebay at the moment.
Thanks!

 

[ionianblues]

Dani,
¡Su Inglés es muy Buena! If I could write in Spanish half as well as you do, I would be very happy. My wife and I have just started studying Spanish.

I have only used a CV 40/1.4 briefly. It was OK. I prefer a 35mm lens. The CV Color Skopar 35/2.5 is a great lens, well made and inexpensive. The only fault is that it is a bit contrasty with BW film.

Mike

Biomed, gracias! Y animo aprendiendo español!
Spanish is one of the easier languages, at least compared to german, russian or finnish... and you already speak it quite well.

 

[Kim Coxon]

Just to another thought to the pot, I like the Pentax 43mm Ltd.

Kim

 

[thafred]

I´ll strongly recommend you the Summicron since it´s the best compromise between Price, Speed and Size IMHO.

I used a Summicron-C for over a year now and bought a Nokton based on the glowing reports on the net and I´m not so impresed with it. If you shoot it only wide open (f2) it might seem sharper than the Summicron-C but at 2,8 they are equal in the center and between f4 and f8 the Summicron-C runs circles around the Nokton 40mm since the Cron-C´s center performance at f4 is only equaled by the Nokton at F8!! The Nokton has more even sharpness in the field than the Summicron but as a matter of taste I prefer the impressive sharpness in the center and can live with the quality falloff (wich is very slight so no problem) in the corners.
In flare behaviour it´s a draw between my samples (my Cron´s glass is pristine, the nokton too...MC version) wich is a good point for the Nokton since the Front element is much bigger and more prone to flare than the small one of the Cron-C-...the improvements in coating are surely responsible for the good flare behaviour of the Nokton but it does not outperform the Cron-C (those rumors saying the Cron is single coated is just BS if you ask me). I never use hoods on my lenses and don´t have problems in everyday situations.

Don´t compare the samples from the RD-1´s 6MP digi chip unless you are going to use it on this camera. A chip like this is vastly outperformed by sharp film and I say that those differneces are easiest seen in a 100ASA fine grained shot scanned at minimum of 2700dpi/3200dpi...thou even more easy to see in a wet print.

I don´t say the Nokton 40 is a underperformer (works very well esp. at the large apertures!) I´m just saying that for me the Cron-C is the better choice.
cheers
fred

 

[ionianblues]

I´ll strongly recommend you the Summicron since it´s the best compromise between Price, Speed and Size IMHO.

I used a Summicron-C for over a year now and bought a Nokton based on the glowing reports on the net and I´m not so impresed with it. If you shoot it only wide open (f2) it might seem sharper than the Summicron-C but at 2,8 they are equal in the center and between f4 and f8 the Summicron-C runs circles around the Nokton 40mm since the Cron-C´s center performance at f4 is only equaled by the Nokton at F8!! The Nokton has more even sharpness in the field than the Summicron but as a matter of taste I prefer the impressive sharpness in the center and can live with the quality falloff (wich is very slight so no problem) in the corners.
In flare behaviour it´s a draw between my samples (my Cron´s glass is pristine, the nokton too...MC version) wich is a good point for the Nokton since the Front element is much bigger and more prone to flare than the small one of the Cron-C-...the improvements in coating are surely responsible for the good flare behaviour of the Nokton but it does not outperform the Cron-C (those rumors saying the Cron is single coated is just BS if you ask me). I never use hoods on my lenses and don´t have problems in everyday situations.

Don´t compare the samples from the RD-1´s 6MP digi chip unless you are going to use it on this camera. A chip like this is vastly outperformed by sharp film and I say that those differneces are easiest seen in a 100ASA fine grained shot scanned at minimum of 2700dpi/3200dpi...thou even more easy to see in a wet print.

I don´t say the Nokton 40 is a underperformer (works very well esp. at the large apertures!) I´m just saying that for me the Cron-C is the better choice.
cheers
fred

Incredible photos in your gallery! I really like them.
How is it shooting with your M4-2 and the 40? Do you use the 50 framelines or have the lens modified to bring up the 35?
I think I will look forward to find a Summicron-C in good shape in a couple of weeks.
I still have to decide what body to go with it.
Thank you,
and cheers

 

[thafred]

glad you like my pictures!

I modified both the Cron-C and Nokton 40 to bring up the 35m Framelines since most of my shooting happens at medium distances (1,5-5m) the 40Fl fits the 35 Framelines like a glove. At very close distances one has to keep in mind that there´s somewhat lesser on the Neg and compose accordingly. (imho Framelines are just for help..one see´s the focallengh anyway after some use)
The sugegstions to use the 50FL with the 40 in close range are somewhat overly carefull since there happens to be much more on the neg than the 50FL (on the M6 at least) indicate. On the M4-2 the 50mm FL are somewhat bigger than on the M6 so as approximation one can trigger them when shooting really close (0.8m) but I just leave a little space to the 35Fl and never have problems.

On a side note. The M4-2 is a gem of a camera. Working much smoother than my (like new) M6 or any M6 i had in my hands ever...might be my example of the M4-2 but if you find one for cheap and don´t need 28 Framelines (a good companion for the 40mm thou!) it´s the Leica body I´d get. Very clean 50 and 90 Framelines, rewind crank (a must!) and a Hot shoe for those situations you might want a flash. (flame me ) ... I like it better than a plain M4 and leave that to collectors (at twice the price anyway ;-)

Glad I could help you
best
fred

 

[ferider]

Like all CV lenses, I found the quality of the Nokton to be very sample dependent (I had 3).

If you like the 40/2 signature and size, I really recommend the CLE Rokkor over the Summicron. Cheaper, better built, easier to handle, equally or better performance optically (depending on coating), and most important, much easier to get filters and a good hood for. Seems simple, but that series 5.5 on the Summicron is a pain.

But, if you care for this, it doesn't say Leitz on the front ring

You might want to look at my 40mm comparison here:

http://ferider.smugmug.com/gallery/2727734_MNe74

Also, the M4-2 35mm framelines are significantly larger than the M4-P and M6 ones, and therefore M4-P and M6 are a better match to 40.

Best,

Roland.

 

[Palaeoboy]

I´ll strongly recommend you the Summicron since it´s the best compromise between Price, Speed and Size IMHO.

I used a Summicron-C for over a year now and bought a Nokton based on the glowing reports on the net and I´m not so impresed with it. If you shoot it only wide open (f2) it might seem sharper than the Summicron-C but at 2,8 they are equal in the center and between f4 and f8 the Summicron-C runs circles around the Nokton 40mm since the Cron-C´s center performance at f4 is only equaled by the Nokton at F8!! The Nokton has more even sharpness in the field than the Summicron but as a matter of taste I prefer the impressive sharpness in the center and can live with the quality falloff (wich is very slight so no problem) in the corners.
In flare behaviour it´s a draw between my samples (my Cron´s glass is pristine, the nokton too...MC version) wich is a good point for the Nokton since the Front element is much bigger and more prone to flare than the small one of the Cron-C-...the improvements in coating are surely responsible for the good flare behaviour of the Nokton but it does not outperform the Cron-C (those rumors saying the Cron is single coated is just BS if you ask me). I never use hoods on my lenses and don´t have problems in everyday situations.

Don´t compare the samples from the RD-1´s 6MP digi chip unless you are going to use it on this camera. A chip like this is vastly outperformed by sharp film and I say that those differneces are easiest seen in a 100ASA fine grained shot scanned at minimum of 2700dpi/3200dpi...thou even more easy to see in a wet print.

I don´t say the Nokton 40 is a underperformer (works very well esp. at the large apertures!) I´m just saying that for me the Cron-C is the better choice.

I agree with the ultimate choice here of the Summicron in that its a great balance of performance, size and handling. For me its the compact nature of the lens and with its original cap and hood makes a very tight clamshell when travelling in harsher conditions. I also like that I can add a protective filter without increasing its size using the oddball series 5.5 filters. (However it should be noted that most seem to hate this cap, hood and filter arrangement and is the main reason people dont recommend it! LOL)

But I disagree that the Nokton center sharpness is lower than that of the Summicron, the opposite in fact. Center and edge resolution of the Nokton is slightly greater than the summicron decreasing this gap between them till they equalize around f5.6 and f8 whereby the Summicron falls off again after f8.

I also disagree that its a draw between the Summicron and MC Nokton with respect to flare. As with my own lenses (I have them all) and the link you have cited the MC Nokton is the least flaring of the lenses you have listed. Even the SC Nokton flares about the same as the Multi-coated Rokkor which shows how the use of modern glasses can help in this area. The first CL Rokkor and Summicron C are the most flare prone of the popular 40's but still good by any standard.

The Sonnar is an interesting lens and most owners seem to adore them. I will be starting a thread about this lens soon as I revisit some of its qualities. The example I currently have exhibits some focusing issues at close range (as have a number of users I have spoken with) but will be having that corrected soon hopefully. Ignoring the focusing issues, I still sway towards the other 40's. Its more expensive than the others and of course 1 to 2 stops slower. Its rendering is classic Zeiss so if you want a 40 to pair with a 28mm Biogon for your CLE then yes it would be the one to go for. Its not a lens you find as readily as the others however. I would agree with the other Rollei owners above that the Sonnar has the edge on all the others with respect to flare.

I think your ultimate choice however wont come down to any slight differences at wider apertures, they are are all good lenses and exceptional value for money. Your choice will most likely be between Size and Speed (and to a lesser extent which you get a good deal on). If you think you need f1.4 then the Nokton is the only game in town. If you want something smaller and dont need f1.4 then one of the f2's will suit you fine. If you want a lens for screw mount then you have to be patient and seek out the Sonnar.

Since no camera except the Besa have proper 40mm frames

Thats not quite correct, there is the CL and CLE and Rollei RF (Although its a Bessa in disguise)

 

[Rob-F]

This thread immediately brought responses--favorable ones--from users of the Rollei 40mm Sonnar. But the Sonnar was not included amont the response options. I think the survey could be improved by including the Sonnar. Is it still possible to do that?

A problem I have in interpreting the results of this, and other surveys, is that undoubtedly many respondents do not own all the lenses listed! Indeed, how many own more than one? That makes it hard to know whether the collected data is telling us which lens is preferred, or which one is owned by more respondents.

I didn't vote, because I have only the Summicron-c; and I have not had that one long enough to see any results from it.

 

[Palaeoboy]

A problem I have in interpreting the results of this, and other surveys, is that undoubtedly many respondents do not own all the lenses listed! Indeed, how many own more than one?

Admittedly Im a bit of a freak and collect 40mm lenses as well as fixed lens rangefinders that have 40mm lenses but compared with some focal lengths they are so inexpensive that alot of people own more than one or try out more than one. I have noticed many others are just as obsessed with their 50mm lenses and own several.

 

[Rob-F]

Joel, it sounds like you might have the Rollei 35, with the 40mm Sonnar, or perhaps the Tessar. If so, would you like to add your comments about that lens. I believe the 40mm Sonnar for the Leica mount is the same optically, although I am not sure of this.

 

[Palaeoboy]

Hi Rob, yes I do have a version of each of the 40's in the Rollei 35's, the Sonnar, Tessar and Triotar. I also have a nice black version of the RF Sonnar that looks quite at home on a CLE. The RF 40mm Sonnar that comes in LTM but comes with an M Mount adapter is the version a few members above praise here. Is it the same optically as the one in the Rollei 35S/SE? Well yes and no. Yes in that its the same 40mm Sonnar design but not its not quite the same as that found in the 70's Rollei 35's. Basically its been updated with more modern coatings and due to the higher contrast of the RF version I suspect an improvement with more modern glasses as well. Colours are simply richer with the RF version. To clarify one point before someone picks me up on it Rollei did also make some late limited edition 35's identifiable with the shoes on top, I dare say these later versions would also have the same modern version of the 40mm Sonnar as the RF version.

 

[Doug]

I don't have any of the Zeiss 40's like the RF Sonnar (say, wasn't there a 40 on the Robot too?). But I'll add my voice to Kim's in mentioning the excellent and rare Pentax-L 43mm f1.9. I also have the 40 CLE Rokkor and 40 Nokton SC, and all three are fine lenses. I've had the Rokkor the longest, and it's given very good service and a lot of favorite photos over the years, so that was my vote.