35mm Nokton F1.4 vs 35mm F2 Biogon

[ryley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey all,

 

Apologies in advance if this comparison has been put to the forum before - I trust someone will post a link to the thread if it has.

 

Let me preceed the following with: in an ideal world we'd all probably love to be shooting with leica glass. I know I would. But many of us have to settle with a poor man's version, and in the case of a fast 35mm, it seems the two best options are the Voigtlander Nokton 1.4 and the Zeiss Biogon. So let's forget for a moment that the 35 cron and the 35 lux do not exist, because unfortunately they're not viable options for me at this time!

 

Can anyone outline the key differences in the voigtlander and the zeiss aside from the difference in stops and price? I shoot on an M8, and am not overly concerned by soft corners and the like. I would predominantly use the lens for B&W night street photography (which immediately makes the 1.4 more attractive), but I will also be taking it OS to Africa and Egypt where colour will play more of a role, and I understand that the zeiss renders colours that are warmer and generally more pleasing to the eye?

 

All feedback would be much appreciated,

 

Cheers,

 

Ryley

[vafa]

I think Steve Huff has done a review on them.

Steve Huff Photos - Real World Digital Camera And Lens Reviews check it out.

 

I bought a Nokton 35/ 1.4 and it had a focus shift problem. I sent it back for an exchange. Hopefully the new one would be better. Other than that I really liked the images.

 

Vafa

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[ryley]

Steve has done two really great individual reviews on both lenses in comparison to their leica counterparts - bless him - but I'm really interested in the Nokton V Biogon comparison, and whether the extra $400 to get the Zeiss is justified.

 

Cheers,

 

Ryley

[jaapv]

I think Steve Huff has done a review on them.

Steve Huff Photos - Real World Digital Camera And Lens Reviews check it out.

 

I bought a Nokton 35/ 1.4 and it had a focus shift problem. I sent it back for an exchange. Hopefully the new one would be better. Other than that I really liked the images.

 

Vafa

It won't be perfect. This type of lens exhibits focus shift.Otoh CV lenses have quite a bit of sample variation. If you are lucky the shift on the next one will be within your tolerance span.

[vafa]

It won't be perfect. This type of lens exhibits focus shift.Otoh CV lenses have quite a bit of sample variation. If you are lucky the shift on the next one will be within your tolerance span.

I'm keeping my fingers crossed and lowering my expectations.

For the money, it's a pretty nice lens.

 

 

Vafa

[Maggie_O]

The second copy I got of the Nokton is spot-on, thankfully. There are good copies out there.

[ryley]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Has anyone used both lenses?

[vafa]

Thanks Maggie, good to know there are good copies. gives me hope.

I've seen some of you pictures with nokton and they look very good.

 

Vafa

[Photon42]

The second copy I got of the Nokton is spot-on, thankfully. There are good copies out there.

 

They should only sell second copies

[juppdiesel]

Maybe they keep on selling that one bad copy first.

I had it too. The second one was fine.

Jari

[Maggie_O]

They should only sell second copies

 

You know, there might be something to that- perhaps the first production run had some problems and by v1.1, things had been fixed?

[juppdiesel]

My first copy had a higher s/n than the second one.

[ottocrat]

Let me preceed the following with: in an ideal world we'd all probably love to be shooting with leica glass. I know I would. But many of us have to settle with a poor man's version, and in the case of a fast 35mm, it seems the two best options are the Voigtlander Nokton 1.4 and the Zeiss Biogon. So let's forget for a moment that the 35 cron and the 35 lux do not exist, because unfortunately they're not viable options for me at this time!

 

I went through exactly the same thought process when I bought my M8. I bought a brand new 35 Nokton and was unhappy to find that it also suffered from the infamous back focus issue. I took it straight back and invested in a second hand 35 Summicron for the same price - much better!

 

Sean Reid reviews both lenses (and more) in great detail on his website (google Reid Reviews), his site is subscription only but it is well worth the small outlay.

[Joseph Reid]

I own both and compared these two lenses a while back on my blog (along with a couple of SLR 35s). My feeling is the Voigtlander 1.4 is a bit better wide open than the Zeiss 2 but that the Zeiss jumps past the Voigtlander at smaller apertures. So you have to decide based on your style of shooting.

[ryley]

Hey Joseph,

 

Cheers for the review link.

 

You're right, it can be a very excruciating process trying to pick the right lens. In general I find the zeiss slightly more pleasing to the eye, but the speed, compactness, and the price of the voigtlander can't be overlooked, even though plenty of users here have experienced bad copies of the lens.

 

As suggested, maybe I am better to go on the hunt for a summicron, as I didn't realise that there were affordable second hand versions out there. In the long run I have no doubt that it would be worth the extra few dollars.

 

Cheers,

 

Ryley

[Dougg]

I have both the f/1.4 Nokton (single-coated) and the f/2 Biogon, both are 6-bit coded. I also still have my v.1 Summicron (coded temporarily). My Nokton SC is surprisingly sharp and I don't detect any focus shift... I'm pleased with the lens, though there is a little barrel distortion and it's subject to veiling flare with strong light sources in or near the field of view.

 

The differences in performance among these lenses are not really large, but they are different. The old Summicron also surprised me with its crisp rendition though at noticeably lower contrast. Coincidentally, it has the same 8-element optical arrangement as the Nokton. The Biogon seems to me the standard to judge my others, with a very pleasant color quality and bokeh, low distortion, low chromatic aberration, accurate focus; generally top-notch lens. The 25 Biogon images even more detail, but it also points up the consistent look of the current ZM line of lenses.

Edited March 4, 2010 by Dougg

[ArtZ]

Has anyone used both lenses?

 

I have both. I use more often the CV Nokton. No problems with focus shift here.

 

I read often here that Voigtländer lenses have (back/front or shift) focus problems and quality is not the same for all copies.

 

Well, my personal experience says that's a myth created here.

 

I have 6 new Voigtländer lenses and ALL of them focus correctly (except the CV 75/2.5 with less than 1 cm front focus at f/2.5 and 1m, which is fully corrected by DOF). I cannot say the same thing for my 7 new Leica lenses... two of them (Summicron-M 28 and 90 APO) needed to be readjusted for front focus; the Summicron 28 has travelled a few times to Solms because the front part unscreew from the rear part and the Tri-Elmar 28-35-50 had to be readjusted twice (last time, for soft focus at infinity). I never needed to send back a Voigtländer lens for adjustments.

 

That said, I wouldn't expect the same built quality in a CV lens than in a Leica lens. I think the price can give you a good indication: For instance, a new Nokton 50/1.1 has the same price than the cheapest Leica lens, the Summarit-M 50/2.5! But, guys, the quality of the Nokton 50 is impressive... even if this is hard to listen to some LUF members!

 

Same thing for the Nokton CV Nokton 35/1.2, Nokton 50/1.5, Heliar 75/2.5...

 

I think the CV Nokton is a great little lens: sharp, compact, well built. Summilux 35 ASPH and Nokton 50/1.2 are better... but the difference in price between the Summilux 35 and the Nokton 25/1.4 doesn't justify the difference in quality.

 

Just two examples,

 

First image: last weekend with the Nokton 50/1.1 at ISO 160, f/5.6

Second image: Crop at 100%

Third image: last summer with the Nokton 35/1.4 "Classic" at ISO 180, f/2

Fourth image: Crop at 100%

.

Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here…

Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members!

Edited March 4, 2010 by ArtZ

[ottocrat]

ArtZ, your personal good luck does not make it a myth. Also, the problem is specific to new 35 Noktons, I've not read that other CV lenses suffer from the problem to any disproportionate degree. The problem with the 35 Nokton is well documented and widely reported and I for one can vouch for it.

[thrice]

ArtZ, your personal good luck does not make it a myth. Also, the problem is specific to new 35 Noktons, I've not read that other CV lenses suffer from the problem to any disproportionate degree. The problem with the 35 Nokton is well documented and widely reported and I for one can vouch for it.

 

But didn't you know, his handheld snapshots are more reliable than Sean Reid's 'mythical' controlled-environment tripod-mounted tests?

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[ArtZ]

ArtZ, your personal good luck does not make it a myth. Also, the problem is specific to new 35 Noktons, I've not read that other CV lenses suffer from the problem to any disproportionate degree. The problem with the 35 Nokton is well documented and widely reported and I for one can vouch for it.

 

I do not pretend to make a myth of CV lenses, I'm also aware of their defaults. Yes, maybe I had good luck with CV lenses but it doens´t explain my bad luck with some Leica lenses. I´m concious that Leica lenses are the best ones and also the most expensive. What I was trying to point out some people belittle or abase CV and ZM just because they're not Leica.

 

I'm just pragmatic. I see what can I get from a CV/ZM lens compared to a Leica lens in terms of quality and price and if it's worthy to pay 10 times more for 10-20% extra quality. I can understand, for instance, some people need a Noctilux 0.95 (for different reasons not necessarily related to the picture quality) but I'm not going to put 8000 € on it, because I don't need it. On the other hand, I won't replace my Summicrons 28 and 90 for any other lens.

 

Going back to the Nokton 35/1.4, you said 'The problem with the 35 Nokton is well documented and widely reported and I for one can vouch for it'. I think the focus shift problem with the Summilux-M 35/1.4 ASPH is widely reported. Nobody here says do not buy a Summilux-M 35/1.4 ASPH because has focus shift, do you?

 

 

But didn't you know, his handheld snapshots are more reliable than Sean Reid's 'mythical' controlled-environment tripod-mounted tests?

 

Wow! You mean that my handheld snapshots could be even sharper if I used a tripod?. Thank you for the advice, but I think the images are spot on and sharp enough!