MS Optical Sonnetar MC f1.1 V Noctilux V1 f1

[250swb]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There must be something wrong with me (no you don't have to agree) because I could guess what the OP meant, and I could guess which lens was which.

 

I think for a lot of the purposes a very fast lens is put to the bokeh of the Sonnetar might be disruptive, it's not creamy, or awesome. But it shouldn't be ruled out, a photographer with a plan might think the harshness would aid an image depicting a harsh world, perhaps the darker side of street photography. Lens rendering doesn't have to be about conventional perfection. This is partly why the 50mm Summitar is popular, the OOF areas are chaotic compared with a Summicron, but they add to the signature in an individual way, definitely not of the norm.

 

 

 

Steve

[suey11]

Just seen a Sonnetar listed on eBay if anyone's interested.

[scaryink]

To me, the shop worn phrase "harsh bokeh" is a cliche best retired from use. Some out of focus renderings may be more or less defined than surrounding areas. Some areas may have more or less color, value or contrast. In my experience, using short cut phrases penned by someone else only serves to short cut my personal and unique experience with the image in question. I end up looking at photos using other people's judgement calls.

 

I am primarily a painter so perhaps my approach looking at images is removed from most photographers. There is no good or bad bokeh. The shutter clicker must simply grow to know how to use the tool and tame the beast. If a photo looks like sh***, it isn't the fault of the lens, its the fault of the person shooting the image. These MS optics lenses appear to have all sorts of wonderful potential. They appear to be far more personal than the assembly line lens. I suspect each one of them is different than the other. Kind of like a hand made instrument.

 

Personally I want to encourage the lens maker and his love for the craft. Shine on and create as much "harsh bokeh" as your fingers can manage.

[scaryink]

There must be something wrong with me (no you don't have to agree) because I could guess what the OP meant, and I could guess which lens was which.

 

I think for a lot of the purposes a very fast lens is put to the bokeh of the Sonnetar might be disruptive, it's not creamy, or awesome.....

 

 

Steve

 

Well said. Life and shooting in the near dark is often, messy, chaotic and disruptive. I would like some of my work to reflect this. If I want smooth and creamy, Ill set the shot to reach this effect.

[Guest]

In addition to all philosophical notes could an owner of the Sonnetar perhaps explain the function of the built-in coma adjustment ring and post some photos with different settings?

Are there really less halos as Felix L. Esser writes on his review: MS-Optical Sonnetar 50mm f1.1 for Leica M, 11/30/2012?

 

"Probably the most ingenious feature of this lens is the built-in coma adjustment ring. What it does is to move the rearmost lens element forwards and backwards, thereby slightly altering the lens’ focal length and with that its optical properties. It can be used for two things:

to minimize coma (i.e. the rendering of halos around point-shaped light sources at wider apertures, more on Wikipedia), by adjusting the ring to the focus distance or

to fine-tune optimal focus at any given aperture (i.e. to counterbalance focus shift, which is inherent to Sonnar designs.)"

 

Review: MS-Optical Sonnetar 50mm f1.1 for Leica M - The Phoblographer

[dante]

Well, for one thing these shots show how hard it is to focus these lenses consistently.

I agree with Joel that the OOF rendering of the Noctilux is superior, and not by a small margin imo.

 

Not to the point of the massive weight and price difference. The Sonnetar images look like ones from the old 50/1.4 Nikkor rangefinder lens.

 

D

[uhoh7]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Not to the point of the massive weight and price difference. The Sonnetar images look like ones from the old 50/1.4 Nikkor rangefinder lens.

 

D

Except the colors are way way richer. It's not as wild as the nikkor, ever. But wilder than the CZJ 50/1.5

 

Sonnetar Portrait by unoh7, on Flickr

The Sonnetar makes perfect circles at all apertures, which I don't think any of the others do. Cause it has a very fancy german aperture.

 

DSC03927 by unoh7, On A7.mod

 

the nikkor can never do this:

Coffee Baron by unoh7, on Flickr

 

To compare the Sonnetar to the f/1 nocti or CV 50/1.1 is like comparing England and France. I mean, where do you begin? Everything is different. But I love both countries

 

Thanks to Dante, I also have the nikkor, which I enjoy very much at times:

 

What does he smell? by unoh7, on Flickr

 

Anyway, if you know what it is, and what it's for, the Sonnetar is a wonderful lens, which I'm very grateful to own. I don't even consider the bokeh provocative, as in daily use it's usually nicer than the huge CV 50/1.1 can muster.

[dante]

I have one of these Sonnetars arriving this week. I'll take a look at it versus the modern 50/1.5 ZM Sonnar (engineered for bokeh above sharpness) and the 50/1.4 Nikkor LTM (engineered for sharpness at close range). The other possibilities would be a CZJ 5cm f/1.5, a Canon 50/1.5 (which is actually very similar to the Nikkor), a Jupiter-3, and a Zunow 50/1.1. 

 

For most of recorded human photographic history, bokeh was not a consideration. In fact, lots of things were done that degraded it in the name of better aberration correction.

 

Dante

[fiftyonepointsix]

The 5 elements in 4 groups of the Sonnetar is an interesting design, looks like the original CZJ Sonnar 5cm F2 with the "filler" left out of the Triplet. In the original Sonnars, a low index of refraction glass was used to fill in the 2nd and 3rd element of the Ernostar to increase transmisison, reduce air/glass surfaces. With modern coatings, it's just not needed. What I find interesting- the performance is so good at F1.1 with so few elements.

 

I've never bought one, picked up the 5cm F1.5 Nikkor-SC instead. Cost a bit more than the Sonnetar. I had to get it, had an extra 40.5mm NKT lens cap...

[dante]

The 5 elements in 4 groups of the Sonnetar is an interesting design, looks like the original CZJ Sonnar 5cm F2 with the "filler" left out of the Triplet. In the original Sonnars, a low index of refraction glass was used to fill in the 2nd and 3rd element of the Ernostar to increase transmisison, reduce air/glass surfaces. With modern coatings, it's just not needed. What I find interesting- the performance is so good at F1.1 with so few elements.

 

I've never bought one, picked up the 5cm F1.5 Nikkor-SC instead. Cost a bit more than the Sonnetar. I had to get it, had an extra 40.5mm NKT lens cap...

 

I'd bet that an original NKT lens cap for the Nikkor 5cm 1.5 SC is worth more than an entire Nikkor 5cm 1.4 SC! 

 

D

[uhoh7]

The 5 elements in 4 groups of the Sonnetar is an interesting design, looks like the original CZJ Sonnar 5cm F2 with the "filler" left out of the Triplet. In the original Sonnars, a low index of refraction glass was used to fill in the 2nd and 3rd element of the Ernostar to increase transmisison, reduce air/glass surfaces. With modern coatings, it's just not needed. What I find interesting- the performance is so good at F1.1 with so few elements.

 

I've never bought one, picked up the 5cm F1.5 Nikkor-SC instead. Cost a bit more than the Sonnetar. I had to get it, had an extra 40.5mm NKT lens cap...

When you back away from 1.1 performance goes up pretty dramatically, and there is a little mark at 1.6, which I think is sort of "optimal", for shooting the lens fast. The 75 lux is the same way comparing 1.4 with 1.8 (though of course it is much better across the frame)

 

The only genuinely ripping superspeed WO I've ever seen is the .95 Nocti. But there is alot of variation with the rest, to be sure.

 

History aside, with the Sonnetar you get the smallest superspeed ever, so light it can always be tossed in a pocket when you think you might possibly like it. The price is the edges. That is no price at all with alot of low light shots, where the subject is central, but of course other shots like a nice edge

[ynp]

I have one of these Sonnetars arriving this week. I'll take a look at it versus the modern 50/1.5 ZM Sonnar (engineered for bokeh above sharpness) and the 50/1.4 Nikkor LTM (engineered for sharpness at close range). The other possibilities would be a CZJ 5cm f/1.5, a Canon 50/1.5 (which is actually very similar to the Nikkor), a Jupiter-3, and a Zunow 50/1.1. 

 

For most of recorded human photographic history, bokeh was not a consideration. In fact, lots of things were done that degraded it in the name of better aberration correction.

 

Dante

 

Please share your opinion on the Sonnetar after you have tested it against the 50/1.5 ZM.

Thanks,

Yevgeny

[dante]

Arrived today. My initial impression is that it is fricking brilliant. The "coma adjuster" is actually a focal length adjuster that allows you to optimize focus for various apertures (instead of what it claims, which is optimizing coma for various distances). 

 

My suspicion is that this lens was incredibly difficult to couple to an RF absent fine-tuning and that this adjuster went from being a one-time collimation shortcut to a full-blown, user-friendly adjuster. Early examples have spanner tip holes in that adjuster ring.

 

It took all of 15 minutes to find the setting that does f/1.1-f/1.6 for most indoor shooting distances (and not bad at infinity). It is quite sharp, as you might surmise from the shot below, taken at f/1.1 and about 0.8m.

 

There is nothing crazy about the mechanics if you can hack the Contax Sonnars, whose aperture rings rotated with focus.

 

Dante

 

 

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!

[ynp]

Thank you very much indeed , Dante.

 

Very useful information from an experienced user is appreciated! I will be very grateful if you write your impressions of the Sonnetar compared to the Zeiss 50/1.5.

 

Yevgeny

[kingson138]

Hi,

 

I just ran some tests on the MS Optical 50mm/1.1 lens with Coma adjusted to "Infinity Position". Camera used: M-P typ240 with EVF. I had found that only "F5.6 to F8" could focus to a true infinity. From " F1.1 to F4" I could only focus on objects that were a little bit before "Infinity" . I would say from 5 M to a little bit before True Infinity. 

 

I had also found that F16 was a little hard to focus with Coma set to "Infinity Dot" using the EVF. I usually used F5.6 to F8 at Aperture Priority, with a +0.7EV compensation on Bright hot days.

 

These two pictures are the same one. Taken at F8, 1/350,  ISO200  (+0.7EV). Processed and auto adjusted by Lightroom CC. The first picture was the original picture exported from Lightroom CC. The second picture was the same one edited by Macphun's "Intensify Pro". I am pleased with the results. But for objects less than 5m, I would set Coma to the "4M" default position.

 

https://www.sugarsync.com/pf/D7078399_73742928_6435600

 

Edit with Macphun "Intensify Pro"

 

https://www.sugarsync.com/pf/D7078399_73742928_6423394

 

Kingson

[kingson138]

Just to add to my earlier post on using Coma adjustment. If you adjusted the Coma position to Infinity, you can still focus to infinity with your range finder. As long as you are using "F5.6 to F8" you will be fine. But take note that any objects before "Infinity" for example at 10 metre  the object will not be focused correctly. 

[icqcq]

Ladies & Laddies:

 

I'm now moving back into things (photography things) seriously (but playfully), and thought I would introduce myself here with an image out of the Sonnetar. My limited experience thus far says that the bokeh can be harsh if there are specular highlights/high contrast, whereas the rendering in this shot: so very... creamy? Buttery? Shot through an M240, wide open....

 

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!

 

Sorry, no other lenses in this focal length neighborhood for me, so no comparo... I bought this as a portrait lens, and have it set up for close focus performance. Wide open, it appears to have sharp focus with a halo, the halo disappearing by f2.8, with just sharpness and a nice glow.

 

I will also post a couple of images with the 28Lux on the appropriate page, if you're curious to see how that lens performs.

 

Q

[tsleica]

Luv that Sonnetar...!