Voigtlander 21mm | Nokton 1.4 or Color-Skopar 3.5?

[astrostl]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

On 10/11/2020 at 11:07 AM, Dennis said:

But I'm afraid that the Color Skopar could be a little better at equivalent apertures. Smaller, cheaper, lighter ...

Given the reviews on both, I'd put odds against the VM 21/3.5 outperforming the VM 21/1.4 at any aperture.

[Advertisement]

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

[Dennis]

1 hour ago, astrostl said:

Given the reviews on both, I'd put odds against the VM 21/3.5 outperforming the VM 21/1.4 at any aperture.

 

That's a great news and what I was waiting in this thread. Are you saying that, based on given reviews of both lenses, it looks like the Color-Skopar performs better that the Nokton at any aperture?

Why am I asking? My english is not my native language, so I translated in google to be sure I understood correctly. Curiously, in the Italian translation the Nokton performs better than Skopar, but in the Spanish translation is the opposite lol 😂 

 

[spydrxx]

I'm not a 21mm guy, but when I needed one for a certain project, I opted for the Color Skopar based on results of others, and haven't been disappointed with the results either on film or digital. Never had the chance to try others, but for my needs I doubt they would deliver significantly different results, as I generally shoot between f/4-5.6.

[astrostl]

1 hour ago, Dennis said:

That's a great news and what I was waiting in this thread. Are you saying that, based on given reviews of both lenses, it looks like the Color-Skopar performs better that the Nokton at any aperture?

No, the opposite: I expect the VM 21/1.4 to outperform the VM 21/3.5. Phillip Reeve found that the Nokton performs better when stopped down (in addition to offering much wider apertures). This makes sense to me given their size and price differences.

Edited October 12, 2020 by astrostl
subjective

[Dennis]

13 minutes ago, spydrxx said:

I'm not a 21mm guy, but when I needed one for a certain project, I opted for the Color Skopar based on results of others, and haven't been disappointed with the results either on film or digital. Never had the chance to try others, but for my needs I doubt they would deliver significantly different results, as I generally shoot between f/4-5.6.

Great, thank you for sharing. Yes, it makes sense. Me too, I would probably leave f/5.6 the 70% of the time if I had a Skopar. Ideally, in a longterm period, it would be great to have both. For street photography, landscape and documentary stuffs, the little one. When one really needs a fast wide angle lens, the big one. But I can buy only one right now

But also with the big one, I can have similar or slightly better performance, much more versatile lens... 🤔

6 minutes ago, astrostl said:

No, the opposite: I expect the VM 21/1.4 to outperform the VM 21/3.5. Phillip Reeve found that the Nokton performs better when stopped down (in addition to offering much wider apertures). This makes sense given their size and price differences.

haha 😂 Good to know. Thank you. It's more expensive, more versatile, but probably better in many aspects 🤔

 

Edited October 12, 2020 by Dennis

[Guest]

6 hours ago, Dennis said:

Yes, it's huge. Too much big? Need to check in person. I don't care about VF blockage

In fairness the leica 21mm f1.4 is also a big lens so i guess its a price you pay for that extra speed.

[tgray]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The 21/1.4 might perform better than the 21/3.5 at an equivalent aperture, but for me the decision would come down to: do I want the extra speed for the extra cost and size. The 21/3.5 appears to be an excellent performer. 
 

As I already have a compact 21, the 1.4 lens does appeal to me. But if I didn’t or if I only occasionally shot 21, the 21/3.5 would be hard to pass up. 

[Dennis]

1 hour ago, tgray said:

The 21/1.4 might perform better than the 21/3.5 at an equivalent aperture, but for me the decision would come down to: do I want the extra speed for the extra cost and size. The 21/3.5 appears to be an excellent performer. 
 

As I already have a compact 21, the 1.4 lens does appeal to me. But if I didn’t or if I only occasionally shot 21, the 21/3.5 would be hard to pass up. 

It makes sense. First question: Does one need the additional apertures? Maybe we don't need it, but we appreciate it on many occasions.
Then if one needs, does justify weight and price? In terms of price, the 21/4 costs 50% more than the 21/3.5. If you compare it with a 21 Summilux, because of the stellar performance of the Nokton, the lens looks like cheap.
As you and I said, it would be great to have both and use them when needed.

 

[250swb]

If you already have good ISO performance with the M10 why would you need a faster lens? A 21mm lens wide open is a joke anyway if you are after 'dreamy bokeh' because it ain't going to happen, too much DOF. A fast 21mm lens is for if you don't have any light.

[Dennis]

49 minutes ago, 250swb said:

If you already have good ISO performance with the M10 why would you need a faster lens? A 21mm lens wide open is a joke anyway if you are after 'dreamy bokeh' because it ain't going to happen, too much DOF. A fast 21mm lens is for if you don't have any light.

I agree in part with what you're saying. We are almost in 2021, and cameras deal very well with high iso, that's right. But what about you need 1/500 by night ... If I need to freeze the moment, sometimes I need to rise up to 12,800 iso because I don't have enough apertures available 🙂 

I don't care about dreamy bokeh; it's more about having more stops available and maybe, having a slight shallow DOP. If you are familiar with Emmanuel Lubezki, the cinematographer, in the movie "The Revenant," he used mostly 21 and 24 FL and sometimes shot wide open. This kind of approach is fantastic. I like environmental portraits, with the subject at 2Mt at f/1.4.  
But I also know that I would shoot 60% of the time at f/5.6 ... That's why I have mixed feelings.

[Guest]

The reputable leica 21mm f3.4 v brand new voigtlander nokton f1.4 .

Would the fact that the leica lens is from 2011 mean that the new voigtlander is likely to perform better at all apertures?

If the answer is no then why not?

[Dennis]

15 hours ago, steve 1959 said:

then why not?

Yes, why not?

The 24mm is a FL that I like and usually use with my DSLR. It would be my first choice with Leica, it's already on my wishlist. Unless you find a super offer, there are not in the market 24mm new lens options. And I don't want a Zeiss. So, my next choice would be 21mm.

So why not? Maybe a 21mm Nokton, super-fast, and in the future a 24mm Leica. Does it make sense?

 

[Guest]

8 minutes ago, Dennis said:

Yes, why not?

The 24mm is a FL that I like and usually use with my DSLR. It would be my first choice with Leica, it's already on my wishlist. Unless you find a super offer, there are not in the market 24mm new lens options. And I don't want a Zeiss. So, my next choice would be 21mm.

So why not? Maybe a 21mm Nokton, super-fast, and in the future a 24mm Leica. Does it make sense?

 

It makes senses as long as you use it at F1.4 to F2 sometimes and your comfortable with the extra size/weight.

[Dennis]

2 minutes ago, steve 1959 said:

It makes senses as long as you use it at F1.4 to F2 sometimes and your comfortable with the extra size/weight.

Absolutely. If I would shoot at f/5.6 only, it doesn't make sense. About size/weight I'm fine. For example I use to shoot w/ my Nikon D5 + 35mm f/1.8G, and it's 1.7KG approx. About 100gr less than a SL2 + 35APO.

While M10 + 24 Nokton is about 1.150KG ... Compared with my DLSR, it looks light 🙂

[astrostl]

Have you considered the TTArtisan 21/1.5? Phillip Reeve and 35mmc have both turned in relatively favorable reviews for it, and the price is right at 430 USD.

I have the Leica 21/3.4, the CV 21/4, and the CV 21/3.5. I find the 21/3.5 annoyingly small between its focus lever and practically impossible-to-use distance scale. The distance scale and focusing were radically better on the 21/4 for my tastes, and it's important to me as my default mode with 21mms is to run at f/8 zone focused with the distance scale so that practically everything up to infinity is sharp.

[Dennis]

1 hour ago, astrostl said:

Have you considered the TTArtisan 21/1.5? Phillip Reeve and 35mmc have both turned in relatively favorable reviews for it, and the price is right at 430 USD.

I have the Leica 21/3.4, the CV 21/4, and the CV 21/3.5. I find the 21/3.5 annoyingly small between its focus lever and practically impossible-to-use distance scale. The distance scale and focusing were radically better on the 21/4 for my tastes, and it's important to me as my default mode with 21mms is to run at f/8 zone focused with the distance scale so that practically everything up to infinity is sharp.

Thank you for sharing, I'll read it tomorrow with calm, awesome. Nope, I didn't considered it in my list, I didn't know this lens. About the small size of the 21/3.5, I get your point, and it could be a problem for me too. I adore the rendering of the 35/2.8 ZM, but it's very small for me. I have big hands and I struggle for focus, maybe with a big focus tab would be better. Or a bigger lens 🙂

How do you feel with the CV 21/1.4? What do you like most about it? Any cons?

 

[astrostl]

I don't own and haven't used the CV 21/1.4. My only concern would be that it's a honker on an M body. I don't care about rangefinder blockage because 1) it doesn't bug me too much in general and 2) I very rarely use it with 21mm lenses anyway, preferring to zone focus at narrow apertures and resorting to live view when critically focusing stopped down. The size and weight approaches "oof" territory when two-lensing it out there though, like a 21/35 kit.

The TT 21/1.5 is not w/o its concerns, but it looks like a player at f/2 and further and I shoot 21s a f/8 95% of the time anyway.

[Dennis]

15 minutes ago, astrostl said:

I don't own and haven't used the CV 21/1.4. My only concern would be that it's a honker on an M body. I don't care about rangefinder blockage because 1) it doesn't bug me too much in general and 2) I very rarely use it with 21mm lenses anyway, preferring to zone focus at narrow apertures and resorting to live view when critically focusing stopped down. The size and weight approaches "oof" territory when two-lensing it out there though, like a 21/35 kit.

The TT 21/1.5 is not w/o its concerns, but it looks like a player at f/2 and further and I shoot 21s a f/8 95% of the time anyway.

I'm sorry, I was reading your message and I misunderstood you have the 21/1.4 instead of 21/1.4  😒 Yes, it's big. I saw also that TT lens is much better at f/2 than f/1.5 ... Which it's fine for me. Still thinking my best option 🤔 Thank you

 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jdlaing]

TTartisan 21 is indeed a nice lens.

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!

[Dennis]

4 hours ago, jdlaing said:

TTartisan 21 is indeed a nice lens.

 

Great, actually I remember this picture of yours from another thread 🙂 How really is this lens? I saw in reviews that 1.5 is kind of soft, specially at close distance. But from f/2 and on, it's great. $1,050 for the CV 21/1.4 vs TT 21/1.5 for $430 .... 

I know that the TT is not a Leica, and its performance can be great, or just fine in some situations. I would use this lens to shoot at f/5.6 and f/8 mostly, and for low light and "artistic" purposes at f/2 ... I like that the lens shape and colors emulate a Leica lens, but not sure how is IQ, can't find so much on line. What's your feedback?