Summilux 35mm vs. Nokton Classic 35/1.4 II

[Ernstk]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 minutes ago, lct said:

And perfectly right for 50mm shooters .

Absolutely. And thereby neutering the camera from its most perfect focal length - 35mm.

Ernst

[Advertisement]

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

[Guest Nowhereman]

2 hours ago, Ernstk said:

Only my personal opinion but they are the most awful thing that Leica has ever produced.

They were, in effect the admission that Leica had got the M3 totally wrong. The situation was only rectified with the release of the infinitely nicer M2...

Sure, for someone shooting a 35mm lens the M2 may be "infinitely nicer". However, years ago I had both an M2 and and M3 and preferred the latter by a long shot — but I was shooting mainly with a 50mm lens. My interest in the Summilux 35 pre-ASPH with goggles is to have the 0.65 m minimum focus distance, but's it could be  trade-off in terms what was mentioned above in terms of balance and viewfinder brightness.

However, I still prefer the M3 now, and find I don't mind shooting the it with either the Summicron 35v4 or the Summilux 35 FLE by framing with the Voigtlander 28/35 mini-finder (pictured below), which I bought when it was still in production and cost $85. A minor point, but I certainly prefer the M3 frame counter mechanism to the rinky-dink one on the M2.

M10 | DR Summicron 50 (close-up range with goggles) | ISO 3200 | f/4 | 1/90 sec

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!

________________________
Frog Leaping photobook Edited January 21, 2021 by Nowhereman

[lct]

7 minutes ago, Ernstk said:

Absolutely. And thereby neutering the camera from its most perfect focal length - 35mm.

35mm has never been perfect for me but it is a matter of taste of course .

[Ernstk]

3 minutes ago, Nowhereman said:

Sure, for someone shooting a 35mm lens the M2 may be "infinitely nicer". However, years ago I had both an M2 and and M3 and preferred the latter by a long shot — but I was shooting mainly with a 50mm lens. However, I still prefer the M3 now, and find I don't mind shooting the it with either the Summicron 35v4 or the Summilux 35 FLE by framing with the Voigtlander 28/35 mini-finder (pictured below), which I bought when it was still in production and cost $85. A minor point, but I certainly prefer the M3 frame counter mechanism to the rinky-dink one on the M2.

M10 | DR Summicron 50 (close-up range with goggles) | ISO 3200 | f/4 | 1/90 sec

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!

________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

Of course, this all comes down to personal preference but for me, the M rangefinder is in its sweet spot with lenses up to 50mm. 90 might be workable but it's not great and 135 just seems pointless.

Ernst

[Ernstk]

7 minutes ago, lct said:

35mm has never been perfect for me but it is a matter of taste of course .

I agree.

But I have an irrational aversion to the 50mm focal length.

It's a lens that sits on the fence. It's a lens that's neither one thing or another. It's not even the field of view of the human eye, which equates to 43mm focal length.

The 2 lenses that I use almost exclusively are 21mm and 35mm. For me, the M comes alive with those focal lengths.

Ernst

[Cobram]

On ‎1‎/‎18‎/‎2021 at 3:47 PM, Danner said:

Feeling the need for a 35/1.4 for film (only), trying to decide between the two.  Both are compact (very good), the Nokton close focuses to .7 meters and cost less, but it's not a Leica (you know what I mean).  OTOH, I am wondering if the Nokton might actually be better, optically, in the f1.4-2.8 range than the Summilux?  I also wonder about sample variations in the Noktons, are there 'good' ones and 'bad' ones?

Thank you for your thoughts.

I feel sorry for Danner, nobody seems to care about Nokton vs Summilux question... 🙂

[lct]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

« Moi, le 50mm c’est ma vie. Une certaine distance avec les gens. Le grand angle gueule, et le 90mm me rappelle ces cornets acoustiques qu’utilisaient autrefois les vieilles dames. »
Henri Cartier-Bresson
Photoportraits sans guillemets
Hervé Guibert, Le Monde 10/10/1985
(quoted by Le Photographe n° 1607, page 28)

Free translation:
The 50mm lens is my life. A certain distance with people. The wide angle shouts, and the 90mm reminds me those ear trumpets that old ladies used to use in the past.

[Guest Nowhereman]

^ A lot has been written how a 50mm lens can be a chameleon — how it can have the feeling either like that of a wide-angle or of a short telephoto, depending of the framing. Also, how it can result, generally, in fewer keepers than a 35 or 28; but how, among those keepers, there can tend to be a greater number of really great pictures. I think that's what HCB had in mind...
________________________
Frog Leaping photobook

Edited January 21, 2021 by Nowhereman

[a.noctilux]

We are lucky to have choices, now.

Personnal feeling of the focal length "comfort" can vary over each person and same person over time.

How I know that 😇.

I don't discus focal lengths anymore ...

and use those (yes ...on M) when I need from 12mm to 560mm happily.

[Mr.Prime]

It seems choice of focal length gets a fair bit of discussion, I guess mostly people who spent a lot of money and time on just one focal length can easily identify it as their favourite focal length and like to show their enthusiasm but as with many choices we make, it’s possible to get overly attached, associating our choices with our self worth and then people start to insist their own choice is the best choice and we are soon quoting the Masters to reinforce this. Just mentioning the obvious as I’ve participated in an audio forum where I swear that people would be willing to enter a punch up over their preference for choice of components.

I like to stay agnostic and keep open the choice of lenses. I’m never impressed by the person who says xx focal length is so much better and that’s the only ‘language’ they can create with. But I am impressed by the photographer who can create great photographs regardless of their tools.

 

p.s. back on topic, I feel this way: the Nokton is a great lens, better price and weight, but if the Leica were the same price I probably would not hesitate to buy it instead. I have the Nokton... for now.

Edited January 21, 2021 by Mr.Prime

[Ernstk]

44 minutes ago, Steven said:

I started my photography life travelling for a few years with a cheap 50 lens and, c'était ma vie, but now I hate this focal length. It's awkward to me. Neither here nor there. There's nothing I like to photograph with a 50, not even portraits. 

I'm glad to hear it's not just me who hates the 50mm lens!

Ernst

[intermediatic]

I’m not sure why there is all this silly hate for 50mm, it’s a great focal length.

I don’t have the Summilux, but I have a new Summicron 35, a Nokton Classic 35 1.4 and a Summarit 35. I never really loved either of the latter lenses, but the Summicron 35 is just great, with my Summicron 50, are my favorite lenses. Between the sharpness of the lens when it’s stopped down, the bokeh when wide open, and general painting, it’s phenomenal. Now I have an M10-R and it may be the Nokton might be fine with lower resolution cameras. 

[cboy]

2c..My experience the nokton has that vintage vibe to the images thats suited for portraits, but it doesnt have that image pop you can get with lux 35. The nokton is a little too saturated for my taste which is why i would prefer it for bw. This is from a pov for digital which is totally useless for the op, but i think the differences will be less for film. Amount of distortion will probably the biggest difference.

Good luck in your search op

[Cobram]

1 hour ago, Steven said:

"So, I took a leap of faith. Again. It worked in the past, so I thought why not. 

I bought a 35mm 1.4 Summilux v.1, aka, the Steel Rim. The idea is that it can replace my Nokton Classic MC as my compact, character 35mm lens. 

I received this morning. It is so beautiful, I cant stop looking at it on my M10P. It's small, it's well built, it has style... look wise, my dream lens as expected. 

I can already see some similarities with the Nokton, but this lens is Leica, so it makes it so much better..... except it's horrible ! 

I had a terrible first day with it. My opinion is not made yet, but what a tough tough lens to use. It's so soft at 1.4 that I'm almost laughing (nervously). It flares so bad that 50% of my shots were ruined because of the position of the light. I even had to finish the day in Live View to make sure it didn't get too bad. At this point, I find it so much worst that the Voigtlander. IQ wise, the Voigtlander seems levels on top. 

That being said, a lot of testimonies in this thread come to the same conclusion. This lens never meant to be a perfect lens. It's full of flaws, but once you learn to use it, you can't let go of it. Considering the price I paid for it, I'll definitely give it more time .... let's see how it goes. "

I just posted this in a thread dedicated to that lens. Here, I'll add that so far I find the Voigtlander really superior, albeit after just a day of testing. But this day of testing even brought my a new appreciation for my Voigt. It's sharper, more contrasty, easier to use, 10 times cheaper, and it still has character and flare, but not too much like on the Lux. 

At this point, my favourite 35mm remains the Pre Fle. Then the Voight, then the Lux pre asph. Ill do more testing, but im convinced that the voigtlander, at 600 euros, is a very serious contender. If compared to the pre asph lux. Not mentonning it focuses at 0.7. 

I discovered only recently how good are Voigtlander lenses. I was always underestimating them. What a fool I was...😅

[Cobram]

2 minutes ago, Steven said:

If only they looked like Leicas though... 

I really wish Voigtlander will release in future, maybe in cooperation with any other company, digital Bessa rangefinder... Bessa + new CV 50 APO... what a combo...😋

[lct]

Just now, Steven said:

If only they looked like Leicas though... 

What differences are you referring to, if i may ask? I have both my Summilux 35/1.4 v2 and Nokton 35/1.4 SC v2 in front of me now. They look pretty similar besides the steel front rim of the Nokton but you like steel rims don't you . 

[lct]

2 minutes ago, Steven said:

I refer to the psychological difference. 

Haha do like me buy them both and psychological differences will disappear immediately

[BradS]

On 1/21/2021 at 10:12 AM, Ernstk said:

.....the field of view of the human eye, which equates to 43mm focal length....

Uhm, no. The fov of human vision is very complex but generally considered to be much wider than the fov of a 43mm lens on 135 format. 
 

43mm is the diagonal of a 35mm negative frame. 
 

sqrt(24^2 + 36^2) = 43.3

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Ernstk]

11 hours ago, BradS said:

Uhm, no. The fov of human vision is very complex but generally considered to be much wider than the fov of a 43mm lens on 135 format. 
 

43mm is the diagonal of a 35mm negative frame. 
 

sqrt(24^2 + 36^2) = 43.3

The full range of vision of the human eye (including peripheral vision) is regarded  as being equivalent to approximately a 22mm lens (on a 24x36 format camera). The part of our vision that we 'see' most with, the cone of visual attention, is around 55 degrees, which equates to a 43mm lens. 

Ernst

[gaheris]

Not sure if this info is useful to anyone: according to my Japanese copy of Camera Magazine, issue 6 2008, the 35mm 1.4 VM I was a lens dedicated to an imperfect, but characterful lens popular in the 50s-60s — AKA the summilux pre a. Not a straight copy as the designers in Cosina wanted to strike a balance between character and usability (in the modern sense). The magazine even had a very brief comparison of the lux pre a, the VM I and the lux ASPH, and the VM I, on small magazine print, wasn't too much different from the ASPH, albeit ever so slightly less contrasty. 

You can tell they have a little homage to the design of the 35mm summilux. The version I has got that summilux aperture wings (but sadly modified away in version II).

The updated lenses (version ii) has reduced focus shift and maybe reduced barrel distortion. I have the SC II and the distortion does not bother me at all in normal shooting circumstances. colorwise the MC II is the one got changed — Cosina "corrected" it so it's more neutral and now the difference with the SC is more apparent. In comparison The SC is more yellow on film, and contains more shadow details and is the one I prefer (also the coating looks majestic). 

I have been looking for a good copy of Canadian Summilux pre a myself but unfortunately it's hard to find one with a reasonable price these days. The SC II gives me what I want, for now.