Voigtlander Nokton Classic 35mm f/1.4 II MC vs. the Leica Summicron 35mm v3

[bcapphoto]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have a 35mm Summicron v3 and a 50mm Summicron v3. 

I've been exploring the idea of swapping over to the new Voigtlander Nokton offerings (f/1.4/1.5) as a more affordable alternative to upgrading to a Summilux for each. 

I put the 35mm Nokton ii against my 35mm Summicron v3 tonight for a few quick tests, and here they are, side-by-side, each at f/2. 

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!

 

I have some thoughts - but - curious as to your thoughts! I also did a side-by-side with the Nokton wide open @ f/1.4 against the Summicron wide open @ f/2. See below. 

 

 

What are your thoughts on the Nokton (left) vs. the Summicron (right) in these?

[jaeger]

Do you shoot raw or jpeg?

 

[bcapphoto]

1 minute ago, jaeger said:

Do you shoot raw or jpeg?

 

RAW - but these are all 0'd out so they're matching. It's a true raw-to-raw comparison. 

[adan]

1) The 50 years of improvement in coatings certainly shows in the "sun-in-frame" pairs. The Nokton produces almost no "space-ship" flares or veiling flare (lower left).

     1a) Conversely the Summicron opens up a tiny bit more shadow detail; for example, deep inside the bush in set 2 (lower left corner).

2) The Nokton is faintly warmer/yellower, assuming the WB settings were actually the same (i.e. a hard consistent number, not "Auto" or "As shot").

3) The Nokton blur circles have gentler "bright-ring" outlines (if any).

4) Rather odd that the Nokton's background blur circles are slightly larger at the same nominal aperture. Notably in pairing #2 (bush in foreground, street and trees in background). Not sure what would cause that. Differences in curvature of field? Or simply one lens at its design limit (f/2) and the other stopped down from its design limit (f/1.4 > f/2)?

To my taste, except for (1a), those all favor the Nokton.

5) at this scale, I can't see a significant center-resolution difference at f/2. The Nokton again has more "pop" and clarity, but the Summicron III might have equal, or even better lpmm detail (e.g. in the "Ford" badge, or in the yellowish "fluffy grass" stalk in pairing 2).

[Alberti]

I like the comparison, interesting how the Nokton performs well.

As regrds the yellyfish in some of the Summicon images, I have luckily never had that neither on my 50mm V.3 nor on the v.5. Nor on any other Leica lens I have. [And luckily I never had the modern onion rings either that all new Asph. glass from Wetzlar seem to have, I don’t like that cup of soup].
That is a good sign of the Nokton’s performance. 

Edited September 2, 2021 by Alberti

[grahamc]

Thans Brian, interesting comparison 

I really like them both, and nice to see they are very similar. In a blind test I would have probably picked the Nokton in all of them TBH if I had to choose a favourite.  The exception being apart the wide open shots of the car - in which I would favour the cron as the Non looks more a more modern render in this particular shot, to my eye . 

[Danner]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The difference in color rendering is quite remarkable.  In the first set, which do you think best matches the pine tree's actual color?  I suspect the Summicron does.

Edited September 2, 2021 by Danner

[bcapphoto]

For reference, here are a few 100% crops - Nokton wide open on the left, Summicron wide open on the right.

 

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!

 

 

 

[spydrxx]

IMHO in practical everyday shooting there is really no discernable difference of any significance, which speaks very well for the Voigtlander. The side-by-side comparisons you did really highlighted to me the similarities rather than differences. Thanks for sharing.

[wizard]

vor 16 Minuten schrieb spydrxx:

... which speaks very well for the Voigtlander.

True, but considering that the Summicron 35mm v3 is likely about 50 years old, that says a lot about just how good Leica lenses were even 50 years ago.

[spydrxx]

24 minutes ago, wizard said:

True, but considering that the Summicron 35mm v3 is likely about 50 years old, that says a lot about just how good Leica lenses were even 50 years ago.

Yes they not only "were great" but remain great living testaments to the design skills of Leica employees. My first Leica lens, purchased new thru a Leica rep when I was a naval officer in 1968, was a 35 Summaron/2.8 for my new M4. It served me well for over 35 years, when I opted for a more modern Cron. Foolishly, I sold the Summaron, which these days I much prefer the rendering of...but we all learn from our mistakes. And Leica has definitely learned to tweak designs to meet new customer expectations and preferences. Unfortunately their prices drive many of us to look to alternatives like CV, which offer almost similar, if not equal, performance at much lower price points.

[bcapphoto]

48 minutes ago, spydrxx said:

Yes they not only "were great" but remain great living testaments to the design skills of Leica employees. My first Leica lens, purchased new thru a Leica rep when I was a naval officer in 1968, was a 35 Summaron/2.8 for my new M4. It served me well for over 35 years, when I opted for a more modern Cron. Foolishly, I sold the Summaron, which these days I much prefer the rendering of...but we all learn from our mistakes. And Leica has definitely learned to tweak designs to meet new customer expectations and preferences. Unfortunately their prices drive many of us to look to alternatives like CV, which offer almost similar, if not equal, performance at much lower price points.

It's funny because I love the story, the narrative and the heritage of the older Leica lenses. It's why I have a 35/50 Summicron v3 - both ~ 50 years old. 

 

The only reason I'm looking @ the Voigtlanders is not because of money, but because I wondered if they offered something BETTER than the Summicrons. Plus, that extra stop of light is nice when I shoot indoors, especially on an M240-series camera where I don't love to shoot above ISO 3200. 

[Dennis]

44 minutes ago, bcapphoto said:

The only reason I'm looking @ the Voigtlanders is not because of money, but because I wondered if they offered something BETTER than the Summicrons. Plus, that extra stop of light is nice when I shoot indoors, especially on an M240-series camera where I don't love to shoot above ISO 3200. 

 I never own a 35 Summicron. I will probably buy soon (if the seller makes a decision) a 35 Asph v1, which I'm excited about it. 
But I do have the 35/1.4 Nokton v2 MC, and I love it. And I think that due to its price and balanced performance, it's a must to have for all Leica M users. If I go on vacation tomorrow and want to bring one lens one camera only, it would definitely be the Nokton. If I buy the used Cron Asph v1 soon, I'll let you know then which one I would bring between the two 🙂 

[bcapphoto]

Testing out the Voigtlander 35mm f/1.4 Nokton ii tonight on my M246. I shot these all wide open. I like the feel of the lens; it's comparable, if not a "bit" cheaper feeling than my 35mm Summicron v3. But very impressive.

 

It handles well wide-open. But the only thing I don't love is how out-of-focus highlight areas render. They're a bit glowy. Just thought I'd share.

 

That last shot is on my 35mm Summicron v3. That is the characteristic flare I get on that lens when shooting into the sun; I sort of love it.

 

Anyone who shoots with the 35mm Distagon or the 35mm Summilux - do you find the same with those lenses?

 

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!

 

 

 

 

 

 

[adan]

Well, the 35 Nokton f/1.4 is intentionally modelled on the original pre-ASPH 35 Summilux. Which produces glows like a banshee at f/1.4. "It is a feature, not a bug."

It is par for the course in a compact, double-gauss, 35 f/1.4 design.

You kinda have to pay your money and take your choice, from four "conceptual groups" of M 35mm lenses:

...........very compact f/1.4 - with glow: original pre-asph 35 Summilux-M, 35 f/1.4 Nokton I/II
...........or more "modern" larger more complex f/1.4 lenses without glow (Distagon(?), Summilux-M ASPH/FLE, various Voigtländer 35 f/1.2s)
...........or a compact f/2.0 of various vintages or names, and forego f/1.4.
...........or these days, APO-35s that are f/2, and large(r). Voigtländer or the $8000 Leica

Original 35mm Summilux-M (1961-early 1990s) at f/1.4 (below - on M9). The Voigtländer f/1.4 Nokton, especially the MC version, has more overall tonal contrast from more modern coatings. But that won't change the "glow" all that much, which comes from spherical aberration (how the glass bends light), rather than coatings (how the glass reflects light).

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 September 3, 2021 by adan

[haikos]

On 9/2/2021 at 12:22 AM, adan said:

1) The 50 years of improvement in coatings certainly shows in the "sun-in-frame" pairs. The Nokton produces almost no "space-ship" flares or veiling flare (lower left).

     1a) Conversely the Summicron opens up a tiny bit more shadow detail; for example, deep inside the bush in set 2 (lower left corner).

2) The Nokton is faintly warmer/yellower, assuming the WB settings were actually the same (i.e. a hard consistent number, not "Auto" or "As shot").

3) The Nokton blur circles have gentler "bright-ring" outlines (if any).

4) Rather odd that the Nokton's background blur circles are slightly larger at the same nominal aperture. Notably in pairing #2 (bush in foreground, street and trees in background). Not sure what would cause that. Differences in curvature of field? Or simply one lens at its design limit (f/2) and the other stopped down from its design limit (f/1.4 > f/2)?

To my taste, except for (1a), those all favor the Nokton.

5) at this scale, I can't see a significant center-resolution difference at f/2. The Nokton again has more "pop" and clarity, but the Summicron III might have equal, or even better lpmm detail (e.g. in the "Ford" badge, or in the yellowish "fluffy grass" stalk in pairing 2).

RE point #4, I noticed the exact same thing when comparing Nokton Classic v2 mc and cron (v4).

[Mark T]

On 9/2/2021 at 11:14 AM, bcapphoto said:

I have a 35mm Summicron v3 and a 50mm Summicron v3. 

I've been exploring the idea of swapping over to the new Voigtlander Nokton offerings (f/1.4/1.5) as a more affordable alternative to upgrading to a Summilux for each. 

I put the 35mm Nokton ii against my 35mm Summicron v3 tonight for a few quick tests, and here they are, side-by-side, each at f/2. 

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!

 

I have some thoughts - but - curious as to your thoughts! I also did a side-by-side with the Nokton wide open @ f/1.4 against the Summicron wide open @ f/2. See below. 

 

 

What are your thoughts on the Nokton (left) vs. the Summicron (right) in these?

Thanks for posting all of this. It's been a real pleasure to read. As a matter of curiosity, is the Nokton version you used Multi Coated, or Single Coated? I wonder what effect Single Coating might have on the flare effects that you enjoy shooting into the sun? I.e. Would single coating give you the best of both worlds; a new 1.4 lens with pronounced flare when shot into the sun?

Thanks,

Mark

[pippy]

6 hours ago, Mark T said:

...As a matter of curiosity, is the Nokton version you used Multi Coated, or Single Coated?...

...Would single coating give you the best of both worlds; a new 1.4 lens with pronounced flare when shot into the sun?...

As far as the first question goes, Mark, the clue is in the thread's title (35mm f1.4 II MC)............

From what I've read on the www over the years the SC versions (both v1 and v2) are regarded as being "slightly" more affected by flare accompanied by a 'slight' increase in contrast. Not sure how slight is "slight" but that word - or a synonym for it - crops up again and again. I've never once read anyone mention a great amount of a difference but everyone agrees that there is a noticeable difference.

What is also agreed in general is that the SC works 'better' with monochrome and the MC works 'better' with colour.

FWIW I have the MC version of the 40mm f1.4 Nokton and I have absolutely no complaints whatsoever about how it renders in B'n'W.

Philip.

[pippy]

5 hours ago, pippy said:

...From what I've read on the www over the years the SC versions (both v1 and v2) are regarded as being "slightly" more affected by flare accompanied by a 'slight' increase in contrast...

Ooops!........^.........

That should read "accompanied by a slight decrease in contrast". Apologies for any confusion!

Philip.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[adan]

7 hours ago, pippy said:

What is also agreed in general is that the SC works 'better' with monochrome and the MC works 'better' with colour.

Someone is going to have to explain that idea to me.

45 years in the business - and still selling - and I have never selected a lens (or coating style) "for" color or "for" B&W.