CV Nokton 35 f/1.2 vs Noctilux

[ashwinrao1]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hello, from a long time reader and first time poster. I had searched the forums on this question, but have not come up with a clear thread that addressed these issues.

 

I wanted some user feedback regarding the similarities and differences in these 2 lenses when used on an M8. Obviously, the Nokton is MUCH cheaper and has a 35 mm focal length, but I am more curious about IQ, OOF rendering, bokeh, sharpness, and user experience at wide open aperture. I just obtained a chrome Nokton, and have loved it so far for low light work.

 

Would those who use both or have experience consider the Nokton to be a poor man's Noctilux, in terms of their respective photo signatures/OOF rendering, etc...Prior threads have suggested a similar "painterly" effect....however, the Nokton has ASPH glass, while the Noctilux is pre-ASHP, right?

 

The noctilux (noctilust?) has been on my list, but I recently got ripped off trying to get one off ebay, so I am still waiting on resolution on that matter before considering it again.

 

 

All user opinions and feedback are appreciated

[wlaidlaw]

Hello, from a long time reader and first time poster. I had searched the forums on this question, but have not come up with a clear thread that addressed these issues.

 

I wanted some user feedback regarding the similarities and differences in these 2 lenses when used on an M8. Obviously, the Nokton is MUCH cheaper and has a 35 mm focal length, but I am more curious about IQ, OOF rendering, bokeh, sharpness, and user experience at wide open aperture. I just obtained a chrome Nokton, and have loved it so far for low light work.

 

Would those who use both or have experience consider the Nokton to be a poor man's Noctilux, in terms of their respective photo signatures/OOF rendering, etc...Prior threads have suggested a similar "painterly" effect....however, the Nokton has ASPH glass, while the Noctilux is pre-ASHP, right?

 

The noctilux (noctilust?) has been on my list, but I recently got ripped off trying to get one off ebay, so I am still waiting on resolution on that matter before considering it again.

 

 

All user opinions and feedback are appreciated

 

Ashwin,

 

I have had both lenses. I think the Noctilux is a wonderful lens and if my arthritic hands had been able to cope with it, I would have it still. It produces unique looking images. There is really nothing else like it.

 

The Voigtlander is a OK lens but not a lot more than that, with its USP the f1.2 speed. Occasionally its low contrast can work in your favour, if you take a lot of dawn or evening shots. However it is not an everyday lens IMHO, performing poorly in bright sunlight, with a strong tendency to suffer from flare and veiling glare, which can knock its already low contrast back to close to zero. It is also big and heavy although I think slightly better handing than the Noctilux due to being a bit smaller in diameter and longer. The CV 35/1.2 is never particularly sharp,emphasized by the low contrast. In its favour it has remarkably little aperture shift. It is also a good lens for IR photography. I am selling mine now I have bought a 35/1.4 ASPH Lux, which I hope will also replace my 35/2 Biogon, meaning one less lens to carry.

 

Wilson

[ashwinrao1]

Yeah, I figured that there would be a difference on some order of magnitude. I have a 35 'cron ASPH which is much sharper. I do want a low light performed and figure to use the lower contrast of the Nokton to my advantage. We'll see. SOme people seem quite negative on the Nokton. Others seem to love it. Here's an example of a shot I took with it yesterday....Seems pretty sharp wide open within its field of focus.

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!

[gravastar]

Yeah, I figured that there would be a difference on some order of magnitude. I have a 35 'cron ASPH which is much sharper. I do want a low light performed and figure to use the lower contrast of the Nokton to my advantage. We'll see. SOme people seem quite negative on the Nokton. Others seem to love it. Here's an example of a shot I took with it yesterday....Seems pretty sharp wide open within its field of focus.

For my sins I have the chrome and black paint versions of the 35mm 1.2 Nokton. I suspect there can be a noticeable sample to sample variation. I find there's a difference in the central resolution at full aperture between the two lenses on the M8. The black one will nearly always produce moire at full aperture if the subject contains fine detail such as a bank note, the chrome does not. @ f1.4 the black lens is a very good match for the Summilux ASPH. Also the chrome has a smaller field of view than my other 35mm lenses, maybe it's focal length is near the longest allowable design limit. It's not a bad lens by any means though.

 

Bob.

[gmaurizio]

Ashwin, it is mostly a matter of taste, FOV, and wallet. Both are fantastic lenses, not the kings of sharpness but with a certain personality. I find the Noctilux on the M8 is too long and not as useful as it would be on a FF body. The price of the Nocti has become outrageous, since for $6,000 you can get a D3 and a Nikon AIS 50mm F1.2 and even keep some money (the D3-50mm AIS F1.2 beats the M8 Nocti in spades, in my experience).

That being said, I sold my Nocti while I kept the CV silver 35mm F1.2, with no regrets whatsoever.

You might just wait for the upcoming CV 35mm F1.4 Nokton, that promises to be one hell of a lens.

Of course, if brand recognition and the Leica feel are your thing, by all means get a Nocti. Be aware of the possible need to send it for a few weeks to SOLMS, and the fact that focus shift is INEVITABLE in the F 2.0-4.0 range, if the lens focuses right on at F1.0-F1.4.

[Dan States]

Had the Noctilux, have the Nokton. Would never go back. The Nokton handles better, is smaller and contrary to others experience above, never flares on me. The Nokton has zero focus shift and looks great even at .7 meters.

 

Of course, if the Nokton had a Leica badge on it it would cost $6K and we'd all be raving about it's performance:D

[terrycioni]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Without commenting on the Noctilux (which can be dangerous on any Leica forum - the cult of the Noctilux lives on). I will say the VC 35mm F1.2 on the M8 is a stellar performer. I don't use it as often as I could and should.

 

Here are two flickr links to the same 39 images - first one is the flickr slideshow thingie..

 

Terry Cioni's slideshow on Flickr

 

or

 

Nokton 35mm F1.2 VC - a photoset on Flickr

 

A good point made earlier is on the M8 Nokton is approximately a 46mm lens versus the 50mm being a 65mm but then is is all preference. You can shoot the Nokton wide-open and it is fun.

 

Cheers. Terry.

[terrycioni]

Had the Noctilux, have the Nokton. Would never go back. The Nokton handles better, is smaller and contrary to others experience above, never flares on me. The Nokton has zero focus shift and looks great even at .7 meters.

 

Of course, if the Nokton had a Leica badge on it it would cost $6K and we'd all be raving about it's performance:D

 

Dan, you are a very very brave man. Kudos!

 

I agree my Nokton does not suffer from FLARE. What is somewhat sad is I had to stick a UV/IR filter on it.

 

Cheers. Terry

[neelin]

 

Nokton 35mm F1.2 VC - a photoset on Flickr

Terry.

 

An excellent gallery Terry, I'm glad I went through it (except for the fact that it's -16 here, oh-well it was -31 + windy yesterday, and Vancouver looks REAL fine right now).

[terrycioni]

An excellent gallery Terry, I'm glad I went through it (except for the fact that it's -16 here, oh-well it was -31 + windy yesterday, and Vancouver looks REAL fine right now).

 

-16, yikes. It is cold here at least for Vancouver. We are having plenty of sun and blue sky right now but today was a chilly +6 C.

 

Saturday at least in my neck of the woods (Burnaby) we had snow - mind you once I drove a few kilometers west into Vancouver - it was just good old rain and not very heavy at that. By noon Saturday morning it was a glorious day, It has been a strange winter here on the Coast.

[marknorton]

Terri, would you like to compare the Noctilux and the Noct-Nikkor which I know you have?

 

My Noctilux has just come back from its third trip to Solms and seems at last to be working. I've also recently bought a normal Nikon 50/1.2 which is a far from shabby performer on a D3 - I'm on the lookout for a Noct-Nikkor but they are as rare as rocking-horse-you-know-what.

[geoffreyg]

Terry -

Nice shots. Would you give some tips as to what typical f stops were used - for example, some of the street shots, or the camera "sales shots" inside (man holding cameras)? Good OOF rendition, just wondering was it like f. 4/5.6 or something faster?

 

The CV seems quite nice, esp. for the price.

 

Geoff

[terrycioni]

Hi folks,

 

I will go back and take a look at the Nokton shots as this lens is not coded other than the wide-open shots I won't be able to accurately tell what F stop I was using - I kept notes but where they are is anyones guess.

 

Mark, I sold my Noctilux awhile back. I do have many images shot with the NOCTI mostly film. My sense is with the flexibility of digital post processing and on the fly ISO changeability the 50mm F1.4 ASPH Summilux is unbeatable on the M8, negating the need for a very very expensive F1 (others will disagree about this). Indeed I believe the Summilux is probably the best 50mm lens ever produced and certainly makes a more useable 50mm lens over-all. This is all opinion of course - I have owned the Noctilux not once but twice and it is total cache on a Leica M.

 

The NOCT NIKKOR is pretty special for night shooting - does pretty well stopped down although not it's forte if you can lay your hands on one do so. Exposure edge to edge was beyond my expectation from the first time I used this lens, especially being used to the NOCTI performance.

 

Recently I bought a 58mm F1.4 Nokton AiS from cameraquest.com. When time permits I will compare all three lenses, 58mm Noct, 58mm Nokton, and 35mm Nokton. That all said, all three a excellent lenses, as is the NOCTI.

 

Cheers. Terry.

[terrycioni]

Terry -

Nice shots. Would you give some tips as to what typical f stops were used - for example, some of the street shots, or the camera "sales shots" inside (man holding cameras)? Good OOF rendition, just wondering was it like f. 4/5.6 or something faster?

 

The CV seems quite nice, esp. for the price.

 

Geoff

 

The Camera Sales shots - I found some notes and they were shot at F8. I have shot primarily between 8 to 1.2 so far. I really did buy this lens to shoot wide-open. All the indoor shots of the June camera club meeting were shoot wide-open.

 

Thanks for looking and your kind comments. This lens for the price has a very good value to performance ratio. It does suffer from one problem - very simply it is not a Leica lens if it were it would have cult status and cost 5000$. I say this with all due respect for Leica lenses. The 50 F1.4ASPH and the 75 F2.0ASPH Leica lenses are simply without equal in my opinion.

 

Best to all. Terry.

[RobertW]

Can't see myself buying the Noctilux, I'm not that good of a photographer.

 

So for me, when I wanted fast, I went for the Nokton. It beats my 35mm Biogon in terms of centre sharpness (wide-open), its easier to focus, but much larger and heavier. As mentioned above, if you can give up the half stop, you might consider the new CV 35 f/1.4.

 

Best

Rob

[wlaidlaw]

Can't see myself buying the Noctilux, I'm not that good of a photographer.

 

So for me, when I wanted fast, I went for the Nokton. It beats my 35mm Biogon in terms of centre sharpness (wide-open), its easier to focus, but much larger and heavier. As mentioned above, if you can give up the half stop, you might consider the new CV 35 f/1.4.

 

Best

Rob

 

Rob,

 

You must either be lucky enough have an exceptional Nokton or a poor Biogon. My 35 Biogon, which I am selling along with my Nokton, walks all over my Nokton for centre and edge sharpness even at f2, where the Biogon is not at its best. If you look at Erwin Puts' MTF figures, that is borne out, where the resolving power of the Biogon is way higher than that of the Nokton. The Biogon also has miles higher contrast than the Nokton, which can some times be a disadvantage. The Biogon tends to make shadows very black.

 

Wilson

[sean_reid]

Of course, if the Nokton had a Leica badge on it it would cost $6K and we'd all be raving about it's performance:D

 

<G> You're going to catch it now for actually writing that when most of us were just thinking it.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

Rob,

 

You must either be lucky enough have an exceptional Nokton or a poor Biogon. My 35 Biogon, which I am selling along with my Nokton, walks all over my Nokton for centre and edge sharpness even at f2, where the Biogon is not at its best. If you look at Erwin Puts' MTF figures, that is borne out, where the resolving power of the Biogon is way higher than that of the Nokton. The Biogon also has miles higher contrast than the Nokton, which can some times be a disadvantage. The Biogon tends to make shadows very black.

 

Wilson

 

Hi Wilson,

 

I think you may have a mediocre copy of the Nokton (as can happen with lenses from any maker). MTF measures contrast and resolution together so one can not rely upon it to describe resolution per se. The Zeiss ZM lenses tend to have higher contrast than most lenses and the Nokton is a moderate, rather than low, contrast lens. *All else being equal* (though it never is) a high contrast lens will always come up roses on MTF charts when compared to a lower contrast lens with similar resolution.

 

Take a look at my 35 mm lens review again, if you'd like, to see how (good copies of) the two compare. When both lenses are focused precisely, the Nokton shows stronger resolution on center than the ZM but the ZM shows stronger resolution in the corners. (In the corners at F/2.0, the Nokton is more similar, in resolution, to the current 35 Cron).

 

You're right about the flare resistance.The current Zeiss lenses have the best flare resistance, overall, of any lens line I've tested. The Nokton isn't especially flare prone but its performance doesn't match the ZM 35 in that respect.

 

Most pictures we all make are slightly out of focus but a lens with higher contrast makes pictures that almost always tends to seem "sharper" than those from a more moderate contrast lens. Once contrast is levelled in post, however, surprising things can happen. The high contrast Zeiss lenses tend to make pictures that dazzle the eye (straight from the camera) but if one looks closely, the detail is often also there in the pictures made with lower contrast lenses.

 

If you use the Nokton a lot, I'd have the focus checked on yours and, maybe, consider trying another copy.

 

Lastly, I know that high contrast lenses can be quite seductive, sometimes fooling the eye into thinking those lenses are also much higher in resolution. This is especially true for photographers who, understandably, don't like to do a lot of work in post.

 

------------------------------------

 

Ashwin,

 

Depth of field alone makes it nearly impossible to compare a 50/1.0 and a 35/1.2. There are too many confounding variables. The Noct and Nok have different characters in their drawing but both are very good lenses and capable of excellent results. But comparing them really is an apples to oranges kind of thing. The best comparison for a 50/1.0 is another 50/1.0.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[sean_reid]

It beats my 35mm Biogon in terms of centre sharpness (wide-open),

Best

Rob

 

I saw exactly that same result in my testing. But the Biogon is the champ in the corners.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[sean_reid]

Rob,

You must either be lucky enough have an exceptional Nokton or a poor Biogon.

Wilson

 

I think he might have typical copies of both.

 

Cheers,

 

Sean