Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2003/09/15
[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]Actually, if one is strapped for cash, one should consider the Cosina Nokton 50 mm f 1.5. There are those who hate it's Bokah, but then there are those of us who don't. And at about $450, this lens that even Erwin Putts has said is a tiny bit sharper than the Summilux - if not as consistent lens to lens - is a real bargain. B. D. - -----Original Message----- From: owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us [mailto:owner-leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us] On Behalf Of Patrick (Washington, DC) Sent: Monday, September 15, 2003 2:20 PM To: leica-users@mejac.palo-alto.ca.us Subject: Re: [Leica] Nikkor 50/1.4 vs. Canon 50/1.2 vs. Summilux 50/1.4 I was faced with the same issue a while back and finally deciced on a latest version 50'lux. I mainly shoot available light environmental portraits, thus the corner sharpness is not a big issue for me, in fact, it many times enhances b&w portraits at f1.4 or f2.0. Combine that 'classic' look with the fact that it is relatively speaking compact, leightweigh, carries the same filter size as many other Leica lenses, has a superior build quality/feel, and finally holds it value better, it wasn't such a hard choice. If one is strapped for cash, paying $1,000 for a minty 50'lux might not be the "value" per se. Cheers, Patrick - --- Peter Klein <pklein@2alpha.net> wrote: > At 10:23 PM 9/13/03 -0700, "Richard F. Man" <richard@imagecraft.com> > wrote: > > >Yes, one of the perpetual comparison question. Which one is "best" > wide > >open at 1.4, and how soft is the Canon at 1.2? > > > >Looks like there's a Nikkor 1.4 and a Canon 1.2 for sale right now, > I am > >somewhat tempted.... > > Richard: Go to http://www.dantestella.com/technical.html > Peruse the sections "Canon lenses for Leica" and "Nikkor lenses for > Leica." They will tell you a great deal about these lenses, with > some > sample pictures. > > I used to have a 50/1.4 Nikkor. It was decent wide open and close up, > with a kind of retro look. Low contrast, but quite usable with some > contrast > adjustments for printing. Because it is optimized for wide open and > close > up, the outer areas of the picture suffer even when stopped down. > > Both the Nikkor and the Canon are Zeiss Sonnar deriviatives. This > means that they are very sharp in the center stopped down even one > stop, with a > noticeable fall-off of sharpness towards the edges. They also give > ni-sen > (double-line) bokeh. Out-of focus highlights can have a dim core and > a > bright edge. Lines can actually double. Some find this > objectionable. Some don't care. > > I sold my Nikkor and picked up a used Voigtlander (really Cosina) > 50/1.5 Nokton, which remains my available light 50 today. At > $260-$275 for a good > sample used, it is a real bargain, and may actually be cheaper than > the > older lenses. You can see some sample pictures on my Web site > at: http://www2.2alpha.com/~pklein/lhsa2002/ (click on the .htm > files > that begin with 2 digits). > > Some samples pictures with the 50/1.4 Nikkor, all wide open: > http://www2.2alpha.com/~pklein/currentpics/paula_harpo.htm > http://www2.2alpha.com/~pklein/currentpics/charlie_xmas.htm > http://www2.2alpha.com/~pklein/temp/marianne.jpg > > I don't own a 50 Summilux, but my friend Mark Davison does. A while > back we got together and had a shootout between my 50 Nokton and his > Summilux. What we found was consistent with what Erwin Puts says. > The > Summilux is a tiny bit sharper in the very center, the Nokton is > significantly sharper overall. The Summilux is smoother in terms of > transition from in-focus to out-of-focus areas, and has a bit better > flare > control. It has a classic look. The Nokton has more "bite" to the > image, > a more modern look, with wirier out-of-focus rendition. > > The Nokton can have a "bokeh" problem--sometimes out-of-focus > highlights stand out glaringly. The Nokton gives such highlights a > sharp edge, while > with the Summilux, they usually fade out at the edge. However, > either lens > can give ugly bokeh under some circumstances, and it's hard to > predict > exactly when. And I must say that my 35/1.4 Summilux ASPH can give > bokeh > just as ugly as the Nokton sometimes, but nobody complains about that > lens. > > Bottom line is that either lens will give you good pictures, with the > > Nokton giving you an occasional bokeh hearbreak. Other than that, > lighting and technique are more important than the mostly subtle > differences between > the optics, especially with ISO 400 and higher film. I would > recommend > either lens over the old Nikkor or Canon unless you are looking for a > truly > "retro" look. > > One of these days I may pick up a 50 Summilux or Noctilux. In the > meantime, the Nokton is so good and such a bargain that I am content > to > wait until the right time and the right lens comes along. Others > disagree--Nathan Wajsman had a Nokton, which he sold because of the > bokeh, > and bought a Summilux. On the other hand, B.D. Colen uses a Nokton > in his > professional work. > > If you do get a 50 Summilux, make sure to get one with a serial number > over 1,844,001. The 50/1.4 Nikkor will edge out the earlier Summilux. > Any > > Summilux over the above serial number is the current optical formula. > I believe the most recent one focuses a little closer, 0.7 meter > instead of 1 > meter. > > Hope this is helpful! > > --Peter Klein > Seattle, WA > > -- > To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? Yahoo! SiteBuilder - Free, easy-to-use web site design software http://sitebuilder.yahoo.com - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html - -- To unsubscribe, see http://mejac.palo-alto.ca.us/leica-users/unsub.html