Archived posting to the Leica Users Group, 2000/07/13

[Author Prev] [Author Next] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Author Index] [Topic Index] [Home] [Search]

Subject: Re: [Leica] Nikkor 50/1.4 LTM
From: "Ken Iisaka" <>
Date: Thu, 13 Jul 2000 22:24:55 -0700
References: <> <>

> LUGgites:
> I'm still doing my evaluation of whether/how much to upgrade my outfit
> of IIIf and screw mount lenses.  What the general opinion regarding
> 1950s Nikkor 50mm f/1.4 LTM is compared to the Leica lenses.  I've got
> one in very nice shape, perfect glass.  I know it's a quite a bit
> than my old Summitar 50/2 was in the "f/4 and wider" category.
> Somebody in a camera store told me that actually the Nikkor is almost
> good as a Summilux 50/1.4 [...ducking any incoming projectiles], and
> Erwin Puts says good things about the old 50 'Lux.
> Has anyone here compared the Nikkor 50/1.4 to any of the pre-aspheric
> lenses?  Am I going to be happy with this lens if I end up getting a
> Summicron, or am I going to lust after a 50 Summicron, too?  I have no
> intention of getting rid of the Nikkor, as it ought to be good for
> available light even if I have a Summicron.
> Facts? Opinions? Barking dogma?  Inquiring minds wanna know...

Being heavily based on Zeiss Sonnar 50/1.5, Nikkor 50/1.4 was a fine
performer for the era.  It did indeed easily outperformed Summarit, but
it would be a stretch to say that Nikkor was better than Summilux.

Nikkor and Sonnar suffers from severe vignetting at their wide
apertures, resulting in rugby ball bokeh pattern that swirls around the
centre of the image.  Noctilux vignettes more, but at least the bokeh is
smoother and more pleasing.

The optical formula of black S-mount 50/1.4 which were introduced in the
sixties are a different formula, based on double-Gauss design.

In reply to: Message from "Peter A. Klein" <> ([Leica] Nikkor 50/1.4 LTM)