Which 40mm lens is best ?? Nokton or Summicron ?

hello,

 

I am thinking about getting a voigtlander bessa r3a, and i wanted to get a 40mm lens for it. what lens do

you think is best? a 40mm nokton 1.2 or a summicron 2.0? thanks.

The 40mm Nokton has a maximum aperture of f1.4 not f1.2. The Voigtlander 35mm Nokton does, however, have a maximum aperture of f1.2 and is quite a "large" lens when compared to other rangefinder lenses.

<p>

That said, many people will say that the Summicron has a much more pleasing bokeh versus the Nokton. I usually get flamed for saying that bokeh is subjective (since there is no standardized bokeh "measurement system" or "units") but if you can handle the bokeh of the Nokton and you need the f1.4 maximum aperture then there is no other choice out there. If you do not see a need for the f1.4 aperture then the Summicron is known to be a very sharp lens for the money.

<p>

Cheers,<br>

Dave

Hi,

 

Do not forget, there is also the Rokkor version of the Summicron C 40/2,

 

cheers Steve.

None of them.

Zeiss Sonnar 40mm/2.8.

Wow, what a little gem!

My 2 cents for the original 40mm Summicron C -- took me 40 years to acknowledge it's the best all-around Leica lens & you can get one in MINT condition for $350.00<div></div>

Ditto for the 40 Summicron and Nocton, but don't forget the Pentax 43mm L 1.9 lens.

And there's the really kewl looking Chiyoko Super Rokkor 45/2.8 (usually cheap) and the Olympus Zuiko 40/2.8 (usually expensive).

Are you serious? The Summicron wins this one hands down on all counts except the one-step faster speed of the Nokton.

 

The Cron is the standard by which a great many lenses are measured. The Nokton is cheaper and faster if that is your criteria. Its not a bad lens. The Cron however is better built and has better boke.

"Are you serious? The Summicron wins this one hands down on all counts except the one-step faster speed of the Nokton.

 

The Cron is the standard by which a great many lenses are measured. The Nokton is cheaper and faster if that is your criteria. Its not a bad lens. The Cron however is better built and has better boke."

 

I must disagree with most of this post. Its a valid and serious question to ask and you imply that the answer is obvious? Its not. I own both Rokkors the Summicron and the MC Nokton and the Summicron definately doesnt win on all counts. Contrast and flare resistance are easily superior on the Nokton. At f2 and f2.8 the resolution of the Nokton is also slighty better but by f4 they are the same except that the Nokton still has higher contrast.

 

In build quality I would agree that the Summicron has the slight advantage but this is lost when you consider using filters on both lenses, the Nokton using common 43mm filters and the Summicron using the awkward series 5.5.

 

As someone above has mentioned the bokeh concept can often be one of preference and a comparison posted on the Rangefinder forum showed that at the same aperture they both have similar bokeh and its mainly at 1.4 the Nokton bokeh can be a bit hard on the eye.

 

I wont deny that the Summicron is a great lens and a favourite of mine but the lens on which many others are judged?? Come on now this lens is often overlooked entirely and to why it can still be found for $250.00. If it was a standard setting lens that others have always been judged against it would be as costly as other Leica lenses.

 

Your choice should be based on your priorities. If you shoot into the sun alot then get the Nokton. If you need 1.4 then only one direct for you too. If you want the most compact package and dont need the speed then go with the Summicron.

<p> I've had the Nokton MC, Cron-C and late, multicoated Rokkor-M. I've kept the Nokton MC and the Rokkor-M.

 

<p> I don't give the Cron-C any special points over the Nokton in terms of build quality, but others may feel differently. And in <a href=http://rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=14524&page=2>my own side by side comparisons of the Rokkor and Nokton</a>, the Nokton wins on sharpness and is at least as good on bokeh. The nokton also has excellent flare control in my experience, much better than the cron-c.

 

<p>Given that the rokkor and the cron-c are identical designs, this makes the decision between the Nokton and the Cron-C a no-brainer: <b>nokton</b>

My bad....I thought he was talking about the Summicron-M badboy.

Hi dear Peter. The Summicron C 40 mm f/ 2 is a very very good ultra sharp lens for my Leica CL. The VC Nokton is also an excellent choice, better in the few available light. If you often shoot in poor available light, take the VC Nokton 40 mm f/ 1,4 (or 35 mm f/ 1,2). Otherwise, the Summicron C 40 mm f/ 2 is a very good choice.

Ciao.

The "Zeiss Sonnar 4/2.8" mentioned above is a Zeiss design, but it's manufactured by Rollei, so you'll find it as a Rollei Sonnar 40/2.8." I agree that it's a little gem. Compact. Great build quality. Excellent resistance to flare. Warm colors. I don't own the others.

 

I suggest that anyone who doesn't like the bokeh of the Nokton at f/1.4 compare it with the bokeh of the Summicron at f/1.4.

Which 40mm is the best? Cron, VC, or Rokkor? It's hard to tell because it's similar to ask

"which is the best pianist? Gilels, Richter, or Horowitz?" I have all of them and more than

once tried to test which one is better with my M6. And to me the result is mostly the same.

Cron has something others don't have, and vice vesa. So, my advice is don''t waste your

time or money for that stuff, just take a look in some photo.webs and see what kind of

picture, color, sharpness.. you want to have, also which lens is fit to you (price, model,

style...) and go get it. Hang around in the downtown and shot some B&W and color rolls,

you'll find the joy of lens.

 

Moreover, do you think a combo of M7 and latest Cron which cost more than 5K can take

the best photos? I don't think so. Let come to Flickr.com and search for Leica M7 results to

compare to orthe cameras like Nikon FM2N or Nikon F3 or even old F2, for example. And

can you honestly tell M7 is much better? No, absolustely no. I believe good pictures come

from the one who know how to manage camera well, know the moment to take, the

special angles... more than the expensive gear. I saw one guy in Flickr.com has many M6,

M7, M8, Cron, Elmar... mostly branch new and I just saw he shows off his gear with many

posts but not a good photo from him. What a shame. I remember in an article that

someone said Leica Company had better to take the shutter out in the special editions,

heheh, that's true. I gonna tell you guys another funny story that when I took the photo for

my wedding poster by some cameras with remotes: M6, Hassy 503CW, Nikon FM2N, 1Ds

MK2 and canon S80 point and shot *-) at the same angle, speed, light... and then printed

out at the same size: 5x7 (Hassy after resize to 3:4) and asked my wife to choose the best

one and she took the photo from FM2N. Of course I can't use FM2N to make a poster, and

I finally used from 503W. But at the small size, which you use daily, the cheaper gear still

can give you nice photos.

Personally I own the Summicron-C

 

I think that the Summicron-C is over-rated by those who own it and under-rated by those who don't.

 

It's a lens built to Summicron specifications, so we know that it's going to be a nice sharp lens. However, in terms of sharpness it isn't quite as sharp as the 35/2 Summicron that we all know and love. But it's certainly above average - some people (maybe not in this thread) have quoted the Summicron-C as sharper than the 35/2 'cron. Not true.

 

In terms of Bokeh, I actually find it hard to get into a situation where I can focus close enough to really show the bokeh of the lens, an advantage the 50/2 has over it, but when you get into a situation where you can really see it, the bokeh shines. Very smooth. The 10 bladed aperture ring really shows it's worth, and it's pretty damn creamy.

 

The thing is that the aperture ring is a little bit loose on a lot of the lenses I've encountered, allowing it to open up a mini-step up. And opening it up too quickly can loosen the blades a little bit, distorting the bokeh just a tad. Noticeabl only if you're looking for it, but we're all a**holes who like to be a bit on the arrogant side of things here and so naturally we ARE looking for it.

 

The nokton has the extra half-step of speed that can be useful and it's what appeals to speed freaks amongst us and why they will fight die-hard style to say the Nokton is better than the Summicron-C.

 

The Nokton does lose a little bit of sharpness on the wider apertures and doesn't match the Summicron-C to the sharpness, until about f/5.6 - at f/5.6 I find it hard to tell much difference.

 

How about Bokeh? Well... like many people say, it IS subjective. However, I have t agree with the general consensus. It doesn't match up to the Leica standard. I have a feeling it's to do with how they form the aperture blades - but it's not as glowing and it's not quite as pronounced and not quite as round. And it doesn't have that Leica 'feel' to it.

 

In the end, a good photograph can be taken by either of them and the lens won't make that much of a difference. You skills to compose and expose will make or break the lens you use.

 

The extra speed won't make that much difference, but neither will the added sharpness or glow, it's rare that you'll find yourself in a situation where either would make a massive difference.

 

Personally, I kept the Summicron-C and I love it. If you want that extra half-step of speed then take the Nokton. Either way, you won't have made a bad choice.

 

I guess it boils down to what you find more important - sharpness and bokeh or speed.

<p>Why not the Voightlander 40mm F2 Ultron New Version? </p>