Using a Voigtländer Nokton 35mm f/1.2 with Nikon D700

<p>Hello all!<br>

I do lot of low light photography and I tend to use more and more good quality fast primes. I have the 2.8 Nikon zooms - I have no complaint about it - but I simply find that I take better pictures with fast prime lenses. One of the last addition was the Nikon 50/1.2 AI and I love it as much as I love the 85/1.4. And this is my favorite lens. </p>

<p>I have some bucks left in the pocket with the purpose to add a good fast prime to my lens kit. By the way I became very particular when buying stuff like this and I really want to buy things that I'll keep for ever. I am not like the guys that are purchasing stuff for a while and then sell it for whatever they get and buy something else.</p>

<p>Looking around I found on the market the Voigtländer Nokton 35mm f/1.2 for Leica and I wonder if there is any adapter from Leica to Nikon and also if anybody here tried to use Leica lenses, eventually this particular lens :-) on a Nikon body. Any advice on this topic will be greatly appreciated. I plan to use this lens on a D700 / D300 combo if this can work.</p>

<p>I also know about Zeiss Distagon 35/2 and Nikon 35/2 lenses. I know that it is very good stuff but I wonder if anybody here has experience with both Leica 35/1.2 and Zeiss 35/2 (or Nikon 35/2). If so, please share some of your input please to help me take a decision. </p>

<p> </p>

<p> Without going into all the reasons why, which have been rehashed here repeatedly, non-F mount lenses do not adapt well to Nikon. My advice is that you would be farther ahead buying a Leica M9 and using that glass than any sort of screwing around with a cobbled-up solution trying to fit glass on a Nikon. Otherwise, go for the Zeiss F-mount lenses. </p>

<p>You can't have the Leica mount lens work on a Nikon and still get to infinity, so the project is not feasible. Unless you shoot extremely close-ups all the time, with the risk of the focus plane coming inside the lens :).</p>

<p>The other way round, using an "F" lens on Leica, does work, and adapters for this purpose exist.</p>

<p>There is no chance to use any short flange to film distant range finder lens on any DSLR without the use of an optical adapter. But then, such an adapter if available and is any good will still screw up the focal length and f-stop, a waste for for such a fine lens. </p>

<p>You will need a Leica M series camera (ie: M9) to use this lens with no change to field of view and f-stop. An Olympus micro 4/3 mount will let you use this lens as a 70mm FOV (lot cheaper).</p>

<p>BTW: Have you look at the 35/1.4 Nikkor?</p>

<p>Mark, Bjorn and Tommy,</p>

<p>Thanks for your immediate answer to my question. I'm not happy with it :-) but it seems that I have to wait some more... either Voigtlander will make a version for Nikon, or Nikon will come on the market with a new 35/1.4 improved lens... If I'll get tired waiting such as miracle, I'll go for Zeiss.</p>

<p>Tommy, I considered for a while to buy Nikon 35/1.4 AIs but a friend of mine told me that in some comparative tests he found Zeiss much better than it at f2 on full frame. And at least Zeiss launched a chipped version... </p>

<p>Mihai,<br>

The 35mm ZF is one of the three best ZFs along with the 21mm and the 100mm. Anybody looking at a 35mm prime ought to consider this one closely as it outstrips anything Nikon has made (prime or zoom) comprehensively. I can pretty much guarantee that you will love it from what you say in your post. I now have six ZFs and they are all very good at worst and world class at best and the 35mm is one of the latter and is my most used lens these days. All my wide angle f2.8 zooms have gone now (including the 17-35mm which I thought I would take to the grave with me) and to all intents and purposes all I use now are these ZF beauties.</p>

<p>I love my Zeiss 35mm f/2.0 with no chip. On the D700, it is a trivial task to add permanent settings that will do the job of the chip (saving $181 or so). Alternatively, the Voigtlander Ultron 40mm f/2.0 SL-II<a name="desc" href="http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/534437-REG/Voigtlander_BA229DN_Ultron_40mm_f_2_0_SL_II.html" ></a> for Nikon has been very positively reviewed by Lloyd Chambers. I recently acquired the Voigtlander Nokton 58mm f/1.4 SL-II for Nikon and find it thrilling. It has made me take a great interest in recent Voigtlander offerings for Nikon.</p>

<p>James,</p>

<p>Good to hear your good experience with Zeiss glass. I am sure that finally I will buy either this 35mm or the 21mm (the only lens I am not completely happy from everything I have is Nikon 20/2.8 AF-D so I may replace it one day...) if not both! The 21mm is expensive but the 35mm is quite OK for the promise it contains! </p>

<p>Martha,</p>

<p>Thank you as well for your answer. I know that for D300 and D700 it's not complicate to tell the camera the info about some old unchiped glass... this is what I did with my nikon 50/1.2. VC Ultron is a good lens too but it seems that the bokeh is not so nice and since I work a lot wide open this is important for me. The 58 Nokton is in mail for me right now... and I am impatient to get it. I am sorry that the VC 20mm is only f3.5 because I really need faster glass. I have a friend who use it for landscape and architecture and it is really great and not expensive at all.</p>

<p>There is a Nikkor 35/1.4 if you don't mind doing your own focusing. Nice lens.</p>

<p>I am very happy with my 35/1.4AIS, on D200, D700, and film. It is a great lens, with a couple of issues one has to look out for. (See Bjorn's review. My experience is similar.) It is not perfect. Flare can be an issue at 1.4 and even 2.0 sometimes. But, I have been very pleased with it in low light situations, particularly if lower contrast. Candle light is enough to for good results with the D700+35/1.4! It is the FIRST lens I grab for my D700. </p>

<p>By the way, Mihai, if you like the Nikon 50/1.2, you might find the 35/1.4 to be very similar. They have similar lowered contrast/flare wide open, but still with good resolution. 1-2 stops in, they start to perform very well. </p>

<p>I have not used the Zeiss ZF. I imagine it can do somewhat better than the 30+ yr old Nikon 35/1.4 design. But, with very few exceptions, I can get excellent results with by Nikon from 2.0, and certainly 2.8 on. Yes, it would be nice to have that level of performance at 1.4, but the Zeiss does not even provide that as an option. Interestingly, I have some experience with another classic, the Leica Summicron-R 35 (last model) on my D700, thanks to Leitax mount. It is a very nice lens, but I can't say it is actually better than the Nikon. In particular, I would not replace my Nikon with the Leica. On film, I have some comparisons of the Nikon to two modern Zeiss rangefinder 35s: the 2.0 for contax G and the 2.0 ZM on Leica. As far as I can tell they are pretty comparable to the Nikon, except that the Zeiss ZM may handle flare wide open better than the Nikon. But, in terms of resolution, it seems no better. I would be surprised if the ZF is really better than the ZM, given the constraints of the SLR designs. The ZF is pretty big and clunky to handle, I find. </p>

<p>Thank you Fred for sharing your experience. I may end up trying to borrow or to rent both lenses to make my own opinion before to throw a bunch of money in this investment. </p>

<p>I have to admitt that I was biased by a friend of mine that tested the two at f2 and he claims that Zeiss is much better at that aperture. </p>

<p>I also bought recently a copy of 58/f1.4 Voigtlander Nokton and the build quality of this Cosina product impressed me a lot. I had no chance yet to work it seriously but I'm looking around for opportunities :-) This is my second MF lens and I believe that the next is 35!</p>