VC Nokton 40/1.4 Classic SC Test Shots

Here are some photos from the 40/1.4. Leica M3; Ilford XP2; Nikon Coolscan IVED;

Vuescan; No sharpening done.

Damn. Let's try that again.<div></div>

2<div></div>

3<div></div>

4<div></div>

5<div></div>

Alan,

 

I think the lens is quite good, especially for the $$$, Yen, etc.

There is nothing in that speed for reasonable sums.

 

Les

Alan are these crops of full frames?

I have new VC 35 f2.5 and center is fine but edges suffer from vignetting below 5.6.

Looks like a fine lens, especially considering its size and price. Are the pics full frame? If they are, the vignetting at f1.4 seems quite reasonable.

On the 40 mm lens with 50 framelines issue...

 

I converted my 40 Rokkor to bring up the 35 frame and I would do it again. I assume the same could be done with the VC.

If you want more info search the forum, Al Kaplan has written a brief instruction on it.

Andreas, it doesn't matter with an M3...there is no 35mm frame. :-) Judging by his "vanity" shot Alan must be using the entire finder to frame his photos.

 

-Dave-

I'm loving my VC 40/1,4 Nokton. I'm using it on an RA3 but have an M3 coming that I will try it on too. Some say the bokeh is a bit rough from some shots I posted earlier but I think the background of some chain link fences in some of my shots might have given a bad impression of the bokeh. Certainly looks pretty good in these shots.

Even if it's not a perfect lens at f1.4, it certainly looks better than the old 35 Summilux at that aperture, and it seems nearly as compact. That's a big plus, IMO.

It sounds like this lens was designed as a compromise between the 35mm Summilux (except a fraction longer) and the 50mm Summicron (except slightly wider and faster) without all the cost of the Leitz glass. If one didn't have either of those lenses then I am sure this 40mm 1.4 lens would seem very attractive.

 

It would also be interesting if one didn't already have a 40mm f2.0 rokker lens or equal. It seems a little bit redundant to pick this guy up if you already have an equally as good lens except one stop slower.

 

It doesn't however sound as useful for the RD-1 as it's going to be something like 64mm, which sort of negates the advantage of it being a supposedly "slightly wide" lens.

 

Hahhah! I love the obligatory bathroom shot!

 

Post more pix please! Thanks!

>> It doesn't however sound as useful for the RD-1 as it's going to be something like 64mm, which sort of negates the advantage of it being a supposedly "slightly wide" lens. <<

 

Well, with the R-D1 you just adjust to the fact that 40mm is no longer slightly wide but rather slightly long. I've used the 40 'Cron-C as my RF normal lens for the past couple years. In the late 1990s I used a 60mm Macro Elmarit as my Leica SLR normal lens. Different views but equally useful...and I like 'em both.

 

-Dave-

The background in the wide-open Rahmen shot looks pretty bad -- jangly, busy, unpleasant. I think the old 35 Summilux is a lot better than that.

>"It sounds like this lens was designed as a compromise between the 35 Summilux and the 50 Summicron without all the cost of the Leitz glass."

 

I doubt it, David. Camera companies are all about selling cameras. Cosina collaborated with Epson in the development of the RD-1. In the process, a 1:1 finder was developed for the RD-1. My guess is that Cosina saw an opportunity: make a big splash by putting the 1:1 finder on a film camera. The problem was that 35 mm framelines wouldn't fit in the finder, given the Bessa base line. Voila! 40 mm framelines were the solution. Of course, a 40 mm lens was needed since Cosina didn't have such a RF lens in their stable. So, make the splash even bigger: 1:1 finer AND f/1.4 lens! So, rather than developing a 40 mm lens in search of a camera, my guess is that the 40 mm lens came in the back door & that Cosina specifically avoided competing with other existing lenses at the speed niche they had already established - which has been the CV way.

Thanks for posting these pics Alan.

Alan,

 

Thanks for the shots, I like the way you see things. But then again, I don't think I've ever seen you take bad shots with any of your lenses. Just goes to show it is the photographer, cheers.

Maybe I'm missing something but, IMHO, the lens doesn't seem particularly great in any way -- except maybe price.

I really like the look of the first two shots taken at f2.8, they seem to be relatively sharp and the oof highlights look smooth. The last three shots at f1.4, however, seem relatively fuzzy at the point of focus with a harsher bokeh. Maybe the different performance at various apertures account for the conflicting reports and uneven images we are seeing on the web. Anyone seen a nice smooth image from this lens taken at 1.4 or 2?

This one is the 40 Nokton at f/1,4 and seems pretty smooth to me.<div></div>

Try again.<div></div>

Richard,

 

Was that alley shot taken with the SC version or the MC version of the 1.4 lens?

Henryk, Kevin: Yes, these are full-frame images. The vignetting is obviously there, but I

don't mind it as I think adds to the "feel" of the pictures, especially in B&W. Still, some

people consider it an optical flaw.