Nokton 40mm f1.4 vs Leica 35mm Lux Aspherical f1.4

[frederick_muller]

Now that the 40mm Nokton has been out for a while, has anyone managed

to compare its results to those obtained with the 35mm Lux Aspherical?

I've seen prior threads speculating that the Nokton design might be

an evolution of the older '63 Pre-Aspherical Summilux 35 design,

albeit benefitting from newer coating and manufacturing technology.

Not much around on actual test results though.

[david k.]

Frederic, there seems to have been some examples of what people have classified as poor OOF image with the Nokton wide open. Not sure if it improves stopped down.

 

The lens has been around for a while now, I would be interested to see if people still feel this way, regardless of how it compares to the Lux ASPH. They really aren't in the same price range.

[howard_cummer1]

Fred,

Please see:

 

http://www.photo.net/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=00AOXk

 

for a rough and ready comparo of several 40 / 35 mm lenses including the 35

Lux Asph and both the SC and MC Nokton f1.4

 

Cheers

Howard

[david_kieltyka]

Having owned all three lenses at one time or another I'd say if the Nokton is based on any Leitz lens it's the 40mm Summicron-C rather than the '60s-era 35mm Summilux. The two 40s render images quite similarly.

 

Here's a characteristic example of out-of-focus rendition from the Nokton & Cron-C. These are full-res crops from the Epson R-D1. I won't tell you which image comes from which lens...see if you can guess. Both taken at f/2 with the lenses focused to about 1.5m. The objects in the photo were about 3m from the camera.

 

-Dave-<div></div>

[david_kieltyka]

To give you a better idea of the content of the two crops above here's the same area at f/16. The objects are a digital video cable, Apple Jam Pack boxes (audio loops and software instruments for the Garageband app), a magazine, some software manuals & other miscellaneous stuff.

 

-Dave-<div></div>

[david_kieltyka]

I forgot to note that the white speckles in the f/16 crop are due to a long exposure (eight seconds) and me neglecting to turn on in-camera noise reduction (dark frame subtraction).

 

-Dave-

[vuk_vuksanovic]

dave.

 

if that bottom one isn't the summicron, i will sell all of my leica tomorrow.

 

vuk.

[ho_ho]

Pls! Pls let us know the truth! Which one from cron? I hope that the second one...

[h_c]

My bet says first one is most likely the 40mm nokton and the 2nd is the cron...

The bokeh on the nokton is a lot 'rougher' looking like the first one

BTW, i don't think the bokeh on the nokton is neccesarily bad, I think some people might

actually like it for certain shots

[bill_marshall1]

David, the 40 Nokton may well be based on the 6 element design of the 40 Summicron-C. You're probably right about that. The way that it resembles the pre-ASPH 35 Summilux is that both add a thin positive element in front of the the rear group of the otherwise fairly classical double Gauss design that was used in the Summicron design at these focal lengths. This technique was used to stretch the 35 Summicron to f/1.4 in the older Summilux design. In the same way, Cosina may have stretched the 40 Summicron to f/1.4 with this additional element to achieve the Nokton design.

 

Regarding performance characteristics, my guess is that it performs more like a 40 because it is a 40 and therefore has less of a problem with the issues that make a wider angle 35 so difficult to design at f/1.4. I think that this is demonstrated by the fact that Leica couldn't really solve these problems until it used aspherical elements in the more recent 35 Summilux design. Like Leica, Cosina also had to use aspherical elements in its faster 35's (Ultron & Nokton). The earlier attempt to use a modified double Gauss design in the Summilux without aspherics proved to be not so successful for such a wide maximum aperture. But it appears from the performance of the Nokton that it has been much more successful with the narrower 40 mm field of view.

[aizan_sasayama]

If it's harsh behind the plane-of-focus, it's smooth in front!

[mike dixon]

Are you sure both lenses were focused on exactly the same plane? This isn't just a difference in the quality of the bokeh--the bottom shot is more out-of-focus (just compare the size of the "blobs"). Is there a part of the two images that shows that both lenses are, in fact, focused on exactly the same plane?

[thomas t]

My guess is top Nokton, bottom Leica. And genuinely no offense to "bokeh" enthusiasts, but all it shows is that, all things being equal, one lens seems to be sharper than the other wide open (assuming Mike's concern about plane of focus is not at work here). this is already verified by the same subject photos from this test:

 

http://dc.watch.impress.co.jp/cda/review/2004/12/03/466.html

 

More importantly, how often do we really worry about the "bokeh" of HCB or Harvey, McCurry or Nachtwey's work? ;-) 2 of whom don't even use Leicas, and one used the Contax sonnar 1.5 for much of his body of work . They sure don't (didn't) miss the leica glow. regards

[monsoonphoto.net]

Well said, Mike.

[frederick_muller]

Mike's point is a good one ... there's nothing to register a common plane of focus ... still, the second shot looks more pleasing.

 

If this is a dumb question, it's only because I don't shoot digital: does choice of medium affect the appearance of bokeh? If this question isn't easily disposed of, I can raise it on a separate thread.

[frederick_muller]

I have to say I find the appearance of the first shot a little disturbing ... it looks like there's some double-imaging going on there :-(

[david_kieltyka1]

First off, both photos were focused on the same subject and to the same distance. Part of the difference in out-of-focus character may be attributable to the fact that the two lenses are not the same focal length. The Nokton is just a bit longer than the Summicron-C...maybe 42mm if the 'Cron-C is an even 40mm. The Nokton thus has slightly shallower DOF at a given aperture. I should also note this is the single-coated version of the Nokton.

 

Second, y'all guessed wrong. The first crop is the Summicron-C, the second the Nokton. At f/2 the 'Cron-C maintains higher local contrast into the corners ("in the field" as Erwin Puts would say) than the Nokton. This results in a somewhat edgier bokeh in this particular shot. But IMO overall it's a plus...the 'Cron-C is the more consistent of the two lenses across the frame at wider apertures.

 

Another thing about the Nokton not evident in these particular crops is its tendency to render the darker parts of sharp, high contrast areas with a slight red/purple tinge. I don't mean purple fringing, as often seen on compact digicams, but an overall purplish cast. I've seen the same thing on film with the CV 35mm f/2.5 II. The 'Cron-C renders these same areas without noticeable chromatic aberration. To be fair this doesn't show up in 8x12" or even 12x18" inkjet prints but is visible on-screen at "actual pixels" resolution.

 

Stopped down the Nokton has higher overall contrast than the 'Cron-C. Resolution is so close, at least with my samples of the lenses, that I'd call it a draw. Both are fine performers. On film I might prefer the Nokton. But on the R-D1, with its perfectly usable ISO 1600 and its sensor's affinity for lenses with lower-than-modern overall contrast, I'm sticking with the venerable Summicron-C.

 

I'll post a web-sized version of the full photo plus full-res crops of the point-of-focus with both lenses when I get home this evening.

 

-Dave-

[frederick_muller]

Vuk, when's the auction start? :-)

[steve_chan5]

A few of us have been saying that the Summicron-C has ring bokeh, but people seem to assume that any pre-asph Summicron is going to be the ne plus ultra of bokeh. FWIW, I think the Zeiss Planar 45/2 on the G series had nicer bokeh as well (but perhaps not as much sharpness across the field).

 

Someone asked about digital capture vs. film in terms of bokeh rendering: no I don't believe it will effect things, so as long as there isn't any processing (sharpening) done to the files. But even if you process the files, so long as you are consistent, you should still be able to do comparisons of lens A vs. lens B for the purposes of checking bokeh.

[stephen_w.]

Many of the B&W photos I've seen posted taken by the 1.4 CV and the Noct' look fine Bokehwise. However, I've seen those nasty swirls when those lenses are used for color shots. How could this be? Has anyone noticed this, too?

[david_kieltyka]

Here are full-res crops from the point of focus in my example photos, 40mm Summicron-C on top and CV Nokton below as before.

 

-Dave-<div></div>

[david_kieltyka]

And finally a scaled-down version of the full photo. This is from the 'Cron-C, again at f/2. The photo shows part of my music room, a former spare bedroom now set aside for instruments and recording gear. (Translate: my stuff was all over the house and I had to clean up or else. <g>)

 

IMO none of the Leitz/Leica 35mm lenses have particularly smooth bokeh wide open. The most coherent OOF is in the f/5.6 range with a close-focused subject. This is true of the Summicron-C and CV Nokton as well.

 

-Dave-<div></div>

[._._z]

Vuk's busy preparing his ebay listing.

[vuk_vuksanovic]

vuk observes oversharpening in photoshop and begins to question findings.

[frederick_muller]

Dave, it's wierd, but the cron-c definitely seems to show double imaging of the digital cable. It's apparent even in the larger scale shot you just posted. Maybe I'm just losing it, staring at the same pic. It doesn't seem to occur in other picture areas ... edges of the curtains, or the bar in the lower middle of the picture. Just in the digital cable that you highlighted earlier.

 

Regarding the "swirley" bokeh with color, others have mentioned it in previous posts. Darn if both the shots from the cron and the Nokton don't look swirley to me. But again, maybe it is just the rendition of that particular subject area.