Can I compare a Voigt Nokton 35mm f1.4 to a Leica 35mm???
- Thread starter benwal
- Start date
Royale With Cheese
Senior Member
a great meal is cooked up by a great chef, not his stove, not his pan that makes a meal great.
themageman
New Member
If shot at f/1.4 there is a spectacular difference! Once you go pass f/5.6 then the results are not major!
virtualme78
Senior Member
surely there's a difference when you go into details otherwise it doesn't justify the astronomical price for a leica one. you can refer to this:
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2009/12/02/the-voigtlander-nokton-35-1-4-mc-lens-review/
http://www.stevehuffphoto.com/2009/12/02/the-voigtlander-nokton-35-1-4-mc-lens-review/
OTOH, the Japanese are playing/loving the old Leica lenses, and that's logical :bsmilie:
artspraken
New Member
Get Zeiss 35mm Biogon F2
PS. Ooops.I realise you want F1.4? Leica 35mm F1.4 got difference but imho not worth the price difference. Zeiss got no 35mm at F1.4.
Voightlander releasing 35mm F1.2 soon lei...
PS. Ooops.I realise you want F1.4? Leica 35mm F1.4 got difference but imho not worth the price difference. Zeiss got no 35mm at F1.4.
Voightlander releasing 35mm F1.2 soon lei...
Last edited:
rosewood1969
New Member
wow, words of wisdom by president of rf.sg!
All the philosophical aside, of course there is a difference.
I have a 35cron asph : this is by far the best lens I have (I own VL 50mm F1.1, ZM 25/2.8 and ZM 50/2.8). The cron is simply perfect every time : sharp and full of contrast wide open/close distance etc. It does not matter. no need to discuss extra sharpness when stopping down, focus shift. Also, buying a second hand 35 cron ASPH means you won't loose any money ever. In my opinion you can't go wrong with any good Leica lens whereas both ZM an VL - no matter how good they are and whether they have that unique drawing - means there is a compromise somewhere.
For reference : I have a perfect copy of the Nokton F1.1 but of course there is some focus shift from F2 to F5.6 visible (not a big deal in real life though), it draws and renders pretty harsh and is a bit soft wide open. The ZM planar is more easy to use then the Nokton, no focus shift but a little soft wide open. Even the ZM 25/F2.8 is a little soft wide open (and thats 2.8). Not the cron, just shoot F2.0 all day and you won't be disappointed
Just my 5 cents.....
I have a 35cron asph : this is by far the best lens I have (I own VL 50mm F1.1, ZM 25/2.8 and ZM 50/2.8). The cron is simply perfect every time : sharp and full of contrast wide open/close distance etc. It does not matter. no need to discuss extra sharpness when stopping down, focus shift. Also, buying a second hand 35 cron ASPH means you won't loose any money ever. In my opinion you can't go wrong with any good Leica lens whereas both ZM an VL - no matter how good they are and whether they have that unique drawing - means there is a compromise somewhere.
For reference : I have a perfect copy of the Nokton F1.1 but of course there is some focus shift from F2 to F5.6 visible (not a big deal in real life though), it draws and renders pretty harsh and is a bit soft wide open. The ZM planar is more easy to use then the Nokton, no focus shift but a little soft wide open. Even the ZM 25/F2.8 is a little soft wide open (and thats 2.8). Not the cron, just shoot F2.0 all day and you won't be disappointed
Just my 5 cents.....
Based on a simple price comparison, you could be able to get a VC 35/1.4, VC 28/2, VC 50/1.5 instead of a Leica 35/2 and still have change for a nice meal.
I personally feel that building the 'eye' and 'vision' for the shot is much more important than holding a coveted Leica glass.
After 5 years of photographing, and although I have a fair share of glass, I cannot say the same for 'keeper shots'.
I personally feel that building the 'eye' and 'vision' for the shot is much more important than holding a coveted Leica glass.
After 5 years of photographing, and although I have a fair share of glass, I cannot say the same for 'keeper shots'.
artspraken
New Member
nowadays i buy leica lens, it is so expensive i heartpain to use. end up buy leica lens keep in dry cabinet only.
i find that i use my zeiss lens alot more.
i find that i use my zeiss lens alot more.
Simple, sell all your other lenses and just stick to one... confirm you'll utilise it to the max!
Royale With Cheese
Senior Member
Simple, sell all your other lenses and just stick to one... confirm you'll utilise it to the max!
lol!
I'm more of a shooter's point of view.
I've shot with Junku thanks to Ox from IPA for bringing me along, 3 days of solid shooting. Burning an average of 2-4 rolls per day.
Junku shot Singapore entirely on one lens, one camera & if you've seen his pictures, they are amazing. So yea, when I ask myself the question, should I change my lenses to all Leica? or buy more gear?
I just cant justify doing it. I've yet to fully uterlise my gear to their maximum potential.
paapoopa
Senior Member
Hi Larry
I take a look at your photo blog, and I must say, there are a lot of beautiful pictures... i guess you are totally fine with whatever setup you having now.
unless you want a faster lens or a certain look from a certain lens, i think any other reason will only be to satisfied yourself in owning something that you want...
for myself, i come to a point that I will only buy a same focal length lens unless I am able to see the difference in the character/rendering from the lens.
just my 2 cents....
ZShutter
New Member
I feel that you hardly if ever need to go below f2.8 in most cases especially if you are just into street photography, unless your a bokeh person. Most of the time I only bring out my Zeiss 35mm Biogon f2.8 and it's enough. I'd rather spend more money on film. (by the way Gary, i like your pan analogy)
Last edited:
I agree, nice photos. I doubt an upgrade in lens will change much in that aspect.
benwal
Member
Thanks for the compliments mate. I suppose you're right. Any lens upgrade WOULD be to feed my lust for leica.
Oh well, I suppose I will take my time to consider the upgrade. At some point, I would like to go back to Digital, and maybe a used M9 would be waiting.
Btw i totally agree that it's the photographer, not the equipment that matters, 90% of the time.
Cheers guys!
Oh well, I suppose I will take my time to consider the upgrade. At some point, I would like to go back to Digital, and maybe a used M9 would be waiting.
Btw i totally agree that it's the photographer, not the equipment that matters, 90% of the time.
Cheers guys!
Similar threads
