I only own one of those, the Nokton 35/1.4, and here is my impression of it:
Positives:
-short in length with a nice build (heavier than Contax G lenses, lighter than Leica.)
-price
-speed
-I think it is somewhat "vibey," especially for B&W.
-smooth focus
Negatives:
-I don't love the way the focus tab handles with NEX (probably better on a rangefinder.)
-It has all kinds of technical IQ "issues": barrel distortion, not particularly sharp at the edges on NEX, some of the most purple fringing potential that I've seen in a lens, field curvature.
-Others complain about the bokeh of the 40 and 35 Nokton, but I haven't had issues with that yet, myself.
Overall, the 35/1.4 Nokton isn't a lens that one should buy for very technical photography, but I like it for street/people/candid stuff. It has a classic vibe, although my SC version still has more contrast than I've seen from most vintage lenses. That being said, unless I really need the F1.4, I usually defer to my Contax G 35.
Unless you really need the speed, I'd strongly suggest a Zeiss ZM Biogon 35mm f2.0 or f2.8 C over the Nokton.
The Nokton isn't a bad lens by any means, but it has a ton of distortion where the Biogon has none, I mean zero. Additionally the Nokton is quite soft wide open and with tons of purple fringing. It does sharpen up pretty well stopped down, but the Biogon is razor sharp even wide open (at least with the f2.8C)
It really comes down to rather different looks I guess more than anything. The Biogon is just razor sharp and contrasty and has great color and zero distortion and cost only a few hundred bucks more. Its modern lens making at its finest
The Nokton's on the other hand are a more classic character, sort of soft and dreamy, with some distortion etc. The speed is nice but personally for most of my shooting I couldn't make a lot of use of it
For street shooting a Nokton isn't a bad choice, but for things like landscape, a Zeiss lens will blow it away in sharpness, "pop", color, flare resistance, lack of CA etc
r.gil wrote:
Thanks again
That Zeiss 2.8 looks great but it is double the price of the Nokton....
the contax g 35/2 is smaller than either zm 35mm, has most of the classic zeiss color and contrast, and is cheaper than the nokton. the pen f 38/1.8 is very small, very cheap, and very sharp with good contrast, but has some field curvature and funky bokeh wide open.
philber wrote:
I remember somebody on this thread writing that the Contax 35 G couldn't hold a candle to the Contax 45...:-)))))
it can't, but from what i've seen from mtfs and full sized images neither can any of any of the other lenses mentioned. i suspect it (contax g 35/2) is probably better in most optical respects than the nokton and worse than either of the zm 35mm lenses.
edit: if your willing to deal with a longer focal length, contax g 45mm is the obvious price/size/performance winner in my eyes.
Philber, as regards to 21mm - the issues it has can be noticed by a knowledgeable photographer, but it is still a pleasure to have it in ones collection . I am also thinking of the future here. when the sensor that can handle this lens well is released I will be ready and wont have to spend 2x the amount for the legendary biogon 21 . I have always wanted one
Edgars, I am a greedy sort. This lens is too good to spend time in the cupboard, waiting for the right camera to appear. I hope to get a Cornerfix profile for it tomorrow, all the more so as the weather forecast for Friday is finally looking good!
sebboh wrote:
it can't, but from what i've seen from mtfs and full sized images neither can any of any of the other lenses mentioned. i suspect it (contax g 35/2) is probably better in most optical respects than the nokton and worse than either of the zm 35mm lenses.
edit: if your willing to deal with a longer focal length, contax g 45mm is the obvious price/size/performance winner in my eyes.
Yeah, the Contax G 45 certainly seems, by all accounts, superior to the 35, but it's an apples to oranges comparison. I've already got a bunch of 50mm lenses, so I haven't been able to justify the Contax G 45... yet.
The Contax G 35 is nearly identical to the Leica 35 summicron pre-asph, in both design and MTF, but with Zeiss contrast and color.
r.gil wrote:
Thanks again
That Zeiss 2.8 looks great but it is double the price of the Nokton....
Check out the Biogon 2.8 C, its $817 at B&H while the Nokton 1.4 MC is $579 so not a drastic difference.
Actually you can get the Biogon for around $700 on Ebay from some Hong Kong sellers as well
Its certainly more expensive though than the CV, but overall it could be money well spent, depending of course on your needs. I do a lot of pano's so that edge to edge sharpness and total lack of distortion make it a great choice for me
. I am also thinking of the future here. when the sensor that can handle this lens well is released I will be ready and wont have to spend 2x the amount for the legendary biogon 21 