nehemiahphoto
Offline
Upload & Sell: On
|
 Re: FM Review: Voigtlander 50mm f/1 Nokton | |
Fred Miranda wrote:
nehemiahphoto wrote:
Like I said before Fred even had his copy on that other thread (and others have said), I don’t really understand why this is a better option than the 50/1.2.
I will try to answer this one: They are lenses with different maximum apertures, so if one wants a f/0.95-1 lens, the CV 50/1.2 Nokton and Leica 50/1.4 Lux mentioned here are not really in this category. The latter is a full stop slower and that could be significant enough for someone shooting in very low light. One could argue that this is no longer an issue with modern sensors, but that's another discussion.
I own the 50/1.2 Nokton and that's why I compared it to the new f/1. However, it would be more appropriate for me to compare the new Nokton to other brands with the same maximum aperture.
Cosina still offers both f/1 and f/1.2 Nokton lenses so one didn't replace the other. The new Voigtlander 50/1 Nokton is just a faster choice with different optical design compromises. One is more compact and has a great balance between resolution and rendering, but it's slower. The other is faster, sharper at infinity (center) and sharper across the image field at MFD and close distance. However, rendering is not as pleasant...so there you have it in a nutshell. 
I have never tested the Leica 50/0.95 Noctilux but this lens seem to be the only direct competition to the new Voigtlander 50/1 Nokton because it shares a modern design and it's also equipped with FLE. I have no clue how they compare optically but I know the Leica is way bigger and heavier.
Personally, I prefer compact lenses for the Leica M, so both Leica 50/0.95 and Voigtlander 50/1 Nokton lenses would not be my first choice. Having said that, the new Voigtlander balances quite nicely on the Leica M10-R.
Yes, I understand and agree. I said the same in a different way--it's good CV didn't reproduce the CV 50/1.2 a half stop faster--I don't think it's enough to get many to change. I don't like the direction they went, but then again, my bias is nearly always against very high contrast glass that favors optical correction at the expense of rendering. They have 2 lenses with distinct signatures. The half stop difference thing is a big deal for lenses--1.4 vs 1.8's is classic. Here's it's just a f1.2 to f1 (or f1.4 for the Lux).
And yes, even comparing the 50/1 Noct doesn't make a ton of sense--it came out in 1975. Similar to the comparison I just ran with the 75 Summilux vs 75 Nokton. That type of age disparity ensures the CV is going to be technically better and a smoother draw (it's not like CV are producing budget knock-offs). They are both uber fast 50's, so it's interesting, but I can' believe someone would study the photos to pick. They draws and feels of the images are very different. One will go with aesthetic preference (or budget).
So yes, the only real "fair" competition is the 50/.95 Noct to my mind, despite the very significant price difference. But also, none of the lenses are really about technical competence anyway. There aren't very practical lenses IMO despite how fun they are. So in a sense, I really don't fuss about technical testing with these type of extreme lenses. I am more interested in how the images look, and how impactful they are for me. I don't like the images as much from the new CV 50/1, but the 50/1.2 are more pleasing to me. Which just means, if anything, I saved money and a larger lens 
|
