Switch to English Language Passer en langue française Omschakelen naar Nederlandse Taal Wechseln Sie zu deutschen Sprache Passa alla lingua italiana
Members: 71,042   Posts: 1,560,728   Online: 1084
      
Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 11 to 19 of 19
  1. #11
    Alex Bishop-Thorpe's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Adelaide, South Australia
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    1,455
    Images
    29
    I looked it up as well after all the talk, but didn't sign up (You can get plenty of opinion on the internet without paying for it), but there seems to be a divide between people who quite like it and the people who say to steer clear and buy a Leica lens. Personally I'm gonna give it a whirl and if I don't like it I can always resell it, I figure. Your example shots help, the 35/1.7 was on my list too.
    The Analogue Laboratory, or 'so you built a darkroom in an old factory in the industrial zone'.
    Blog thing!.

    Worry less. Photograph more.

  2. #12

    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    129
    with plastic rings, this lens should look spic-and-span for a long time. there were complaints about black paint chipping off on earlier lenses. lowers weight, too.

  3. #13

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Images
    11

    I'm leaning towards the 35/1.2 Nokton

    Quote Originally Posted by raizans View Post
    with plastic rings, this lens should look spic-and-span for a long time. there were complaints about black paint chipping off on earlier lenses. lowers weight, too.
    I am leaning towards buying either the Chrome Voigtlander 35/1.2 Nokton(a big, fast, heavy lens).

    Or the Zeiss Biogon T* 2/35 ZM.
    Tom Hoskinson
    ______________________________

    Everything is analog - even digital :D

  4. #14
    BrianPhotog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan/Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by raizans View Post
    with plastic rings, this lens should look spic-and-span for a long time. there were complaints about black paint chipping off on earlier lenses. lowers weight, too.
    I really don't have any complaints about the plastic anymore. I understand the design need (for molded tabs which are required due to the compactness of the lens) and in-use it doesn't bother me.

  5. #15

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    171
    is this lens any decent wide openner?

  6. #16
    BrianPhotog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan/Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by cotdt View Post
    is this lens any decent wide openner?
    In my Ultron vs. Nokton Classic review I have a f1.4 sample with 100% crop showing that the center sharpness wide open is excellent (better then the Ultron, more akin to the 50/1.5 Nokton). There is a fall-off in sharpness at the edges.

    It's similar at f2. There seem to be some back focus issues at f2.8 to f4.

  7. #17

    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Southern California
    Shooter
    Multi Format
    Posts
    3,879
    Images
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by cotdt View Post
    is this lens any decent wide openner?
    The test results and photos I have seen for the 35/1.4 Nokton show good results at f1.4.

    However, results with the 35/1.2 Aspheric Nokton at f1.2 are outstanding (as they also are with the 35/2 Zeiss Biogon at f2 ).
    Tom Hoskinson
    ______________________________

    Everything is analog - even digital :D

  8. #18

    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Shooter
    4x5 Format
    Posts
    171
    WOW very interesting...thanks!

  9. #19
    BrianPhotog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Taipei, Taiwan/Los Angeles, CA
    Shooter
    35mm
    Posts
    134
    Quote Originally Posted by BrianPhotog View Post
    There seem to be some back focus issues at f2.8 to f4.
    I took a series of test pics from f1.4 to f8 to try and see the backfocus at f2.8-f4 that Sean Reid and a few others claimed to be getting but didn't see any. Either:

    Maybe the additional DOF with film makes it a non-issue for film users like me?

    The test shots are here. The focal point is the paper flower.

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12


 

APUG PARTNERS EQUALLY FUNDING OUR COMMUNITY:



Contact Us  |  Support Us!  |  Advertise  |  Site Terms  |  Archive  —   Search  |  Mobile Device Access  |  RSS  |  Facebook  |  Linkedin