Voigtlander Nokton 40mm f/1.2 vs f/1.4 MC
Old 12-20-2018   #1
BillBlackwell
Registered User
 
BillBlackwell's Avatar
 
BillBlackwell is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Orange County, CA
Age: 61
Posts: 885
Voigtlander Nokton 40mm f/1.2 vs f/1.4 MC

has anyone done any "road tests" comparing these two lenses?

Seems to me like an obvious curiosity, but Google reveals nothing.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-04-2019   #2
colker
-
 
colker is offline
Join Date: Jan 2009
Location: rio de janeiro
Posts: 763
I would go w/ the 1.4. Slower lenses are usually sharper, have less distortion not to mention lighter weight and smaller size.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-04-2019   #3
Doug
Moderator
 
Doug's Avatar
 
Doug is offline
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Pacific NW, USA
Posts: 13,094
The f/1.4 Nokton is a considerably older design, very compact, likely intended for film. Mine was new in Mar 2005 and probably from the second production run. The f/1.2 lens is very recent, so may benefit from optical improvements, and surely made expecting use with digital camera...

Ah, I see I made some notes about the f/1.4 Nokton:
While this lens is just fine on film cameras, it's unacceptable on the digital Leica M typ240, smearing corner resolution, and strong corner illumination fall-off and cyan color-shift... the wider the aperture the stronger it gets and the closer it moves toward center. The latter issues might be helped by coding the lens. The "plane" of focus at wider apertures is decidedly bowl-shaped, concave. The 40 Rokkor is far superior!

I have no experience with the f/1.2 Nokton.
__________________
Doug’s Gallery
RFF on Facebook
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-04-2019   #4
jonmanjiro
Moderator
 
jonmanjiro's Avatar
 
jonmanjiro is offline
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Yokohama
Posts: 5,316
The Nokton 40mm f1.2 should be far superior on digital cameras as it was designed with performance on digital cameras (four aspherical surfaces on two elements) in mind.

http://www.cosina.co.jp/seihin/voigt...nt/e-40mm.html
http://www.cosina.co.jp/seihin/voigt...vm40mm1_2.html
__________________
flickr
Instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-04-2019   #5
splitimageview
Registered User
 
splitimageview is offline
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,026
Big fan of the 1.2 rendering. 1.4, not so much...
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-05-2019   #6
Archlich
Registered User
 
Archlich is offline
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 1,307
Quote:
Originally Posted by colker View Post
I would go w/ the 1.4. Slower lenses are usually sharper, have less distortion not to mention lighter weight and smaller size.
This only applies when both lenses have similar optical design. Not the case here.
  Reply With Quote

Old 01-05-2019   #7
Bike Tourist
Registered User
 
Bike Tourist's Avatar
 
Bike Tourist is offline
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Central California
Age: 83
Posts: 1,231
I only have the 1.2 version 2. I'm completely satisfied with it (maybe I'm easily pleased). The only fault is the way it obscures the lower right hand corner of the VF. Performance-wise it's sharp and contrasty, nice color and a really usable range of f-stops, from 1.2 to 22. It's rare that a photographer will perform at the level of the lens, so why the concern with minute differences?
__________________
Dick Thornton

Stock Portfolio:
http://www.shutterstock.com/g/biketourist
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-26-2019   #8
BillBlackwell
Registered User
 
BillBlackwell's Avatar
 
BillBlackwell is offline
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Orange County, CA
Age: 61
Posts: 885
By now, I'm hoping someone has done some actual side-by-side tests between these two 40mm lenses.

It's more a curiosity than anything else. Regardless of what "should be" - based on individual reviews on these lenses - other than the half-stop increase and close-focus advantage of the 1.2 version (and the size advantage in the 1.4 version), I actually wouldn't expect there to be any substantial practical differences between them.

Neither report particularly great OOF renderings.
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-26-2019   #9
bayernfan
Registered User
 
bayernfan's Avatar
 
bayernfan is offline
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 748
There are threads dedicated to both lenses on this and other forums.

My impression from sample images:

The 40/1.2 has a highly corrected modern look. Very smooth (non-distracting) background rendition. Sharp at f/1.2. Sharp closed down.

The 40/1.4 has a more classic signature, but at the same time it's a bit "plain" without much character. Exhibits "softness" wide open.
__________________
M_V instagram
  Reply With Quote

Old 05-26-2019   #10
pyeh
Registered User
 
pyeh is offline
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Taylor Square
Age: 59
Posts: 602
I have both these lenses, and while I can't provide any side-by-side comparisons, it's clear to me that between the two, the 1.2 is:

1) sharper/higher resolving.
2) has pronounced pincushion distortion, which is noticeable when taking pictures with lots of straight lines, which I tend to do.
The 1.2 aperture though is certainly light-grabbing. Great at night with film. I find its physical size bearable, and it works on the CL and CLE as long as you don't use the hood. The hood gets in the way of the RF window.
__________________
Peter
  Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 06:12.


vBulletin skin developed by: eXtremepixels
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.8
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.

All content on this site is Copyright Protected and owned by its respective owner. You may link to content on this site but you may not reproduce any of it in whole or part without written consent from its owner.