ultron vs nokton on ep1: opinions sought please!

rbelyell · Expire: 2014-01-31

i want to buy a very sharp and fast 35-40mm lens to use on my ep1. i am not looking to spend more than $3-400 and had been doing some research and settled on the ultron 35/1.4, the ultron 40/2 or the nokton 40/1.4 as in the right range of features and price.

i would really like some opinions of those who have 1 or more of these lenses about there properties and what you like/dislike about them. also, if i have missed an obvious choice that would yield sharp results in my price range, please feel free to mention! the more info the better, especially when one is committing a fair sum of money!

thanks in advance.
tony

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

40 or 50mm is doesn't matter on 2x crop you can buy fast and cheap SLR lenses for low amount. Like Konica 50mm f1.4 or OLympus OM 50mm f1. 4

If you need smaller one take a look on Konica 40mm f1.8 Pancake. If you willing to price high price also an option Carl Zeiss Jena Tevidon 25mm f1.4 (require machine work) so better to buy those lenses what I already converted to use with C-mount.

rbelyell · Expire: 2014-01-31

thanks attila. why dont you llike the voigtlanders?

Attila · Expire: 2025-11-18

std · Joined: 09 Feb 2010 Posts: 1826 Location: Bulgaria

SLR lenses (as FD) will be heavy and with large adapters so you should look at rangefinder lenses.

I have Contax G planar 2/35 - is very nice and small - with the adapter it is smaller than the Oly pen kit zoom. f2 is not exactly fast in modern terms but it's useable even in low light.

From what I've seen on flickr the voigtlanders has outstanding out of focus rendering. I've always wanted to get one Smile

rbelyell · Expire: 2014-01-31

yeah, as you can see from my signature, i have plenty of slr lenses. i want 1 or 2 really good rangefinder lenses because of the size/quality on ep1, exactly.

so, again, if anyone who has one can weigh in on the voigtlander comparison, thatd be great. my biggest concerns are speed and sharpness in 70-80mm range, which is why i settled on these 3.
thanks!

scsambrook · Expire: 2011-11-18

Maybe also think about Voigtlander 35/1.7 . . . only a little bit bigger than the 35/1.4 and reputedly better at apertures down to f2. Brass body under black paint, nothing cheap in its construction

I have the 35/1.7 and it is very good. Well, maybe some colour fringing at f1.7 but so has the 1.4 from what I've read. None of the focus shift problems that folks on the RFF and LUF sites complain about with the 1.4. From f2.8 down it's as sharp as my Leica 35/2.8 Summaron.

And ... you can buy 35/1.7s for quite a bit less than the f1.4s.

rbelyell · Expire: 2014-01-31

stephen thank you so much, that's great info. i will check out the 1.7 definitely!

btw, do you have any thoughts on the nokton?
tony

scsambrook · Expire: 2011-11-18

I haven't used the Nokton 40/1.4, but it seems to be pretty much the same design as the 35/1.4. So, it probably gives a similar 'fingerprint'. Have you tried trawling the www.pbase.com/cameras database? I think yu might find some 'real world' pictures from all these lenses there. And it's the 'real world' results that matter! Sometimes lenses that look pretty poor in the MTF charts etc can actually work pretty well. Not always, but sometimes!

aleksanderpolo · Joined: 24 Jan 2010 Posts: 684

I have 35/1.4 and it is pretty good. There are some LoCA wide open that improves stopping down. Reasonably sharp wide open, sweet stop at F4 I think. Some claim that 35/1.4 is less harsh bokeh wise than 40/1.4

Regarding bokeh, I think it is ok smooth if you avoid problematic situation (wide open back lit leaves, etc). The front bokeh is harsher than the back bokeh though.

I think there are not that many other 1.4 alternatives that are as fast and as small, Summilux is up the roof, Nikon 35/1.4 is not small nor good wide open...

I have one for sale on another forum, but the price is currently above your listed range. Let me know if you are interested though.