NikonGear'23
Gear Talk => Lens Talk => Topic started by: John Geerts on July 18, 2015, 13:16:37
-
Has anyone experience with the Voigtländer Nokton 58mm f/1.4 ?
It's now the yearly fair in Tilburg, the largest one of the Benelux and ideal playground for testing all kind of 'stuff'. I have some spare time and planned to test two Voigtländers, Nokton 58, and the Lanthar 90, which I could recently purchase at a bargain.
Natural colours, intriguing bokeh and usable at all apertures are my first conclusions. 'Monkey-shots' are a typical choice of the fair ;)
Nikon D700: first at 1.4 1/350 ISO 400, second at 2.0 1/125 at same ISO. (unprocessed only resized) Three and Four are at 1.4 and 2.8
-
John, you have got yourself a good lens there :)
keep on using it and show us the images produced!
i have no experience with those lenses fast lenses, and i cannot get un-hooked from my 85/1.4 it's as simple as that.
-
Thanks Jakov. I will.
Couldn't find a decent review of the lens. But I was looking for a fast manual lens with a larger use than the Nikkor 50 1.2. (and at an acceptable price)
Did some tests, in F/1.4 only.
-
Well, I have extensive experience (and issued a review on some other newsgroup). To me it is 1) a joy to use, 2) a lesser, modern 50/1.2, 3) not properly named.
About 1) : manufacturing quality is superb, handling too. I guess you noticed... hard to resist.
About 2) : it has some kind of dual personality (like the 50/1.2) but to a lesser extent: "dreamy" look wide open (less so than the 50/1.2), very sharp from f/2.8 (I think the 50/1.2 is better at f/2.0). On the other hand, images from f/2.8 are probably cleaner with the Voigtländer (less CA, less distortion, less flare)
About 3) : night shots are very good from f/2.8. But below... Strong "glow" and coma at f/1.4 make night shots unpalatable, unless you want special effects (that's probably the price to be paid for getting dreamy shots). Better avoid point light sources in the frame, in which case you will get rewarded by reasonably sharp pictures with good color and decent fringing. Otherwise, from f/2.0, it is +/- acceptable. I would rather use the 50/1.8G under such circumstances and such aperture. I fail to understand why some reviewers compared it favourably to the Noct Nikkor in that respect (well, the published pics avoided point light sources... but the evaluation seems biased because of this).
Bottom line : a very good allrounder, also providing close focus (about 1:5) if you are not too picky with sharpness at close distance. I use it a lot on the Df and guess it is, similarly, a very sensible choice on the D700. And at 200€ for a mint used copy, it is a bargain compared to the 50/1.2.
By the way I do not see the case for a "larger use" than the 50/1.2. To me, these are lenses with somewhat different styles, starting of course with the FL, but very similar "use cases". The 50/1.2 is also not very convincing at night due to coma - although stopping down is often a viable option with the D700, and even more often with the Df.
You may also be interested by the 40/2, an extremely useful lens, the IQ of which is at least as good, while obviously belonging to the same family. Conversely, I might become tempted by the 90/3.5 ;)
-
I too have been interested in the 58/1.4 and look forward to other's replies. I have the 90/3.4 CV and it does not disappoint on my D800 or A7R (now looking forward to using it on the A7RII).
-
École Militaire, wide open (maybe this is an anti-militarist view)
-
The typical f/1.4 close-up haze
-
Now if you want it sharp, try f/11
-
More about that : see
http://airym.prosite.com/443918/7216902/gallery/voigtlaender-5814-a-tour (http://airym.prosite.com/443918/7216902/gallery/voigtlaender-5814-a-tour)
-
Thanks Airy for your reply and very helpful summary. And your very nice examples of the capabilities this Voigt 58m.
1) Yes, the manufacturing and handling are superb, and equal in that respect to the APO 90 (although the focus-range of the latter is longer as the minimum distance is less than 50cm). It is important to focus very precise, and that can be big step for users who are not familiar with manual focusing.
2) Dual personalities of a lens is a great bonus. It also applies for the Nikkor 35mm 1.4 Ais. My feeling at the moment is that the shots at larger apertures are 'cleaner' with the 58, than the 50 1.2 and also the 35 1.4 Perhaps that is what I meant with a possible usage in more circumstances and still have the images you want/like.
Your recommendation of the 40/2 is very helpful, and find it interesting. The APO 90 was the reason to look for this 58, so it's recommended, when I have some time I will post something about it here. Or perhaps jhinkey can say something about it?
Here some 'fresh' samples at different apertures:
at F8 and at F16 (actual a mistake as I made some pictures of fair-movement earlier and forgot to switch back. Excuse the framing, it was handheld above my head...
-
I suspect the 50/1.2 to be actually sharper wide open, and most certainly at 1.4 (the forgotten aperture, so to say, as the ring easily goes on to 2.0 - the click is barely perceptible). Sharper with crazier aberrations at the same time. TheVoigtländer is cleaner, but with low resolution.
-
A bit of an impression the Tilburg Fair with the 58mm
Bumbercars at F/2,4 ISO 200 Homewards at F/5.6 ISO 1600
-
Pigeons on the main square in Tilburg (De Heuvel)
-
@John: great graphics and perfect moment in the pigeon shot
-
A great shot indeed. But, as much as I enjoy it, I find the background bokeh a bit objectionable. A comparison with the Nikkor 58/1.x would be of interest here.
-
Thank you, Frank and Airy.
Well, there is a story behind it. First of all Background (bokeh) is a subjective thing, but that's clear. Secondly, this is the main square in Tilburg (Heuvel), it used to be a park, green, with bushes and was completely redecorated, removing most of the green elements, and creating a stone facade including a fountain. That 'new' look I wanted to emphasize by having the background-terrace in the blur and preferably multiplied. Wide open the Nokton could deliver what I wanted. Of course the background is different at F/2.8, F/4.0 or F/8.0 but then the desired effect was gone.
A comparison with the Nikkor 58mm F/1.4 G is more than welcome, but I don't have that lens. ;)
-
Yes, in this particular case the blur is effective, and that's also why I particularly like the pic. But that's no general-purpose blur. Similar situation with the 50/1.4 SC for instance.
-
Funny guy, this 58/1.4 from Voigtländer. At f/1.4, it is impossible to get anything sharp at minimum focussing distance. On the other hand, the lens has clearly been designed for longer distances. Here's an example (with a 100% crop). There is some haze, but also lots of detail. You could count the bolts on the Tour Eiffel with it.
-
it is a very sharp lens
-
Well yes, except at f/1.4-f/2 close to MFD. I think the short MFD has been offered as a compensation for the longer FL (58 instead of 50) but without any CRC-style precautions. So I won't blame Voigtländer for offering direct 1:4 ratio. Tamron, with its new 45/1.8, completed the exercise by offering very consistent performance across the field, f stops, and focussing distances (and, similar to the Voigt, nearly zero distortion, which is very welcome). In the MF domain, only the latest Zeiss 50/2 seems comparable - Otus is in another price class anyway.
-
i have a weakness for this wideopen behaviour
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8337/29073141915_56283717a7_o.jpg)
-
Honey :)
-
microcontrast recalls zeiss
-
Indeed, and a very good performance with the Close up lens 4T
-
Thanks for the tip, I'll get one.
The Voigtländer 40/2 has a much better close-up performance, which is further improved (at a given magnification ratio) by its dedicated close-up lens. The interest of the latter is not so much to get closer, but to improve short range performance.
Here with the 58/1.4, we may expect a similar benefit, i.e. 1:4 magnification (that also can be reached without close-up lens) but reasonable sharpness (which is not possible without close-up lens).
-
True about the CV 40/2 but I prefer the 45/2.8P over the 40/2. Both are good performers with the 4T, but the excellent colours and bokeh of the 45P are more important to me.
-
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8494/28463395993_ce0b2e3273_o.jpg)
Amerongen castle the garden @f8
the bright light of a sunny day quite a challenge for Photoshop, did better with Photoninja
-
And that's what the 50/1.4 AIS delivers. Same angle of voew but different framing, owing to the fact that 1) FLs are different, and 2° I cannot fly. Whaddya think?
-
Well, looks like more detail and contrast in the Nokton.
-
Interesting thread guys. As much as I enjoy my 58 1.4G, a local dealers is stopping stocking Voigtlanders and had the last 58 1.4 at a very good price. I was a bit concerned about any sample variation and the fact that it could not be replaced/serviced. Same dealer has the 50 1.1 but same reservations. Anyone used the 50 1.1?
I have been very pleased with my Voigtlanders on the Sony a7II. The older LMT mounts and the 15 f4.5 VM.
Cheers,
Tom
-
Hard to imagine the CV 58/1.4 needing repair... concerning sample variation, no idea because it is anyway difficult to find them.
From what I saw, the 58/1.4G is nearly free from purple haze wide open, which is probably due to its better correction of spherical aberration (and yes, it is sharper wide open). So I'd recommend the old CV as a backup in case the Nikkor needs repair. At smaller apertures, the CV has no weakness, and its bokeh is very nice, maybe not quite Nikkor 58/1.4G level, but better than most other 50mm Nikkors. Not to mention the excellent (and useful) resistance to flare.
-
A nearly successful attempt to summon a ghost out of the CV 58/1.4 at f/11. Shot against the sunlight. You will see a faint orange ghost above the bright light, under the platform roof. The CV is extremely flare-resistant; I have yet to test it against my champion (Zeiss 35/2), but the different FLs forbid a "scientific" comparison.
-
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8101/29085748841_171a4c3b85_o.jpg)
@1.4
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8098/29085749251_05abff7f5f_o.jpg)
@5.6
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8143/29085748671_9f94645f96_o.jpg)
@10
On Df
-
other samples, wide open and f/8
-
Wide open. Pretty sharp I think.
Bookmarket
-
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8235/29260891816_80b53fd1c4_o.jpg)
D3 cv58mm @f2
-
Wide open inside a New Hampshire Smokehouse.
-
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/9/8555/29185843705_412e96c472_o.jpg)
D3 full aperture
-
Another example of the good behaviour of the 58/1.4 - here at f/11 : no flare.
-
Great example Airy.
Hardly any flare. Here is one with the autumn-sun. @ f/2.8
-
High contrast is maintained indeed. THe only aperture with low contrast is f/1.4, but that's builtin.
-
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5669/30794859411_aa60b07766_o.jpg)
D500 @5.6
-
(https://c2.staticflickr.com/6/5486/30746165561_c6a7f2c326_o.jpg)
D800 @8
-
Oil spill ;)
-
I am entering this reply to move the topic to the top of the column, to enable a friend to find it more easily. I am enjoying my 58/1.4 SL II, and recommended this lens to him.
-
And that's a good idea. The only warning would be against shooting wide open close to minimum focusing distance (which is very short), in which case the lens gets soft even when in focus (see e.g. reply #37 by Fons). The "artistic" effect may be nice though. But even at minimum focusing distance, the lens gets sharp once stopped down.
-
The Voigtländer Nokton 58mm f/1.4 on the Nikon Z6 (however at f/16) ;)
-
Nice effect. Beautiful color. Always good to reminded that there is almost always more flare at the smallest apertures.
-
Thanks Keith. Yes, especially when the light comes frontal and low.
-
Some images with the current SL IIS version.
The first two images were shot wide open, and the last two, at f2.0.
-
When the subject is close, f/2 is a safer bet than f/1.4, given the drop in sharpness close to MFD.
Subject separation works well esp. on the last shot, precisely because of the extra sharpness of the subject provided by stopping down, while the bokeh remains acceptably busy. I'd reserve f/1.4 for moody ambiental shots.
See also John's first two shots in this thread; again, IMHO, separation is better at f/2.
-
i noticed that this lens is kind of weak close-up :o :o :o
thats why i didnt buy it ::)
for that price i got the Nikkor
-
When the subject is close, f/2 is a safer bet than f/1.4, given the drop in sharpness close to MFD.
Subject separation works well esp. on the last shot, precisely because of the extra sharpness of the subject provided by stopping down, while the bokeh remains acceptably busy. I'd reserve f/1.4 for moody ambiental shots.
See also John's first two shots in this thread; again, IMHO, separation is better at f/2.
I don't really mind the softness the Nokton shows when used for closer distances wide open. But I agree that f2.0 is better for the separation at close to meddle distances. I found the bokeh is a bit busy when shot at middle focus distances, which I think is rather common among the fast lenses of this design. I rather prefer its character to the clinical and perfect rendition of the lenses of modern designs.
i noticed that this lens is kind of weak close-up :o :o :o
thats why i didnt buy it ::)
for that price i got the Nikkor
I chose Nokton because the focal length is a bit longer and I don't really like the gear-like aperture shape of MF 50mm Nikkors stopped down by one or two stops. The aperture of Nokon is round and smooth at any aperture values.
I also like the long focus throw of the current version which makes focusing easier.
-
i noticed that this lens is kind of weak close-up :o :o :o
thats why i didnt buy it ::)
for that price i got the Nikkor
Not really weak. For one thing, it gets closer than the competition (1:5 or so), and IQ deteriorates, not surprizingly. Near MFD, it gets very sharp and clean by stopping down a little, so I found it quite usable for close-ups after all.
Initially, I was also a bit disappointed, but honestly, shooting a 40 cm distant subject at f/1.4 is a strange idea.
At longer distances, the full aperture becomes optically usable, and also makes more sense, delivering relatively clean, but low contrast pics. The full aperture remains a "special effect", a bit similar to the Nikkor 50/1.2 at 1.2-1.4 but less extreme, and objectively much better.
Like Akira, I also found the extra 8mm of focal length quite in line with my photographic habits.
-
Wide open.
-
Very nice Akira!
Wide open :)
-
Very nice Akira!
Wide open :)
Thank you, Nasos! I'm more and more attracted to this lens.
-
Wide open.
Great shot in that light, subtle.
-
Nice one, Akira. Soft and subtle :D
-
Great shot in that light, subtle.
Nice one, Akira. Soft and subtle :D
Thank you, John and Luc!