Voigtländer Nokton 50/1.0 (Z mount), or Verklärte Nacht

[Akira]

It is rather the bokeh of the Nokton 58/1.4 that I found problematic. Apparently, this Nokton 50/1.0 fares better (except in the far corners) at comparable apertures. Its sweet spot may be at f/1.4, actually, where the 58/1.4 is rather weak (lacking contrast, and even sharpness at short distances). Other than the 58/1.4 or the 50/1.2 Nikkors, the new Nokton has no "dual personality", dreamy vs. sharp. It evolves from sharp to very sharp, contrasty to very contrasty as you stop down.

If you do not like dry, you should try the Summicron R 50/2, one of my all-time favourites (but for shooting against the light). Sharp but mild wide open, "subtle" in one word. I have the 2nd version. The 1st adds "Leica glow", so I was told, but I'm not necessarily after that.

The lack of dual personality would be one of the common characteristics of modern lens designs.  Interestingly, I noticed tht the 50/2.0 DG DN, SIGMA's latest standard lens, shows a hint of dual personality.  Wide open, the bokeh is ever so slightly doubled, which adds a little bit of the character of a classic lens which I like.  The SIGMA 50/1.4 DG HSM, one of the reputed SIGMA lenses designed for DSLRs showed a dry character which I didn't really like.

As for the Leica lenses, I found that the lenses made from the earliest period of Leica to the 90s tend to fog too easily when stored in the humid climate.  I've rarely seen second-hand Leica lenses, R or M, with their clear elements during the film days.  That was the essential reason for me to give up using Leica even though I loved the color resulted from the Leica M lenses and Kodachrome 25.

[Airy]

wil this do? Drastically compressed.

Thanks for the goodie

[Airy]

The lack of dual personality would be one of the common characteristics of modern lens designs.  Interestingly, I noticed tht the 50/2.0 DG DN, SIGMA's latest standard lens, shows a hint of dual personality.  Wide open, the bokeh is ever so slightly doubled, which adds a little bit of the character of a classic lens which I like.  The SIGMA 50/1.4 DG HSM, one of the reputed SIGMA lenses designed for DSLRs showed a dry character which I didn't really like.

... and I never liked the Sigma 35/1.4 precisely because of harsh double-edging; is it what you describe about the 50/2? on the other hand, if found the old Nikon AI 50/2 to have a pleasant "busy bokeh" (recommended to me by Fons)... "pleasant" is very subjective.

[Akira]

... and I never liked the Sigma 35/1.4 precisely because of harsh double-edging; is it what you describe about the 50/2? on the other hand, if found the old Nikon AI 50/2 to have a pleasant "busy bokeh" (recommended to me by Fons)... "pleasant" is very subjective.

I should have said that the bokeh of the latest 50/2.0 is busy.  I also liked the characteristic bokeh of the old Nikkor-H 50/2.0 when wide open.  When used with an APS-C sensor, the residual coma and spherical aberration added pleasing haloes around the point light sources.  (I'm not a big fan of the straight hexagonal aperture blades, though.)

[Roland Vink]

Of the 50mm Nikkors I have tried (which is most of them), I prefer the AI 50/1.8. The background bokeh is relatively smooth, becoming a little more "textured" towards the edges. I think the rendition is smoother than the 50/2 lens, and it has a 7-sided aperture opening so the background blurs have a more organic appearance. The 50/1.8 optics used in the series-E, AI-S pancake, AF and AF-D versions have a rougher or double-edge bokeh which I don't like.

[Airy]

The only thing that clearly gives away the wide aperture is the presence of coma, in such kind of shots with a "flat" subject... here at f/1.0

[Airy]

... and here, still at f/1.0, the slight softness of the picture (and the coma, even more marked as the light sources are strong).

[Airy]

Back to colour, this time at f/1.4. Pleasant, I'd say. And in all cases, no nasty ghosting (the hood is always on, that's my house rule, except with the 50/2 AI and Milvus 50/2 macro planar that have deeply recessed lenses).

[Snoogly]

Mr Frost just reviewed it.

https://youtu.be/w8rDEU7lCxY?si=jB_z0lB4uxy2O2PY

[Akira]

Of the 50mm Nikkors I have tried (which is most of them), I prefer the AI 50/1.8. The background bokeh is relatively smooth, becoming a little more "textured" towards the edges. I think the rendition is smoother than the 50/2 lens, and it has a 7-sided aperture opening so the background blurs have a more organic appearance. The 50/1.8 optics used in the series-E, AI-S pancake, AF and AF-D versions have a rougher or double-edge bokeh which I don't like.

I have used Ai (non-s) 50/1.8 only on an APS-C body so far, but I would go for the Ai (non-s) 50/1.8 for general purposes if I would need a manual standard lens for a full-frame camera.  Its longer focus throw (compared to that of Ais) is essential to me, especially on the digital cameras.

[Akira]

Back to colour, this time at f/1.4. Pleasant, I'd say. And in all cases, no nasty ghosting (the hood is always on, that's my house rule, except with the 50/2 AI and Milvus 50/2 macro planar that have deeply recessed lenses).

I love that blue color!

[Airy]

Some more shots of the day in Lille, still using the Zf. These two at f/1.4.

[Airy]

Then, for comparison sake, at f/1.0 and f/2.0. The second is obviously better (this is no subject for f/1 anyway), but the most striking difference is the coma, quite apparent in the first and nearly gone in the second shot (as one would expect, f/1.4, not shown here, stands in the middle).

[Airy]

Now f/1 and f/1.4. There is no bleeding or ghosting. Despite the uncorrected coma, this lens definitely deserves the name "Nokton" (unlike its otherwise excellent sibling, the 58/1.4 that is a "Dayton" to me).

[Airy]

Last one at f/2.8, for a change. All fifties are expected to be very good at f/2.8. This one is no exception, despite its crazy specs.