Menu
What's new
The GetDPI Photography Forum

Great to see you here. Join our insightful photographic forum today and start tapping into a huge wealth of photographic knowledge. Completing our simple registration process will allow you to gain access to exclusive content, add your own topics and posts, share your work and connect with other members through your own private inbox! And don’t forget to say hi!

Voigtländer Nokton Classic 35/1.4

Nick_Yoon

Nick_Yoon

New member
More test shots of the CV 35 Nokton 1.4 MC - shot on Leica M8, handheld, DNG, ISO160, -1/3EV, AWB, Aperture priority, apertures as indicated on test sheets. Converted with Adobe Camera Raw, no sharpening.

(As an aside, doing this test emphasized the handling differences between the lenses in terms of aperture and focusing rings - the 1.2 has the smoothest focus and "solid" feeling aperture stops - not sure how to describe it, when it clicks into place it feels well damped while the 1.4 feels lighter - maybe it's just the difference in mass of the lenses. The 1.4's focusing is tighter than the 1.2, but it's a brand new lens. The Hexanon's aperture ring feels rough compared to the Noktons)



Larger:
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3193/2298771968_209edfde8e_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3098/2298772578_594543a2e8_o.jpg
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3135/2298771672_37f9043d68_o.jpg
 
S

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
Maggie O said:
Oh lordy, Yousendit is evil.
I'll see if I can squeeze in a boffin shot or two during the day here and I'll put it in the same place when I can.
Click to expand...
Got 'em. f/1.4 on the cans? That's what the maker Notes think it is.

Whazza boffin shot? Something that you do in a Renaissance costume with a foam sword?

thanx

scott
 
robsteve

robsteve

Subscriber
From the can shot it looks like it back focuses a bit wide open. That is assuming you focused on the middle can.

The sharpness at f1.4 looks to be about the same as the Noctilux at f1.

One thing I noticed is there seems to be a lot of DOF compared to other f1.4 shots I have seen from other lenses.

Robert
 
Maggie O

Maggie O

Active member
I think if I'm shooting at 1.4 I'll just have to remember to lean back a wee bit after focusing and before squeezing the shutter release.
 
S

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
robsteve said:
I think it probably has focus shift. If you look at the shots of your sister, the ones at f1.4 are soft, while the the f2 are nice and sharp.
Click to expand...
Actually, I looked at those, and thought that the plane of sharpest focus was a little in front of the eyes (which is where we usually focus). That's judging from the weave in the sweater. On the shots of her father, the eyeglasses are sharpest, but that's a common place to focus. Maggie, do you recall which can you focussed on - the middle or No. 4? So maybe it is focusing a little in front of what the rangefinder converged on. It's hard to know without careful notes. If this is true it is not out by much, and probably does clear up by f/2.0.

scott
 
S

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
Maggie O said:
On the shot I posted, I focused on the middle can. Camera on tripod, used self-timer to release the shutter.
Click to expand...
Did you focus on the side of the can or on the letters on the front? The sharpest part of the image seems to be the lettering on can #4, which is a little closer to the can edge than the letters on the front of the middle can. But if you focussed on the lettering on can #3 it is back-focusing. Nice rendering of the objects off to the side, BTW, and generally nice OOF rendering, except for the strange lines that glow out of the chair rails on the left and the funny stuff that happens with the picture at the rear.

Now for the bricks.

scott
 
Maggie O

Maggie O

Active member
I focused on the letters.

BTW, I just looked at the bricks and the f11 one has camera shake going on.
 
S

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
I'm looking at the bricks. I see why Sean insists on focus bracketing when he tests wide open. It looks to me as if the 1.4 is a little out of focus, and shows some vignetting. The 5.6 and the 8 seem sharp and evenly illuminated, but I would have guessed that there is diffraction at f/11 reducing the sharpness and contrast of the image. From the cans, it looks like there is a focus shift of as much as an inch at f/1.4, so try pulling the focus forward in tiny amounts and I bet that one will sharpen up and brighten as well. How does the best result with your brick wall work out at f/2? The can trick to check for focus shift at f/2.0 would also help to determine if you will have to focus bracket here as well.

scott
 
S

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
If you want to get it to really work for you at f/1.4 it may take some really careful technique. Your f/5.6 exposure (L1011194) is the sharpest but the image plane is a little curved. I cropped out the corners, which are nicely in focus (in order they are upperleft, upperright, lowerleftl, and lowerrright), but the last crop shown, from the center, is not:

scott
 
Maggie O

Maggie O

Active member
So, even at f 5.6, the center is out of focus? Is that right? That seems like there's something wrong with this lens.
 
Maggie O

Maggie O

Active member
OK, here's a thought- if the lens is backfocusing, wouldn't it make sense that the middle is mushy (that was the focus point) and the corners, being farther away, should be in focus? Though f5.6 should have enough DOF to cover that range, yes?

Is this something that can be adjusted? Do I send the lens back to Cameraquest? I'm kinda getting bummed out here. (Thankfully, I can go and shoot with my lovely 50/2 Heliar Classic and it cheers me up.)
 
S

scott kirkpatrick

Well-known member
Give Steve Gandy a call, and show him these pictures. It might be worth trying a second copy of the lens. There were reports of variations in performance with the CV21 and Cv25s. Ideally, the plane of sharpest focus should be a plane, not a sphere or other curved surface, but few lenses can really pull that off. Those that can are usually labeled macro lenses, and have been designed for flatness of field. When Sean shoots his resolution tests, he first checks very carefully to ensure that the back of the camera is parallel to the test wall, then focus brackets. I think he chooses the image which is sharpest in the center to study. If the image field is curved, then you will see that the corners are soft when the center is sharp.

Pixel-peeping at 100% with a f/1.4 lens on the M8 is an invitation to get very frustrated, as I've seen on the LUF with all the agony spent on the Leica Summilux 35/1.4-asph. That exhibits focus shift as you stop down, complaints of backfocus are common, all that hair-pulling stuff. Other people are quite satisfied, but I suspect it is because they shoot more tolerant subjects, or are more tolerant with their shots.

scott
 
Maggie O

Maggie O

Active member
Pixel-peeping at 100% with a f/1.4 lens on the M8 is an invitation to get very frustrated, as I've seen on the LUF with all the agony spent on the Leica Summilux 35/1.4-asph. That exhibits focus shift as you stop down, complaints of backfocus are common, all that hair-pulling stuff.
Click to expand...
Man, I soooo do not want to be That Guy™, you know? I'm usually a pretty go-with-the-flow kind of gal.

Looking at my non-boffin shots, I have to say that I'm happy with most of them, and the ones that don't quite look right could be more due to my sloppy technique than the lens. I talked to my SO about this and he suggested that I shoot a bunch more with the lens- out and about, maybe go downtown and get all street with it and then see how I'm feeling and thinking about the lens and the images it produces.

Man, a new lens should not send me to the Xanax bottle!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top