Which look of which lens did you prefer? And what is your opinion when it comes to the question "Is Leica glass worth the money"? I would be interested to learn more about your thoughts, so please feel free to share them here. Also: In case you want to support my work and get access to additional content, please head over to my Patreon page: www.patreon.com/karinmajoka Lots of love, Karin 🤍
Hallo, Ich hatte bis vor kurzem das VOIGTLANDER ULTRON 28MM F2.0 TYPE II VM ASPHÉRIQUE zu meiner Leica M, das wirklich ein klasse Objektiv ist. Fantastische Schärfe, 1A Fertigungsqualität sowie hervorragende Farbwiedergabe, die Photos waren total beeindruckend! Man kann dieses herrliche Objektiv zu 100% empfehlen. Da ich mir nun eine Q3 zu meiner M hinzugekauft habe, dessen 28er das Voigtländer ja ersetzt, habe ich das 28er Objektiv von Voigtländer zu meinem Bedauern verkauft. Grüße aus Luxemburg.
Die Nokton Linse. Warum? Die Farben sehen besser aus (wärmer), der Helo Effekt bei F1.4 ist genau der Look den ich feier und es gibt kein chromatischen Aberration wie bei der Leica.
I bought the Nokton 35 mm 10 months ago and have been extremely happy with it. I don't mind small imperfections like vignetting, but the reason why I decided to change it for a Leica Elmarit was the focal length. I wanted to exchange it for a 28 mm lens instead and having seen som reviews, I decided the pricy Elmarit 28 mm was right for me. I expect to shoot it a lot for street, cityscape, architecture and landscape and the 50 mm Summicron for portraits and everything else. I ended up becoming annoyed by the constraints of a 35 mm and wanted something more versatile and moderne as my go to lens. But I have to say that the colour rendering of the Nokton and sharpness produces really lovely pictures. I will try to sell it, but I will keep it, if I can't get a decent price on it.
I can’t tell… I’m surprised as I thought I knew the look of both of those lenses. I thought they were quite different lenses but you show that the differences are in real life very small… thank you.
I totally agree! I still think the Leica outperformed the Nokton when it comes to technical details. But in the end it does not really matter because the "real life" test results showed how close and hard to distinguish they actually were.
This was great - it's just a shame that the lens hoods gave this away quite early on who was shooting what. Still very interesting results. Great video.
Totally true, I only realised it in the edit (and hoped people would not pay attention too closely haha). But it was so bright that day, that shooting without a lens hood would be a terrible option.
First of all, thanks for this cool comparison, it's a great idea to have these two excellent lenses go head to head. I honestly had the right guess during the video as to which was the Leica lens. The images with the Summicron had that slightly clearer, cooler color shades, aka "Leica look", to me. With the Nokton, I found the colors more vibrant and the look a bit more washed out, more vintage style. If money was no object, the Summicron would be my first choice, but in real life I would probably go with the Voigtländer and still be very happy with it. 🙂
Strange, to me the Nokton actually looks sharper in the centre from f2 (at 13:30). Either way if the 'sharpness' is the thing people notice about your photos then that's not a good sign. Some of the most amazing images I've ever seen aren't even fully in focus! For me I prefer cheap stuff because I can be more adventurous and focus on capturing images than worrying about super expensive gear.
Glad it’s not just me! The Nokton certainly does look sharper in the centre crops from f2, and not just because of the higher green/red colour fringing on the lens engraving from the Summicron. Unless maybe those crops were captioned the wrong way round…
Nice to see pictures from Münster. A nice and fair comparison. The Nocton looks very good but I guess in the end we all want the summicron. did not know that they are so close...
I have the nokton 35 1.4 and love it! There is just one thing that didn’t really show up that much in the review though. At wider open apertures the colors change pretty vastly for me, a lot of times I really like how this looks (also the bokeh gets swirly at 1.4) but it could be seen as an imperfection
I honestly rarely use any lens wide open, which is why I did not really put this in the focus of the review - but that is in fact a good point! The Bokeh of the Nokton is a but more agitated and swirly, but the Bokeh on the Summicron is a bit more calm and smooth in my opinion. Imperfections are not always a bad thing. :)
Nice comparison video! Some others have noted the lens hood giving it away, which I noticed as well 😅, but I guessed it right before that, but ONLY because of some distortion on some of the straight on shots of buildings where a window edge or other straight line was at the edge of the frame. If it weren't for that distortion I probably wouldn't have been able to tell much of a difference. I have the Nokton myself and have always enjoyed shooting with it and am perfectly happy with the photos it makes. I definitely don't feel like the Summicron is worth $2000 more for my purposes...but then, i've never actually used one myself.🤔
So So close! I’m just blown away that you can get such amazing quality and sharpness from film. I preferred the Leica but as said it was so close. Great video and a decision I’m going to have to make soon when I get my M6 or MP.
Leica lenses are super expensive, but from my experience, they hold their value well. I sold some Lenses after using them for years and got the same price for them. I also like that they are designed to be used fully opened. When you compare the Voigtländer f1.4 to the even more expensive Summilux, you will see a massive difference at f1.4. But I can also understand that not everyone can afford such lenses. I want to say that these lenses are not only crazy expensive but also great performers.
I think if you're really into Leica and know you'll use the system for a long time, having your most used lens be a Leica might be worthwhile, then use third parties for the rest of your focal lengths
There's no point having a faster lens if it doesn't perform well wide-open. I only shoot Leica glass and prefer the subtle creamy fall-off and 'soft' sharpness. Highly recommend the 28 Elmarit prea(spherical) inexpensive (by Leica standards) and just jaw-dropping gorgeous.
I clocked the Summicron right away simply because I use a 50mm Summicron F2. The modern crons are so sharp. I found your Nokton to have noticeably warmer tones with a little more distortion. I’m currently shopping for a 35mm lens so this comparison was super helpful. Because I mostly shoot cars, I think I would go with the option that is more neutral in color rendering to highlight the true color of the cars. The sharpness doesn’t matter as much to me.
What a great review and very helpful in decision making considering that I’ve shot with the voigtlander 35 1.4 MC & MCII for four years. I’ve been trying to find out if it was worth the swap. I’d say very much so from this video.
My impression is that the differences aren't really big if you shoot film and mostly use medium apertures, like in street photography. I own the Nokton 35mm 1,4 (Version I though) myself and like the compactness and the image quality is mostly great. It has some annoying issues though, the distortion and vignetting can be nasty and wide open it is really soft, which makes not really a good option for low light. So I look for an upgrade, but the Leica 35mm lenses are definitely out of my price range 😕 Maybe the new Voigtländer Ultron 35mm 2,0 or the Zeiss Biogon? We'll see... Happy shooting, I would also like to see a video about your experiences with the M10 so far!
As a collector of the very finest cameras, I personally believe that’s all about their character, charm and experience of shooting. The fun factor. Not necessarily the price, sharpness or speed. It’s about that instant moment that you grab that equipment and, from the first few shots, you know you are hooked. That sweet formula that makes in love for photography again and again.
Also agree. I’ve had a few dozen lenses over the past 20 years, budget to Leica APO lenses, as well as some of Sony, Canon, Sigma and Voigtlanders best. Quality was ultimately not the prevailing factor for me. “Good enough” with great ergonomics (largely, compactness) wins. If the lens quality is the make or break for a picture, then I wasn’t taking a great picture to begin with.
I love my Voigt collection for the SL2S , placebo makes you think Leica lens may be leaps ahead while actual perceptual difference maybe negligible. Great video
I choose the lens that gives the images I like the most. My three favourite lenses are 21mm Elmarit f2.8 ASPH, Nokton 35mm f1.4 classic MC II and Planar 50mm f2 ZM. I tried a variety and chose on image not price nor brand. I can’t be bothered with the Leica snobs, they are obviously more bothered about being big heads than their image quality :-)
As always, love your videos. I actually purchased the Nokton for my M6 based on research and the earlier video you mentioned. I haven't been disappointed. Do you ever discuss 50mm options? I'll have to look at your library of videos. Though I've been in the industry for over 35 years I am continuously surprised that people would tell other people how to use, or what gear they should be using. Shoot what you want, that fits your budget and serves your art.
I would love to underline your last sentence several time! Word, I could not agree more! :) Glad to hear you are happy with the Nokton, it's a fantastic lens. So far, I have mainly shot 35mm lenses on the Leica and have tried out 28mm more recently. 50mm is not a focal length I use too often which is why I have not made any comparisons between lenses here.
Give the Nokton 50 F1.5 II a go, honestly the best jack-of-all-trades 50, fast, super small, cheapish, well made, sharp, and extremely pleasant render.
Great content! The purist will not agree but I guess you can enjoy a Leica camera with a non Leica lens. Sure a lot of the Leica lenses are great. But totally not in reach of my budget. So Voigtlander makes great lenses you can enjoy the great M bodies with a very good lens without paying the price most people can not afford. Another great alternative for me are the Carl Zeiss lenses. A bit higher in price as Voigtlander but IMHO also better performing. And now I am gonna make the purists 🤮. I own 2 7Artisan lenses. Both very well made. Focus is smooth and tight! All metal and glass. A 35mm f2 and a 50mm f1.1. And both perform above what there price would suggest! I use the 50mm on my old M8 that is 66mm on that camera. I shoot Monochrome jpegs with this camera, and the results are absolutely stunning! Keep up the good work!! Kind regards.
Enjoy your Summicron! 🙂 I was unable to tell the differences between the two lenses, in the street photographs shown in your presentation. It does not suprise me that your side-by-side comparison images showed the Nokton to have more visible distortion, or that the Summicron has sharper corners. I have owned neither lens, but did quite much “homework” on 35mm lenses, in the past. I test-shot a new friend’s Voigtlander Nokton II MC, during a meeting at a coffee shop in a nearby city, earlier this year. (In return, he had the opportunity to try my M10, before he made a decision whether to buy a pre-owned M10-R from an on-line seller.) My initial impression of the Nokton was quite favorable! Cosina/Voigtlander makes excellent lenses. I already have several of them, for the Nikon F-mount and for Leica. My APO Lanthar 50mm Aspherical may is one of the most stunningly “perfect” lenses I have ever used. Ultimately, however, when I did buy a 35mm lens, this past summer, I opted for Leica, though a Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 Steel Rim “Re-Edition” lens. This may well be the only Leica M lens I ever purchase new, rather than pre-owned, so, I am glad that it works well, for me. I already had the excellent, but large Zeiss Distagon 35mm f/1.4 ZM, with very modern optics, so, it made sense to buy the Leica 35mm M lens with a more-vintage character and compact size. I know that I will have to sell lenses, to compensate my budget, but feel that it will be worth it.
Thank you, I am sure I will! :) That's true, some differences in the 101 comparison where kind of "expected" but it's still great to actually test it and not only trust what people are saying about these lenses. I had the chance to try out the re-released Summilux In Wetzlar on its release day and really enjoyed it for the short time I had it. A great lens to achieve great performance closed down, but really artsy, painterly quality shot wide open. Thanks for your comment!
Super Review und sehr schöner, praxisbezogener Vergleich. Kommt gerade richtig, da ich plane von der Fuji X-Pro3 auf eine Leica M (wohl die Monochrom Typ 246) umzusteigen. Bin noch in der Entscheidungsphase… Das Nokton steht bei mir auf der Liste und dieses Review kommt mir gerade gelegen. Dankeschön dafür ✌🏻☺️ Ich mag den Look und ja, vom Preis her isses auch sehr ansprechend.
Vielen Dank für deinen Kommentar, das freut mich! :) Oh, spannend! Wo stehst du grade im Entscheidungssprozess, wieso wird es vermutlich die 246 Monochrome? Das Nokton ist super, das Review zeigt mir nochmal wie nah die beiden Objektive in der Praxis doch aneinander sind.
@@KarinMajoka Hi ! Ich bin grad auf der Suche nach einem guten Angebot für eine M246. Monochrome daher, da ich immer mehr feststelle das ich bei Street hauptsächlich B/W fotografiere und eine Kamera mit Monochrom-Sensor reizt mich schon seit langem. Andererseits überlege ich auch die X-Pro3 zu behalten und mir die Voigtländer Noktons für den X-Mount zuzulegen und dann nur mit monochromen Fuji-Rezepten bzw. Lightroom-Presets zu arbeiten. Morgen bekomme ich ein Nokton 23 f/1.2 geliehen. Vielleicht läuft das auch darauf hinaus. Ist ja auch eine finanzielle Frage ;). Mal schauen wo der Weg hinführt.
I like in field tests. I'm not very interested in lens performance on the test booth. Colour fringing is a showstopper for me, vignetting isn't. I like vignettes, and if I ever want to get rid of it, Capture One will do the job. Also, the Nocton compares a lot more to the Leica 35 mm f1.4 Steel Rim. Compared to the Steel Rim, the Nocton performs much closer to the Leica than in this comparison. In some fields even better. For me, the Nocton 35 mm f1.4 II is the better choice, but I totally understand your decision. I will never change my Summicron 50 mm (Version IV) with any other lens. Some lenses are pure magic. Thank you for your honest comparison. I like the style of this video and will definitely look for further content on your channel.
This is crazy! I loved the warmth of the Voigtlander images sooo much and was convinced that was gonna be the Leica lens! Glad that it isn't though lol need one of those Voigtlander lenses!
I got a summicron 35 a few months ago and I really love it but I don’t like how expensive it is and I’m thinking of selling it for that reason alone. Also recently I tested out a Q3 and so something will have to go (summicron 35) but hopefully I can try out a nokton at some point Also I just wanted to state that in my opinion the chromatic aberration on the summicron is a benefit. I think it adds s really nice dimension to the images but I’m a fan of chromatic aberrations
I totally get that, sometimes you have to shuffle some gear around to make room for something new. Interesting thought about the chromatic aberrations, seeing it as a strong point rather than weak point.
Great video, as always. I only have 2 M lenses - a 50mm Leica Summicron and the latest CV 35mm Nokton f1.5 - so it’s impossible for me to compare the results of different types and manufacturers of lenses at those focal lengths. That said, I see no reason to buy anything other than the CV 35mm for that focal length. I shoot digital and mainly for a black &white final image so colour rendition is irrelevant. Personally, I can discern no practical difference in the “look” of a CV lens from a Leica or Zeiss - I must just be blind to it!
Do a comparison for the summicron vs Voigtlander Ultron v2 35/2 please. The Ultron is better but would love to see if you still chose the Summicron for character. Thx
Dear Karin, great video. Have you tried the Voigtlander 35mm Ultron F2? I am looking for a budget M mount lens. I simply can't justify spending almost 6000 for the Summilux as an amateur photographer.
Nice comparison. Just by looking at the photos, I couldn't say which was shot on which lens. But I did work out who was shooting which lens quite early on in the video. I won't say how I knew, so as not to spoil it for other watchers. I owned the Nokton 35mm and it's a fantastic little performer.
Haha, I know what you are referring to. I only noticed it later because we did not film everything from behind. I just hoped people would not pay too much attention ;) Thanks for your comment!
As an owner of the Summicron 35mm. I personally feel one should use the lens that one feels gives them the look they want. I also use TTArtisan, Light Lens Lab and Thypoch lenses. I have the Voigtländer 21mm and 90mm Skopars on my to buy list.
I'm doing research I found a Nikon Z7 with a Sigma 135mm DG lens and a Leica M240 with a summicron-m 35mm f/2 asph on it. And yes found they were in a bin, I live in a nice building I'd say some rich bloke tossed it. Shutter was not working properly on the Leica, but sorted that out!
Hello and thank you for this interesting video. The give away was when I saw the lens hood on your camera ... But I still enjoyed the video and I was very very much surprised at the look of the files coming from the Voigtlander. I have shot the older version (on a Leica M9) and was not very happy with center sharpness and most importantly colour fringing but it seems they've made everything better now and for a third of the price compared to the Summicron!!! Great value for the money, great to be able to go out and shooot with a lens that gets good results and will generate less stress if banged (a little). I have also shot with a Summicron ASPH 35mm (on the M9 and then on a M240 and an M6 as well) but I was less than happy with it: seems to me that (at least on my version) the Leica "pop" was lacking and overall build quality was to par with the Voigtlander; but not over the top.
Warum heißt Elmar wie die Bezeichnung einiger Leicaobjektive? Ich war zunächst irritiert. Wieso raten, wenn es da unterm Bild steht? Und war nicht vom Summicron die Rede?
Honestly I could not tell! I really enjoyed the lens review with both the studio scenes and the street photography. I think that both lenses look great. I have used Voightländer lenses on a Cosina/Voightländer R body and a Zorki IV. They are great performers and feel nice when focusing and working the aperture ring. I have used them with an adapter on my Fuji T-T2. I have not had the pleasure of using any Leica lenses, so I don't really have a dog in this fight. One thing I would say is that there once were a lot of disparities between old Leica and Zeiss Lenses compared with the Japanese lenses from Canon, Minolta, Konica and others in the middle to late twentieth century. Some of Leica and Zeiss's superiority came down to more fiddly tolerances and higher levels of machining and manufacturing. But by the 1980s the Japanese had caught up through through higher quality control and now by having more robots do the work. I don't think there is any meaningful quality differences between lenses made in Germany and lenses made in Japan. Everything comes down to trying to find a balance between optical qualities, ease of manufacturing, and price. I also expect that there were different engineering philosophies and design choices that drive the performance of contemporary Leica and Voghtländer lenses. All these things come down to trade offs in lens performance, color quality, the type of Bokeh, and ease of manufacturing, cost of manufacturing, etc. For example, I am guessing Leica was fine with slight chromatic aberration because this was present in their historical lenses and they wanted to emphasize sharpness in the corners. (I don't know the exact optical formulas and science here, but from what I understand there are balancing acts with all these qualities.) Seems to me that Cosina/Voigthländer was not setting out to copy the Summicron, but instead wanted something with better chromatic performance and faster aperture, while keeping costs reasonable.
Shooting with all kinds of lenses for my Leica M10 and M2 - no prestige at all. But I find myself always going back to the Leica 50mm Summilux ASPH. I know it’s on the high price spectrum, but it just creates magic. I think @benjhaisch captured why it’s so wonderful in one of his videos. It’s my forever lens.
Outside of holding its value better in the long term paying x3 the price for the Summicron doesn't make sense for practicality IMO. But most Leica owners I know reach a point where they *feel* as if they need to own Leica glass or are missing out on something. Fancy camera can't be as cool if you're using a third party lens. Especially in comparison to the better Voigtlander lenses like the 35 f2 Ultron which IMO is better than the Leica counterpart.
always a good video... thanks... I elected to keep a Nokton 35 f/1.4 and an Ultron f/2. I like the slight darkened corners and slight softness in the corners on many photos, as well as the more contemporary sharp all over look for others.
Thanks for your comment. :) That's so nice to hear! Because this is exactly what I mean: "Perfection" in a lens is not always good! Some people love the quirks and imperfections a lens has because it was character.
I prefer the Nokton, as it's more "Rock & Roll. The lens is not perfect, in the same way we as humans are not perfect, and it's always good to embrace the error. Also, as Henry Cartier-Bresson once said: "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept"... That's not to say this statement should be used as an excuse for poor technique, rather that not every image has to be sharp to be credible...
It was not a blind test; I can recognize from the beginning that Karin is using Voigtlander because of the hood during the photowalk.-) I own both these lenses, I use Nokton for BW and Summictron for color.-)
Lens A just has that bit more contrast I come to know with Leica lenses. I found the same experience with the Voigtlander 28mm f2 Ultron (first gen) and later made the jump to a 28 Summicron ASPH. Voigtlander by no mean a bad lens, and hard to argue if a 28 summicron is worth the money as value for money is very subjective. But if you can afford it, the result is worth it. Plus you don't really spend money buying a leica lens as they will keep their value much better than the Voigtlander. (I lost money selling the Ultron)
Funny how different perception is, I kind of feel like lens A (the Summicron) is a bit less contrasty while the Nokton is a bit more punchy. The point about keeping the value is very valid though!
Have you looked at the Voigtlander Ultron 35mm f/2? I think it is extremely competitive against the Summicron. The Nokton 1.4 is great for the small size, character, and fast speed. The messy bokeh at low DOF can be polarizing. I enjoy it.
I feel like the Voigtlander 35mm F2 APO Lanthar is a better comparison to the Simmicron. After having had it, it's 50mm F2 APO and 90mm F2.8 APO Lanthar siblings i'm absolutely mind blown at just how sharp and CA free those lenses are even wide open.
This is a very well informative video and a great comparison, especially for people wanting to decide which lens to go for, though i don't own a M6 nor Lecia i have a Bessa R with a Jupiter 50, i would love to see like a low end comparison between the Jupiter and the Voigtländer! amazing video thank you for the information
Thanks for your comment, I appreciate it a lot! I wanted to try out Jupiter lenses for a while now, but somehow never got my hands on any of them. Maybe a project for the future
cool video Karin! :) I'm curious if you can test the Summilux 35mm in the near future :) I recently sold my 50mm 1.4 Summilux ASPH, because I realised that at my current situation with 2 small kids I only shoot casually with the M system and therefore 2500€ sitting on the shelf collecting dust is something I didn't like. I settled for the Nokton 35mm 1.4 for now as my only M lens since it makes financially sense, but I have to admit, I miss the Summilux :..D Grüße aus BaWü :)
ich hatte einige Jahre das 2/35mm und fand es toll... aber nicht perfekt. Heute habe ich das Ultron 2/35 mm und da ist es genauso: Es ist nicht perfekt aber der Bildcharakter ist toll und dem des King-of-Bokeh auch sehr ähnlich!
Think the Summicron is more dreamy, cause of that ill use it with more contrasty film like Colorplus! But i love that in Gold the Nokton punches out the colours cause of contrast!
Leica glass was the best 70 years ago on 35mm cameras. It was no comparison - the precision engineering, coatings, designs, glass quality was unmatched. Medium format cameras obviously had a superior image quality and great optics from Zeiss and others, but on 35mm Leica was king. The bodies of course were elegant and durable and rangefinders were discrete and allowed for slow handheld shots for photojournalism, street, art photography and other scenarios that made it a more versatile tool. Other manufacturers weren't producing bodies that were as full featured and none of them had optics that could compete. However, In the very late 70's, and continuing into the 80's and 90's, all the big manufacturers caught up. Nikon AI glass was exceptional and rivaled what Leica was producing and many other manufacturers had caught up as well. Still, that reputation had stuck due to effective branding and marketing. The vast majority of people will fail in blind tests or prefer non-Leica lenses and there really is nothing to justify the price tags associated with Leica glass. They don't have special MTF curves, they don't have special designs (they've been reproduced and copy cats have existed for years), all manufacturers have exceptional coating and fantastic manufacturing processes with finer tolerances that today are superior then stuff we considered elite in the 80's and 90's. Of course some vintage lenses do have unique characteristics in out of focus areas but there are lots of modern lens designs like that as well. Realistically, you have to go out of your way to buy 'bad lenses' nowadays cause even the cheap stuff is very good by historical standards. Ultimately people can of course buy whatever they want but for the hobbyist or working photographer, paying for a 3000 dollar f2 35mm lens is totally unnecessary and it's not going to unlock any new potential in you. Put another way - your shot will not go from forgettable to award winning because you used Leica instead of voigtlander. However, by saving that 2000 dollars you might be able to go on a trip and take an award winning shot with that voigtlander :) With that said, I understand many people are very motivated by what equipment they use and it compels them to pick it up and shoot which is important so. Yea.
Nice video and great work on the comparison! However, I feel you have tested the wrong lens 😉. This particular Voigtländer lens deliberately aims to be a character lens by copying the design of the first Summilux from the 1960's. The Summicron you tested is older by is meant to be as clinical as possible.Voigtläder has the excellent 35mm Nokton F1.5, which uses aspherical elements and is a modern lens. There is also the Ultron F2, which woudkl be a good Summicron equivalent and the APO Lanthar, which is meant to compete with the APO Summincron, but is still much cheaper than the normal Summicron. All these would make a better alternative for the Summicron IMO. The lens you tested could be seen as an alternative to one of the Leica vintage reissues. Having said that, I feel that any of the 35mm Voigtländers are great alternatives to Leica's own offerings. I am a big proponent of them. I can not see a difference between a 1,000 USD Voigländer lens and a almost 5k USD Leica equivalent in normal use, i.e. not the typical contrived test scenarios (like brick walls).
You know, I don't compare lenses that would be great to compare in theory, but I compare lenses that would be great to compare in practise ;) I simply compare these two because this is truly how my evolution of lenses happened: I switched from the Nokton to the Summicron so it makes senses for me to compare the two, even though they might not be equivalent "on paper". I totally see your point though and get where you this idea is coming from, so thanks for bringing the suggestion in! :) Also, in practise I know that the Nokton 35mm 1.4 is one of the most popular lenses for people who get their first 35mm lens for the Leica M system. And for many it's a question that occurs if they should "upgrade" to a Leica lens or not, so this is a scenario that happens regularly (and that I get questions about regularly). By the way: I had the Ultron for one day and brought it back to the store more or less immediately because I did not like it at all. The comparison would therefore be over at that point for me already haha :D Well, I guess that just proves how subjective things are
@@KarinMajoka Yes, good point about the 1.4 being a very popular first lens choice (due to it being relatively cheap, I assume). I agree, it's a good comparison. Just thought I should point out that there are alternatives that are maybe more comparable (in terms of intended performance). To be completely honest, in my daily use, the feel of a lens (focus throw, smoothness of focus ring, ease of changing aperture, the thing not covering half the viewfinder) is much more important than all this rendering and performance stuff.
I figured that the images that were tack sharp were from the summicron. While the others weren't tack sharp. Not necessarily a bad thing if you want some character vs sterile images. I was looking at the corners of the image for sharpness. At least in my opinion that's how I was able to tell the difference. which do you prefer?
Hmmm… like them both. Own them both ( version 1&2 of the Voigtlaender). Use them both. Strangely the voigtlaender V2 is on my M8 for B/W most of the time. The 35 2 is on my film Leicas or on the 240. But … the enlarged prints of shots taken with the 35 2 are breathtaking sometimes, by enlarged I mean poster size for exhibits or the wall at home with a size of 1.5 to 1 m or even bigger…
Hi, sorry fot off topic question: I've seen the TT art 28mm. Do you think that it is necessary to calibrate it, since I want to use it only with analog leica.. thank you
I preferred the Leica, but I think it might have been the exposure. I didn’t see a difference in the quality of the images. I have some Zeiss and Voightlander lenses. The quality is excellent for the price.
Maybe you should also compare Ultron 2/35 VM II to both testes lenses. I am pretty sure you would be surprised, how the latest version of Ultron beats also Summicron lens, while wide open :)
Does it also depend on whether you shoot film or digital? I’d imagine for film you would not necessarily want a super clinical modern Leica lens? I shoot on an M6 + f5.6 28.mm summaron - I love the vintage look it gives. I’m looking for a faster lens but wonder which of these two would suit film. For digital I guess the Leica hands down.
Comparison with Ultron have had more fair results. However i have used both. Even i dont care technical details as such i can say that like almost all my photos taken with Summicron Asph I. Nice sharpness with a character
I guess, beside Leica owners, most of people know that anything branded "Leica" is mainly just for those who can afford it, no matter how sharp their eyes are at nitpicking or how high their photographic skills are, or how trully needed these products are for their photography. In fact, by not putting a Leica lens on your M body you defeat the main concept of owning a M camera : the distinctive factor. Kidding aside, I know the other 35mm rangefinders are... different, maybe not as comfy or hyped. But still, my point stands : you can make them work. Buy a Bessa put any lense you want and keep the change you saved (thousands of euros) and shoot a shit ton of films :)
I get your point! However, what people sometimes don't understand is that I am not buying lenses to compare them. I am simply showing my journey when it comes to my equipment and compare the lenses I own. So I could not compare the Summicron to the Ultron since I simply don't own it. I have used the Nokton for 1.5 years and got the Summicron as an idea to replace it - which is why it made sense for me to compare these two, even though other lenses might be more "equivalent" technically. The Nokton is actually a common entrance lens to the Leica M system, so I know many people who have this lens and were wondering if it makes sense to switch to Leica glass or not.
I think one has to expect more fall-off (vignetting) the more a lens can open. The Noctilux shows even more vignetting. In that aspect the two lenses aim for a different design with different objectives. The Summicron is a bit the all rounder.
For analog photography with film there will not be much difference, but it had been high megapixels cameras there could maybe be more difference. I do not have Leica M camera, I do not like rangefinder cameras. But I do have Leica R Lenses and Voigtländer Lenses. The Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 35mm 2.0 Aspherical is an excellent Lens with outstanding good optical image quality, at least as good as the best Leica Lenses !
To me, the difference is obvious. I have a Summicron 35 that I use a lot. And I have a Voight 28 Ultron, which I don't use because I don't like the imaging of those lenses. I bought my first M camera thinking I could shoot with third party lenses and save money. But it didn't work out. Only Leica lenses capture the essence
My opinion: it’s worth the money if you can afford it. It means if it‘s not going to hurt your bank balance, just do it. The experience of shooting with a Summilux or Summicron is really good. But if it’s gonna make you feel some impact on your bank account, and Preis-Leistung-Verhältnis is a thing for you, then don’t do it. Actually, between my Nokton 50/1.1 and my 11726, I could not see a big difference in terms of sharpness. I tested 50 Summicron and I could tell the difference(between the test photos, I even forgot which one was Nokton and which one was Summicron). The improvement in pure picture quality is not worth the money. But the feeling, the focusing, and at some scene, you can feel it later that Nokton is going to perform differently, but that doesn’t happen a lot.
Honestly it is hard to understand through a video on YT. Then I have to say that for what I have seen I prefer the Voigtländer. Or, it is better to say I don’t see the difference to justify the price tag of the Leica
I liked this comparison. Unfortunately at 04:46 we can see the side of your lens which kind of gives it away. The lens you shot with has warmer and more vivid colours that I associate with Zeiss lenses so I guessed that was the Voigtlaender. Cheers.
That's true, I was hoping people would not pay that close attention 😬 It's really hard filming each other without showing the lens and not wanting to film everything only from behind. I totally agree, the Nokton is a bit more punchy on the film images.
I'm pretty happy with my color Skopar 35! I broke on the 50 and got a summicron v3 because there are not many good alternatives in the 50. But not what I wanted to see. :(
If you use Leica Cameras and lenses really hard as daily users then the prices will yield their values. If you only use the leica system as seasonal user then the prices outweigh the values. I used M cameras, summilux and summicron as daily users, only after years of ownership I begin to detect in which fields these summiluxes and summicron outshine other camera system. Am not talking about MTF because current Sony GM lenses have very high MTF, am talking about how we tend to take 2nd,3rd, 4th look at pictures we took using Leica lenses. There is something that makes the object stand out as if they are alive in the pictures.
Vielen Dank! Schöne fotos. Of course, the Leica lens was much better when I looked through a microscope at the pictures. . 😇. I never considered a Leica lens for my MP. For that money, I could buy several Voightländers and never notice the difference. I am talking about my type of amateur photography, not about the photos by pros. I have several Ultrons f2 and they are small and light and even with hood do not block too much of the view finder. This is very important for me. I have one second hand Leica 24mm, which I sometimes use in cities or for landscapes. For parties with many people, it is great for an atmosphere of togetherness, coupled with the (Voightländer) 75mm for more intimacy. I can tell the difference only by the angle. But don't forget I am just an experienced amateur, not a professional.
Thanks for your comment, I appreciate it! Haha, that's what I call next level pixel-peeping, but I am sure some people would go as far as using a microscope 😂 I have to admit that I have tried the 35mm Ultron and was not a big fan - this show how subjective this whole lens game actually is. I know it's a brilliant lens when it comes to image quality, but I just could not work around the tactile experience and small, almost invisible distance scale.
It depend, Voilander=cosina form JP - same as Carl Zeiss - msome of leica is APCHROMATIC - usualy F2, fast lens is not apchromatic - and apochromatic is best qulaity - BUT i compare some with TTArtisan APO-M 35mm F2 ASPH. - one of best lens on Leica - i use it on GFX100S - hi qulaity, bettre that cosina and leica
I own leica and voigtlander lenses and i couldnt tell the difference on a screen. But when the comparo was tagged, the leica had neutral colour rendering, while the Nokton was noticeably punchier.
For your street photography, I can't see any difference. I like shooting with fast lenses, and you can really see the quality of a fast lens by shooting wide open. The best ones with floating elements like the newest Summilux give the best contrast and sharpness wide open. I prize my Vogtlander 50 1.2 Nokton because it is an old-school design that gives highlights a beautiful glow at f1.2, which is especially nice when shooting in monochrome.
You cannot see the differences between Voigtländer, Zeiss and Leica that easily in a video, especially when there is not much bokeh involved. You can however see them on a computer screen. Leica lenses are smaller compared to similar lenses, they usually have better corner sharpness and they give your image a je-ne-sais-quoi. On a computer screen i can tell photos shot with Leica, Zeiss and Voigtländer apart, in most cases easily. Is it worth the extra money? It's a hobby, everyone has to know that for himself.
Which look of which lens did you prefer? And what is your opinion when it comes to the question "Is Leica glass worth the money"? I would be interested to learn more about your thoughts, so please feel free to share them here. Also: In case you want to support my work and get access to additional content, please head over to my Patreon page: www.patreon.com/karinmajoka
Lots of love, Karin 🤍
Hallo,
Ich hatte bis vor kurzem das VOIGTLANDER ULTRON 28MM F2.0
TYPE II VM ASPHÉRIQUE zu meiner Leica M, das wirklich ein klasse Objektiv ist.
Fantastische Schärfe, 1A Fertigungsqualität sowie hervorragende Farbwiedergabe, die Photos waren total beeindruckend!
Man kann dieses herrliche Objektiv zu 100% empfehlen.
Da ich mir nun eine Q3 zu meiner M hinzugekauft habe, dessen 28er das Voigtländer ja ersetzt, habe ich das 28er Objektiv von Voigtländer zu meinem Bedauern verkauft.
Grüße aus Luxemburg.
Die Nokton Linse. Warum? Die Farben sehen besser aus (wärmer), der Helo Effekt bei F1.4 ist genau der Look den ich feier und es gibt kein chromatischen Aberration wie bei der Leica.
B
I think the voigtlander looks great. It was the one that I preferred.
It's a great lens and I saw really happy with it for the most part. :)
I bought the Nokton 35 mm 10 months ago and have been extremely happy with it. I don't mind small imperfections like vignetting, but the reason why I decided to change it for a Leica Elmarit was the focal length. I wanted to exchange it for a 28 mm lens instead and having seen som reviews, I decided the pricy Elmarit 28 mm was right for me. I expect to shoot it a lot for street, cityscape, architecture and landscape and the 50 mm Summicron for portraits and everything else. I ended up becoming annoyed by the constraints of a 35 mm and wanted something more versatile and moderne as my go to lens. But I have to say that the colour rendering of the Nokton and sharpness produces really lovely pictures. I will try to sell it, but I will keep it, if I can't get a decent price on it.
That intro is my comment section 😂
Hahahah feel you! 😂
I can’t tell… I’m surprised as I thought I knew the look of both of those lenses. I thought they were quite different lenses but you show that the differences are in real life very small… thank you.
I totally agree! I still think the Leica outperformed the Nokton when it comes to technical details. But in the end it does not really matter because the "real life" test results showed how close and hard to distinguish they actually were.
This was great - it's just a shame that the lens hoods gave this away quite early on who was shooting what. Still very interesting results. Great video.
Totally true, I only realised it in the edit (and hoped people would not pay attention too closely haha). But it was so bright that day, that shooting without a lens hood would be a terrible option.
I had noticed the lens hoods also but still enjoyed the video, especially the side my side comparison.
First of all, thanks for this cool comparison, it's a great idea to have these two excellent lenses go head to head.
I honestly had the right guess during the video as to which was the Leica lens. The images with the Summicron had that slightly clearer, cooler color shades, aka "Leica look", to me. With the Nokton, I found the colors more vibrant and the look a bit more washed out, more vintage style.
If money was no object, the Summicron would be my first choice, but in real life I would probably go with the Voigtländer and still be very happy with it. 🙂
Strange, to me the Nokton actually looks sharper in the centre from f2 (at 13:30). Either way if the 'sharpness' is the thing people notice about your photos then that's not a good sign. Some of the most amazing images I've ever seen aren't even fully in focus! For me I prefer cheap stuff because I can be more adventurous and focus on capturing images than worrying about super expensive gear.
Glad it’s not just me! The Nokton certainly does look sharper in the centre crops from f2, and not just because of the higher green/red colour fringing on the lens engraving from the Summicron.
Unless maybe those crops were captioned the wrong way round…
Nice to see pictures from Münster. A nice and fair comparison. The Nocton looks very good but I guess in the end we all want the summicron. did not know that they are so close...
Münster is not such an easy city for street photography though. Totally agree, they are in fact really close!
I have the nokton 35 1.4 and love it! There is just one thing that didn’t really show up that much in the review though. At wider open apertures the colors change pretty vastly for me, a lot of times I really like how this looks (also the bokeh gets swirly at 1.4) but it could be seen as an imperfection
I honestly rarely use any lens wide open, which is why I did not really put this in the focus of the review - but that is in fact a good point! The Bokeh of the Nokton is a but more agitated and swirly, but the Bokeh on the Summicron is a bit more calm and smooth in my opinion. Imperfections are not always a bad thing. :)
Nice comparison video! Some others have noted the lens hood giving it away, which I noticed as well 😅, but I guessed it right before that, but ONLY because of some distortion on some of the straight on shots of buildings where a window edge or other straight line was at the edge of the frame. If it weren't for that distortion I probably wouldn't have been able to tell much of a difference. I have the Nokton myself and have always enjoyed shooting with it and am perfectly happy with the photos it makes. I definitely don't feel like the Summicron is worth $2000 more for my purposes...but then, i've never actually used one myself.🤔
So So close! I’m just blown away that you can get such amazing quality and sharpness from film. I preferred the Leica but as said it was so close. Great video and a decision I’m going to have to make soon when I get my M6 or MP.
Leica lenses are super expensive, but from my experience, they hold their value well. I sold some Lenses after using them for years and got the same price for them. I also like that they are designed to be used fully opened. When you compare the Voigtländer f1.4 to the even more expensive Summilux, you will see a massive difference at f1.4. But I can also understand that not everyone can afford such lenses. I want to say that these lenses are not only crazy expensive but also great performers.
I agree with that! :)
I think if you're really into Leica and know you'll use the system for a long time, having your most used lens be a Leica might be worthwhile, then use third parties for the rest of your focal lengths
There's no point having a faster lens if it doesn't perform well wide-open. I only shoot Leica glass and prefer the subtle creamy fall-off and 'soft' sharpness. Highly recommend the 28 Elmarit prea(spherical) inexpensive (by Leica standards) and just jaw-dropping gorgeous.
I clocked the Summicron right away simply because I use a 50mm Summicron F2. The modern crons are so sharp. I found your Nokton to have noticeably warmer tones with a little more distortion. I’m currently shopping for a 35mm lens so this comparison was super helpful. Because I mostly shoot cars, I think I would go with the option that is more neutral in color rendering to highlight the true color of the cars. The sharpness doesn’t matter as much to me.
What a great review and very helpful in decision making considering that I’ve shot with the voigtlander 35 1.4 MC & MCII for four years. I’ve been trying to find out if it was worth the swap. I’d say very much so from this video.
Thanks for sharing! :) Glad you are happy with your choice!
My impression is that the differences aren't really big if you shoot film and mostly use medium apertures, like in street photography. I own the Nokton 35mm 1,4 (Version I though) myself and like the compactness and the image quality is mostly great. It has some annoying issues though, the distortion and vignetting can be nasty and wide open it is really soft, which makes not really a good option for low light. So I look for an upgrade, but the Leica 35mm lenses are definitely out of my price range 😕
Maybe the new Voigtländer Ultron 35mm 2,0 or the Zeiss Biogon? We'll see... Happy shooting, I would also like to see a video about your experiences with the M10 so far!
As a collector of the very finest cameras, I personally believe that’s all about their character, charm and experience of shooting. The fun factor. Not necessarily the price, sharpness or speed. It’s about that instant moment that you grab that equipment and, from the first few shots, you know you are hooked. That sweet formula that makes in love for photography again and again.
Also agree. I’ve had a few dozen lenses over the past 20 years, budget to Leica APO lenses, as well as some of Sony, Canon, Sigma and Voigtlanders best.
Quality was ultimately not the prevailing factor for me. “Good enough” with great ergonomics (largely, compactness) wins. If the lens quality is the make or break for a picture, then I wasn’t taking a great picture to begin with.
I love my Voigt collection for the SL2S , placebo makes you think Leica lens may be leaps ahead while actual perceptual difference maybe negligible. Great video
I have a Voightlander 35mm f1.4 Nokton Classic E on my Sony camera. I absolutely love it.
I choose the lens that gives the images I like the most. My three favourite lenses are 21mm Elmarit f2.8 ASPH, Nokton 35mm f1.4 classic MC II and Planar 50mm f2 ZM. I tried a variety and chose on image not price nor brand. I can’t be bothered with the Leica snobs, they are obviously more bothered about being big heads than their image quality :-)
Love your new Viedo, Karin! His name being Elmar makes it quite confusing though ;) 😄
I have the Nokton and it’s really my favorite lens. It’s just so bright and beautiful
As always, love your videos. I actually purchased the Nokton for my M6 based on research and the earlier video you mentioned. I haven't been disappointed. Do you ever discuss 50mm options? I'll have to look at your library of videos. Though I've been in the industry for over 35 years I am continuously surprised that people would tell other people how to use, or what gear they should be using. Shoot what you want, that fits your budget and serves your art.
I would love to underline your last sentence several time! Word, I could not agree more! :)
Glad to hear you are happy with the Nokton, it's a fantastic lens. So far, I have mainly shot 35mm lenses on the Leica and have tried out 28mm more recently. 50mm is not a focal length I use too often which is why I have not made any comparisons between lenses here.
Give the Nokton 50 F1.5 II a go, honestly the best jack-of-all-trades 50, fast, super small, cheapish, well made, sharp, and extremely pleasant render.
Great content! The purist will not agree but I guess you can enjoy a Leica camera with a non Leica lens. Sure a lot of the Leica lenses are great. But totally not in reach of my budget. So Voigtlander makes great lenses you can enjoy the great M bodies with a very good lens without paying the price most people can not afford. Another great alternative for me are the Carl Zeiss lenses. A bit higher in price as Voigtlander but IMHO also better performing.
And now I am gonna make the purists 🤮. I own 2 7Artisan lenses. Both very well made. Focus is smooth and tight! All metal and glass. A 35mm f2 and a 50mm f1.1. And both perform above what there price would suggest! I use the 50mm on my old M8 that is 66mm on that camera. I shoot Monochrome jpegs with this camera, and the results are absolutely stunning!
Keep up the good work!!
Kind regards.
Nice comparison. Enjoy your new lens. I only have two lenses for my two Leica M's (film and digital): the same 35mm Summicron and the 28mm Elmarit.
Thank you! :) The 28mm Elmarit seems to be a great lens as well.
Enjoy your Summicron! 🙂 I was unable to tell the differences between the two lenses, in the street photographs shown in your presentation. It does not suprise me that your side-by-side comparison images showed the Nokton to have more visible distortion, or that the Summicron has sharper corners. I have owned neither lens, but did quite much “homework” on 35mm lenses, in the past. I test-shot a new friend’s Voigtlander Nokton II MC, during a meeting at a coffee shop in a nearby city, earlier this year. (In return, he had the opportunity to try my M10, before he made a decision whether to buy a pre-owned M10-R from an on-line seller.) My initial impression of the Nokton was quite favorable!
Cosina/Voigtlander makes excellent lenses. I already have several of them, for the Nikon F-mount and for Leica. My APO Lanthar 50mm Aspherical may is one of the most stunningly “perfect” lenses I have ever used. Ultimately, however, when I did buy a 35mm lens, this past summer, I opted for Leica, though a Summilux-M 35mm f/1.4 Steel Rim “Re-Edition” lens. This may well be the only Leica M lens I ever purchase new, rather than pre-owned, so, I am glad that it works well, for me. I already had the excellent, but large Zeiss Distagon 35mm f/1.4 ZM, with very modern optics, so, it made sense to buy the Leica 35mm M lens with a more-vintage character and compact size. I know that I will have to sell lenses, to compensate my budget, but feel that it will be worth it.
Thank you, I am sure I will! :)
That's true, some differences in the 101 comparison where kind of "expected" but it's still great to actually test it and not only trust what people are saying about these lenses.
I had the chance to try out the re-released Summilux In Wetzlar on its release day and really enjoyed it for the short time I had it. A great lens to achieve great performance closed down, but really artsy, painterly quality shot wide open.
Thanks for your comment!
Super Review und sehr schöner, praxisbezogener Vergleich.
Kommt gerade richtig, da ich plane von der Fuji X-Pro3 auf eine Leica M (wohl die Monochrom Typ 246) umzusteigen. Bin noch in der Entscheidungsphase…
Das Nokton steht bei mir auf der Liste und dieses Review kommt mir gerade gelegen. Dankeschön dafür ✌🏻☺️ Ich mag den Look und ja, vom Preis her isses auch sehr ansprechend.
Vielen Dank für deinen Kommentar, das freut mich! :)
Oh, spannend! Wo stehst du grade im Entscheidungssprozess, wieso wird es vermutlich die 246 Monochrome?
Das Nokton ist super, das Review zeigt mir nochmal wie nah die beiden Objektive in der Praxis doch aneinander sind.
@@KarinMajoka Hi ! Ich bin grad auf der Suche nach einem guten Angebot für eine M246. Monochrome daher, da ich immer mehr feststelle das ich bei Street hauptsächlich B/W fotografiere und eine Kamera mit Monochrom-Sensor reizt mich schon seit langem. Andererseits überlege ich auch die X-Pro3 zu behalten und mir die Voigtländer Noktons für den X-Mount zuzulegen und dann nur mit monochromen Fuji-Rezepten bzw. Lightroom-Presets zu arbeiten. Morgen bekomme ich ein Nokton 23 f/1.2 geliehen. Vielleicht läuft das auch darauf hinaus. Ist ja auch eine finanzielle Frage ;). Mal schauen wo der Weg hinführt.
Really nice comparison, love the images you both shot!
Thank you! :)
I like in field tests. I'm not very interested in lens performance on the test booth. Colour fringing is a showstopper for me, vignetting isn't. I like vignettes, and if I ever want to get rid of it, Capture One will do the job. Also, the Nocton compares a lot more to the Leica 35 mm f1.4 Steel Rim. Compared to the Steel Rim, the Nocton performs much closer to the Leica than in this comparison. In some fields even better. For me, the Nocton 35 mm f1.4 II is the better choice, but I totally understand your decision. I will never change my Summicron 50 mm (Version IV) with any other lens. Some lenses are pure magic.
Thank you for your honest comparison. I like the style of this video and will definitely look for further content on your channel.
This is crazy! I loved the warmth of the Voigtlander images sooo much and was convinced that was gonna be the Leica lens! Glad that it isn't though lol need one of those Voigtlander lenses!
I got a summicron 35 a few months ago and I really love it but I don’t like how expensive it is and I’m thinking of selling it for that reason alone. Also recently I tested out a Q3 and so something will have to go (summicron 35) but hopefully I can try out a nokton at some point
Also I just wanted to state that in my opinion the chromatic aberration on the summicron is a benefit. I think it adds s really nice dimension to the images but I’m a fan of chromatic aberrations
I totally get that, sometimes you have to shuffle some gear around to make room for something new.
Interesting thought about the chromatic aberrations, seeing it as a strong point rather than weak point.
Great video, as always. I only have 2 M lenses - a 50mm Leica Summicron and the latest CV 35mm Nokton f1.5 - so it’s impossible for me to compare the results of different types and manufacturers of lenses at those focal lengths. That said, I see no reason to buy anything other than the CV 35mm for that focal length. I shoot digital and mainly for a black &white final image so colour rendition is irrelevant. Personally, I can discern no practical difference in the “look” of a CV lens from a Leica or Zeiss - I must just be blind to it!
Do a comparison for the summicron vs Voigtlander Ultron v2 35/2 please. The Ultron is better but would love to see if you still chose the Summicron for character. Thx
Dear Karin, great video. Have you tried the Voigtlander 35mm Ultron F2? I am looking for a budget M mount lens. I simply can't justify spending almost 6000 for the Summilux as an amateur photographer.
Nice comparison. Just by looking at the photos, I couldn't say which was shot on which lens. But I did work out who was shooting which lens quite early on in the video. I won't say how I knew, so as not to spoil it for other watchers. I owned the Nokton 35mm and it's a fantastic little performer.
Haha, I know what you are referring to. I only noticed it later because we did not film everything from behind. I just hoped people would not pay too much attention ;) Thanks for your comment!
As an owner of the Summicron 35mm. I personally feel one should use the lens that one feels gives them the look they want. I also use TTArtisan, Light Lens Lab and Thypoch lenses. I have the Voigtländer 21mm and 90mm Skopars on my to buy list.
I'm doing research I found a Nikon Z7 with a Sigma 135mm DG lens and a Leica M240 with a summicron-m 35mm f/2 asph on it.
And yes found they were in a bin, I live in a nice building I'd say some rich bloke tossed it.
Shutter was not working properly on the Leica, but sorted that out!
Hello Karin, i have no idea about Cameras but i always enjoy these videos! keep on keeping on!
Hello and thank you for this interesting video. The give away was when I saw the lens hood on your camera ... But I still enjoyed the video and I was very very much surprised at the look of the files coming from the Voigtlander. I have shot the older version (on a Leica M9) and was not very happy with center sharpness and most importantly colour fringing but it seems they've made everything better now and for a third of the price compared to the Summicron!!! Great value for the money, great to be able to go out and shooot with a lens that gets good results and will generate less stress if banged (a little). I have also shot with a Summicron ASPH 35mm (on the M9 and then on a M240 and an M6 as well) but I was less than happy with it: seems to me that (at least on my version) the Leica "pop" was lacking and overall build quality was to par with the Voigtlander; but not over the top.
Warum heißt Elmar wie die Bezeichnung einiger Leicaobjektive? Ich war zunächst irritiert. Wieso raten, wenn es da unterm Bild steht? Und war nicht vom Summicron die Rede?
Got it early on. The Leica seemed crisper to me. Great review and thanks for your efforts and presentation Karin.
I own both of those lenses and couldn’t spot any difference at all. 👏👏👍🏻
Honestly I could not tell! I really enjoyed the lens review with both the studio scenes and the street photography. I think that both lenses look great. I have used Voightländer lenses on a Cosina/Voightländer R body and a Zorki IV. They are great performers and feel nice when focusing and working the aperture ring. I have used them with an adapter on my Fuji T-T2. I have not had the pleasure of using any Leica lenses, so I don't really have a dog in this fight.
One thing I would say is that there once were a lot of disparities between old Leica and Zeiss Lenses compared with the Japanese lenses from Canon, Minolta, Konica and others in the middle to late twentieth century. Some of Leica and Zeiss's superiority came down to more fiddly tolerances and higher levels of machining and manufacturing. But by the 1980s the Japanese had caught up through through higher quality control and now by having more robots do the work. I don't think there is any meaningful quality differences between lenses made in Germany and lenses made in Japan. Everything comes down to trying to find a balance between optical qualities, ease of manufacturing, and price.
I also expect that there were different engineering philosophies and design choices that drive the performance of contemporary Leica and Voghtländer lenses. All these things come down to trade offs in lens performance, color quality, the type of Bokeh, and ease of manufacturing, cost of manufacturing, etc. For example, I am guessing Leica was fine with slight chromatic aberration because this was present in their historical lenses and they wanted to emphasize sharpness in the corners. (I don't know the exact optical formulas and science here, but from what I understand there are balancing acts with all these qualities.) Seems to me that Cosina/Voigthländer was not setting out to copy the Summicron, but instead wanted something with better chromatic performance and faster aperture, while keeping costs reasonable.
I identify as Leica Glass
Love this comment 😂
Shooting with all kinds of lenses for my Leica M10 and M2 - no prestige at all. But I find myself always going back to the Leica 50mm Summilux ASPH. I know it’s on the high price spectrum, but it just creates magic. I think @benjhaisch captured why it’s so wonderful in one of his videos. It’s my forever lens.
It was easy to tell, because the shape of the hoods was visible in the video that gave it away.
That said, both look great.
Outside of holding its value better in the long term paying x3 the price for the Summicron doesn't make sense for practicality IMO. But most Leica owners I know reach a point where they *feel* as if they need to own Leica glass or are missing out on something. Fancy camera can't be as cool if you're using a third party lens. Especially in comparison to the better Voigtlander lenses like the 35 f2 Ultron which IMO is better than the Leica counterpart.
Thank you, great review. Any chance of adding a comparison of the Zeiss 35mm lens with these.
always a good video... thanks... I elected to keep a Nokton 35 f/1.4 and an Ultron f/2. I like the slight darkened corners and slight softness in the corners on many photos, as well as the more contemporary sharp all over look for others.
Thanks for your comment. :) That's so nice to hear! Because this is exactly what I mean: "Perfection" in a lens is not always good! Some people love the quirks and imperfections a lens has because it was character.
I prefer the Nokton, as it's more "Rock & Roll. The lens is not perfect, in the same way we as humans are not perfect, and it's always good to embrace the error. Also, as Henry Cartier-Bresson once said: "Sharpness is a bourgeois concept"... That's not to say this statement should be used as an excuse for poor technique, rather that not every image has to be sharp to be credible...
I like that your friend is named after a Leica lens ;)
It was not a blind test; I can recognize from the beginning that Karin is using Voigtlander because of the hood during the photowalk.-) I own both these lenses, I use Nokton for BW and Summictron for color.-)
Lens A just has that bit more contrast I come to know with Leica lenses. I found the same experience with the Voigtlander 28mm f2 Ultron (first gen) and later made the jump to a 28 Summicron ASPH. Voigtlander by no mean a bad lens, and hard to argue if a 28 summicron is worth the money as value for money is very subjective. But if you can afford it, the result is worth it. Plus you don't really spend money buying a leica lens as they will keep their value much better than the Voigtlander. (I lost money selling the Ultron)
Funny how different perception is, I kind of feel like lens A (the Summicron) is a bit less contrasty while the Nokton is a bit more punchy. The point about keeping the value is very valid though!
Have you looked at the Voigtlander Ultron 35mm f/2? I think it is extremely competitive against the Summicron.
The Nokton 1.4 is great for the small size, character, and fast speed. The messy bokeh at low DOF can be polarizing. I enjoy it.
In Münster läuten die Glocken 5:35 Also schönes Wetter zum fotografieren.😸
I feel like the Voigtlander 35mm F2 APO Lanthar is a better comparison to the Simmicron. After having had it, it's 50mm F2 APO and 90mm F2.8 APO Lanthar siblings i'm absolutely mind blown at just how sharp and CA free those lenses are even wide open.
This is a very well informative video and a great comparison, especially for people wanting to decide which lens to go for, though i don't own a M6 nor Lecia i have a Bessa R with a Jupiter 50, i would love to see like a low end comparison between the Jupiter and the Voigtländer! amazing video thank you for the information
Thanks for your comment, I appreciate it a lot! I wanted to try out Jupiter lenses for a while now, but somehow never got my hands on any of them. Maybe a project for the future
The Voigtlander 35 ultron F2 would be a better test as it’s a fab performer. I have this and the Voigtlander 35 F1.4 nokton.
cool video Karin! :)
I'm curious if you can test the Summilux 35mm in the near future :)
I recently sold my 50mm 1.4 Summilux ASPH, because I realised that at my current situation with 2 small kids I only shoot casually with the M system and therefore 2500€ sitting on the shelf collecting dust is something I didn't like. I settled for the Nokton 35mm 1.4 for now as my only M lens since it makes financially sense, but I have to admit, I miss the Summilux :..D
Grüße aus BaWü :)
ich hatte einige Jahre das 2/35mm und fand es toll... aber nicht perfekt. Heute habe ich das Ultron 2/35 mm und da ist es genauso: Es ist nicht perfekt aber der Bildcharakter ist toll und dem des King-of-Bokeh auch sehr ähnlich!
Think the Summicron is more dreamy, cause of that ill use it with more contrasty film like Colorplus! But i love that in Gold the Nokton punches out the colours cause of contrast!
Leica glass was the best 70 years ago on 35mm cameras. It was no comparison - the precision engineering, coatings, designs, glass quality was unmatched. Medium format cameras obviously had a superior image quality and great optics from Zeiss and others, but on 35mm Leica was king. The bodies of course were elegant and durable and rangefinders were discrete and allowed for slow handheld shots for photojournalism, street, art photography and other scenarios that made it a more versatile tool. Other manufacturers weren't producing bodies that were as full featured and none of them had optics that could compete.
However, In the very late 70's, and continuing into the 80's and 90's, all the big manufacturers caught up. Nikon AI glass was exceptional and rivaled what Leica was producing and many other manufacturers had caught up as well. Still, that reputation had stuck due to effective branding and marketing.
The vast majority of people will fail in blind tests or prefer non-Leica lenses and there really is nothing to justify the price tags associated with Leica glass. They don't have special MTF curves, they don't have special designs (they've been reproduced and copy cats have existed for years), all manufacturers have exceptional coating and fantastic manufacturing processes with finer tolerances that today are superior then stuff we considered elite in the 80's and 90's. Of course some vintage lenses do have unique characteristics in out of focus areas but there are lots of modern lens designs like that as well.
Realistically, you have to go out of your way to buy 'bad lenses' nowadays cause even the cheap stuff is very good by historical standards.
Ultimately people can of course buy whatever they want but for the hobbyist or working photographer, paying for a 3000 dollar f2 35mm lens is totally unnecessary and it's not going to unlock any new potential in you.
Put another way - your shot will not go from forgettable to award winning because you used Leica instead of voigtlander. However, by saving that 2000 dollars you might be able to go on a trip and take an award winning shot with that voigtlander :)
With that said, I understand many people are very motivated by what equipment they use and it compels them to pick it up and shoot which is important so. Yea.
I was wrong! After a couple shots I thought Karin had the summi for sure!
Nice video and great work on the comparison! However, I feel you have tested the wrong lens 😉. This particular Voigtländer lens deliberately aims to be a character lens by copying the design of the first Summilux from the 1960's. The Summicron you tested is older by is meant to be as clinical as possible.Voigtläder has the excellent 35mm Nokton F1.5, which uses aspherical elements and is a modern lens. There is also the Ultron F2, which woudkl be a good Summicron equivalent and the APO Lanthar, which is meant to compete with the APO Summincron, but is still much cheaper than the normal Summicron. All these would make a better alternative for the Summicron IMO. The lens you tested could be seen as an alternative to one of the Leica vintage reissues.
Having said that, I feel that any of the 35mm Voigtländers are great alternatives to Leica's own offerings. I am a big proponent of them. I can not see a difference between a 1,000 USD Voigländer lens and a almost 5k USD Leica equivalent in normal use, i.e. not the typical contrived test scenarios (like brick walls).
You know, I don't compare lenses that would be great to compare in theory, but I compare lenses that would be great to compare in practise ;) I simply compare these two because this is truly how my evolution of lenses happened: I switched from the Nokton to the Summicron so it makes senses for me to compare the two, even though they might not be equivalent "on paper". I totally see your point though and get where you this idea is coming from, so thanks for bringing the suggestion in! :)
Also, in practise I know that the Nokton 35mm 1.4 is one of the most popular lenses for people who get their first 35mm lens for the Leica M system. And for many it's a question that occurs if they should "upgrade" to a Leica lens or not, so this is a scenario that happens regularly (and that I get questions about regularly).
By the way: I had the Ultron for one day and brought it back to the store more or less immediately because I did not like it at all. The comparison would therefore be over at that point for me already haha :D Well, I guess that just proves how subjective things are
@@KarinMajoka Yes, good point about the 1.4 being a very popular first lens choice (due to it being relatively cheap, I assume).
I agree, it's a good comparison. Just thought I should point out that there are alternatives that are maybe more comparable (in terms of intended performance).
To be completely honest, in my daily use, the feel of a lens (focus throw, smoothness of focus ring, ease of changing aperture, the thing not covering half the viewfinder) is much more important than all this rendering and performance stuff.
I figured that the images that were tack sharp were from the summicron. While the others weren't tack sharp. Not necessarily a bad thing if you want some character vs sterile images. I was looking at the corners of the image for sharpness. At least in my opinion that's how I was able to tell the difference. which do you prefer?
I didn't guess right but I preferred the Nokton in the blind test and assumed it was the Leica, so I was pleasantly surprised.
yes I watched that video over and over again
So I couldn't tell which was the Leica lens. Nevertheless, I like the look of the Voigtländer better. If I had to choose, it would be the Voigtländer.
7:33 is a really good picture.
Hmmm… like them both. Own them both ( version 1&2 of the Voigtlaender). Use them both. Strangely the voigtlaender V2 is on my M8 for B/W most of the time. The 35 2 is on my film Leicas or on the 240. But … the enlarged prints of shots taken with the 35 2 are breathtaking sometimes, by enlarged I mean poster size for exhibits or the wall at home with a size of 1.5 to 1 m or even bigger…
Hi, sorry fot off topic question: I've seen the TT art 28mm. Do you think that it is necessary to calibrate it, since I want to use it only with analog leica.. thank you
Münster, nice place, visited it last spring for the first time
I preferred the Leica, but I think it might have been the exposure. I didn’t see a difference in the quality of the images. I have some Zeiss and Voightlander lenses. The quality is excellent for the price.
Maybe you should also compare Ultron 2/35 VM II to both testes lenses. I am pretty sure you would be surprised, how the latest version of Ultron beats also Summicron lens, while wide open :)
No sabría decir cuál prefiero pero (en la mayoría de los casos) sí sabría diferenciar las fotos de uno u otro, la verdad.
Does it also depend on whether you shoot film or digital? I’d imagine for film you would not necessarily want a super clinical modern Leica lens? I shoot on an M6 + f5.6 28.mm summaron - I love the vintage look it gives. I’m looking for a faster lens but wonder which of these two would suit film. For digital I guess the Leica hands down.
Speaking as a nikon/nikkor guy, I can just sit here with my popcorn and see how it all shakes out. 😁
Comparison with Ultron have had more fair results. However i have used both. Even i dont care technical details as such i can say that like almost all my photos taken with Summicron Asph I. Nice sharpness with a character
Nice comparison… maybe now compare the Cron to the VM Ultron II.
This probably won't happen. Had the Ultron for one day and returned it back to the store the next day because I did not like it at all.
I guess, beside Leica owners, most of people know that anything branded "Leica" is mainly just for those who can afford it, no matter how sharp their eyes are at nitpicking or how high their photographic skills are, or how trully needed these products are for their photography. In fact, by not putting a Leica lens on your M body you defeat the main concept of owning a M camera : the distinctive factor. Kidding aside, I know the other 35mm rangefinders are... different, maybe not as comfy or hyped. But still, my point stands : you can make them work. Buy a Bessa put any lense you want and keep the change you saved (thousands of euros) and shoot a shit ton of films :)
That's great. I shoot w a Summilux 35 and before that w Voigtlander and Zeiss and I was 100 % sure Karin had the Summicron. 100% wrong !
Should have tested it against the newer ultron. It's also a f2 lens, and superior to the old nokton in every way possible. So is the new nokton 1.5
I get your point! However, what people sometimes don't understand is that I am not buying lenses to compare them. I am simply showing my journey when it comes to my equipment and compare the lenses I own. So I could not compare the Summicron to the Ultron since I simply don't own it. I have used the Nokton for 1.5 years and got the Summicron as an idea to replace it - which is why it made sense for me to compare these two, even though other lenses might be more "equivalent" technically. The Nokton is actually a common entrance lens to the Leica M system, so I know many people who have this lens and were wondering if it makes sense to switch to Leica glass or not.
I think one has to expect more fall-off (vignetting) the more a lens can open. The Noctilux shows even more vignetting. In that aspect the two lenses aim for a different design with different objectives. The Summicron is a bit the all rounder.
For analog photography with film there will not be much difference, but it had been high megapixels cameras there could maybe be more difference. I do not have Leica M camera, I do not like rangefinder cameras. But I do have Leica R Lenses and Voigtländer Lenses. The Voigtländer APO-Lanthar 35mm 2.0 Aspherical is an excellent Lens with outstanding good optical image quality, at least as good as the best Leica Lenses !
I preferred, but not by much, the Nokton.
Totally fair! As I said, I think it's best to just choose a lens based on personal, subjective preference :)
I honestly thought you were the one with the Leica lens 😮
To me, the difference is obvious.
I have a Summicron 35 that I use a lot.
And I have a Voight 28 Ultron, which I don't use because I don't like the imaging of those lenses.
I bought my first M camera thinking I could shoot with third party lenses and save money.
But it didn't work out.
Only Leica lenses capture the essence
My opinion: it’s worth the money if you can afford it. It means if it‘s not going to hurt your bank balance, just do it. The experience of shooting with a Summilux or Summicron is really good. But if it’s gonna make you feel some impact on your bank account, and Preis-Leistung-Verhältnis is a thing for you, then don’t do it. Actually, between my Nokton 50/1.1 and my 11726, I could not see a big difference in terms of sharpness. I tested 50 Summicron and I could tell the difference(between the test photos, I even forgot which one was Nokton and which one was Summicron). The improvement in pure picture quality is not worth the money. But the feeling, the focusing, and at some scene, you can feel it later that Nokton is going to perform differently, but that doesn’t happen a lot.
Honestly it is hard to understand through a video on YT. Then I have to say that for what I have seen I prefer the Voigtländer. Or, it is better to say I don’t see the difference to justify the price tag of the Leica
I liked this comparison. Unfortunately at 04:46 we can see the side of your lens which kind of gives it away. The lens you shot with has warmer and more vivid colours that I associate with Zeiss lenses so I guessed that was the Voigtlaender. Cheers.
That's true, I was hoping people would not pay that close attention 😬 It's really hard filming each other without showing the lens and not wanting to film everything only from behind.
I totally agree, the Nokton is a bit more punchy on the film images.
The light and compositions made the difference.
I'm pretty happy with my color Skopar 35! I broke on the 50 and got a summicron v3 because there are not many good alternatives in the 50. But not what I wanted to see. :(
If you use Leica Cameras and lenses really hard as daily users then the prices will yield their values. If you only use the leica system as seasonal user then the prices outweigh the values. I used M cameras, summilux and summicron as daily users, only after years of ownership I begin to detect in which fields these summiluxes and summicron outshine other camera system. Am not talking about MTF because current Sony GM lenses have very high MTF, am talking about how we tend to take 2nd,3rd, 4th look at pictures we took using Leica lenses. There is something that makes the object stand out as if they are alive in the pictures.
Vielen Dank! Schöne fotos. Of course, the Leica lens was much better when I looked through a microscope at the pictures. . 😇. I never considered a Leica lens for my MP. For that money, I could buy several Voightländers and never notice the difference. I am talking about my type of amateur photography, not about the photos by pros. I have several Ultrons f2 and they are small and light and even with hood do not block too much of the view finder. This is very important for me.
I have one second hand Leica 24mm, which I sometimes use in cities or for landscapes. For parties with many people, it is great for an atmosphere of togetherness, coupled with the (Voightländer) 75mm for more intimacy. I can tell the difference only by the angle. But don't forget I am just an experienced amateur, not a professional.
Thanks for your comment, I appreciate it! Haha, that's what I call next level pixel-peeping, but I am sure some people would go as far as using a microscope 😂
I have to admit that I have tried the 35mm Ultron and was not a big fan - this show how subjective this whole lens game actually is. I know it's a brilliant lens when it comes to image quality, but I just could not work around the tactile experience and small, almost invisible distance scale.
It depend, Voilander=cosina form JP - same as Carl Zeiss - msome of leica is APCHROMATIC - usualy F2, fast lens is not apchromatic - and apochromatic is best qulaity - BUT i compare some with TTArtisan APO-M 35mm F2 ASPH. - one of best lens on Leica - i use it on GFX100S - hi qulaity, bettre that cosina and leica
very nice intro,
my choice: Leica yes! Voigtländer/Zeiss why not! TT-artisan no way!
I actually shoot with the 50mm TTartisan and love it! Great build and image quality. For the price you can't beat it.
@@JPWineberg I don’t like china products, the quality may be ok, but china stuff is not my way
I have nothing against Chinese made products but the TT-Artisan lenses are a big no for me too. I have no idea why people like them.
@@cggg490 have you shot with one?
because theyre cheap and they work sometimes really well. it's fairly obvious why people would like them lol@@cggg490
Yes. Next question.
I own leica and voigtlander lenses and i couldnt tell the difference on a screen. But when the comparo was tagged, the leica had neutral colour rendering, while the Nokton was noticeably punchier.
You totally have it away with the side shot of your shooting the Nokton. Oooooops!!! Maybe be more careful on future “blind” test. 😂
For your street photography, I can't see any difference. I like shooting with fast lenses, and you can really see the quality of a fast lens by shooting wide open. The best ones with floating elements like the newest Summilux give the best contrast and sharpness wide open. I prize my Vogtlander 50 1.2 Nokton because it is an old-school design that gives highlights a beautiful glow at f1.2, which is especially nice when shooting in monochrome.
You cannot see the differences between Voigtländer, Zeiss and Leica that easily in a video, especially when there is not much bokeh involved. You can however see them on a computer screen.
Leica lenses are smaller compared to similar lenses, they usually have better corner sharpness and they give your image a je-ne-sais-quoi. On a computer screen i can tell photos shot with Leica, Zeiss and Voigtländer apart, in most cases easily.
Is it worth the extra money? It's a hobby, everyone has to know that for himself.
Interesting thought, I agree! Especially the last sentences, what's "worth it" is always subjective.