[awreetus]

[url="http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=276"]Nokton μFT 25 review[/url]



Summary



Pros:

solid, very well-made and compact barrel at the same time,

very good f/0.95 aperture,

sensational image quality in the frame centre,

good image resolution on the edge of the frame,

chromatic aberration controlled in an excellent way,

decent correction of astigmatism,

not very bothersome distortion.



Cons:

the image is distinctly „fuzzy” at the maximum relative aperture,

significant vignetting near the maximum relative aperture,

high coma.



The flaws of the Nokton 0.95/25 are quite typical for very fast lenses with the field of view on the level of 40-50 degrees. In fact almost every single one of them features huge vignetting, high coma and an average image quality at the maximum relative aperture. Splendid fastness, compact dimensions, perfect build quality and exemplary image quality on slight stopping down are the chief assets of the Voigtlander, tested here. Such advantages are certainly not common in the case of classic 50 mm lenses so the users of the Micro 4/3 system gain here a very strong point.

[PuxaVida]

... and [url="http://noktor.com/products.php"]this beauty[/url] would also dazzle the micro 4/3 owners as well.

[Sylvain]

[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1292333806' post='4981']

... and [url="http://noktor.com/products.php"]this beauty[/url] would also dazzle the micro 4/3 owners as well.

[/quote]



Not I... <img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />

Until I see a proper review of it, the NOKTOR still looks like an overpriced quick C-mount to m43 job, with all that this implies. And fluo green just give it poor looks.

Just my 2 cents!

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='awreetus' timestamp='1292329408' post='4980']

[url="http://www.lenstip.com/index.php?test=obiektywu&test_ob=276"]Nokton μFT 25 review[/url]



Summary



Pros:

solid, very well-made and compact barrel at the same time,

very good f/0.95 aperture,

sensational image quality in the frame centre,

good image resolution on the edge of the frame,

chromatic aberration controlled in an excellent way,

decent correction of astigmatism,

not very bothersome distortion.



Cons:

the image is distinctly „fuzzy” at the maximum relative aperture,

significant vignetting near the maximum relative aperture,

high coma.



The flaws of the Nokton 0.95/25 are quite typical for very fast lenses with the field of view on the level of 40-50 degrees. In fact almost every single one of them features huge vignetting, high coma and an average image quality at the maximum relative aperture. Splendid fastness, compact dimensions, perfect build quality and exemplary image quality on slight stopping down are the chief assets of the Voigtlander, tested here. Such advantages are certainly not common in the case of classic 50 mm lenses so the users of the Micro 4/3 system gain here a very strong point.

[/quote]

The users of a mirco 4/3rds system do NOT gain a "very strong point" here.... They merely gain an interesting lens ONLY for the 4/3rds camera they own.



Lets do the math:



25mm x 2 crop factor = 50mm

f0.95 x 2 crop factor = f1.9



So.... basically a 50mm f1.8 equivalent. Want to compare prices? Even 50mm f1.4 lenses are most of the times more affordable.

That is for full frame.



What about APS-C?



Canon 35mm f2 (full frame + APS-C)

Canon 35mm f1.4 L USM (full frame + APS-C)

Nikon 35mm f1.8 DX (APS-C)

Sony 35mm f1.8 (APS-C)

Sigma 30mm f1.4 EX DC HSM (APS-C)

Tokina 35mm f2.8 1:1 macro (APS-C)



It was only 4/3rds which did not offer any "standard" lens with such an aperture. Now they finally have one option, without AF though.

[Guest]

Why bother? The Pana 20mm is really quite nice and so much more pocketable. An economical 50mm, why not, but I cannot possibly get excited about anything with manual focusing in this day and age. Don't get me wrong, I like to use MF, but I don't like to have to use it. For my purposes, I really can't see why I'd want either one.

[popo]

For lack of a better description, not everyone shoots "equivalent DoF" priority all the time. Or even most of the time. The potential purchasers would likely shoot "I need more light" priority, and that's where this lens fits in.



If you're going to do the format compares, then you can pretty much strike out APS-C, since there is no 30-35mm f/1.2 which would be required if you maintain the equivalent aperture comparison. Even downgrading to a f/1.4 isn't cheap still. The full format may have a 50mm f/1.8, but you still need the full format sensor behind it, again not so cheap in any fair like for like comparison. And all that still neglects considerations outside of image quality.



Having said all that, I wouldn't get one either. The MF experience on Olympus at least just isn't there. If it had AF, it might raise some interest even if it the image quality isn't there wide open.

[Brightcolours]

[quote name='popo' timestamp='1292435490' post='5012']

For lack of a better description, not everyone shoots "equivalent DoF" priority all the time. Or even most of the time. The potential purchasers would likely shoot "I need more light" priority, and that's where this lens fits in.



If you're going to do the format compares, then you can pretty much strike out APS-C, since there is no 30-35mm f/1.2 which would be required if you maintain the equivalent aperture comparison. Even downgrading to a f/1.4 isn't cheap still. The full format may have a 50mm f/1.8, but you still need the full format sensor behind it, again not so cheap in any fair like for like comparison. And all that still neglects considerations outside of image quality.



Having said all that, I wouldn't get one either. The MF experience on Olympus at least just isn't there. If it had AF, it might raise some interest even if it the image quality isn't there wide open.

[/quote]

You are right, in that for APS-C there are not as fast standard primes. On the other hand, uptill this f25mm f0.95 there was no f1.4 equivalent or even f2 equivalent for 4/3rds either.



So... compared to full frame, this lens is nothing special. Compared to APS-C, this lens is not all that special, but it does open wider. On 4/3rds, it is special and very welcome, but lacking AF.



You are also right on the "I need more light" priority. For 4/3rds users it is a welcome addition in that aspect. Compared to FF, it is nothing special here again (considering one uses equivalent ISO settings). On APS-C again this lens has a 1 stop advantage.

[genotypewriter]

[quote name='popo' timestamp='1292435490' post='5012']

If you're going to do the format compares, then you can pretty much strike out APS-C, since there is no 30-35mm f/1.2 which would be required if you maintain the equivalent aperture comparison.

[/quote]

Well we have the Nex now... so we can use:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/288040-REG/Voigtlander_45BA236B_Nokton_35mm_f_1_2_Aspherical.html



<img src='http://forum.photozone.de/public/style_emoticons/<#EMO_DIR#>/smile.gif' class='bbc_emoticon' alt='' />





[quote name='popo' timestamp='1292435490' post='5012']

Even downgrading to a f/1.4 isn't cheap still. The full format may have a 50mm f/1.8, but you still need the full format sensor behind it, again not so cheap in any fair like for like comparison. And all that still neglects considerations outside of image quality.

[/quote]

This is where it gets difficult to compare. A good 50 1.8 on FF will produce better IQ images than a 25 0.95 on a mFT, even if the number of pixels is the same between the sensors.



GTW

[popo]

[quote name='genotypewriter' timestamp='1292469888' post='5034']

Well we have the Nex now... so we can use:

http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/288040-REG/Voigtlander_45BA236B_Nokton_35mm_f_1_2_Aspherical.html

[/quote]

The earlier statement I made was in reference to Brightcolour's listing of SLR lenses. The 35mm f/1.2 on NEX would be about parity with 25mm f/0.95 on f4/3, but not "better" in the sense of cost or functionality (still manual everything).