So here we are with the first battle between the two top Micro Four Thirds lens. Which one is better? The manual focusing and ultrafast Nokton or the new, cheaper and autofocusing Leica lens? At SLRclub you can find the answer! A forum user just posted an image comparison you can see below (Click on image to enlarge). As you see the Panasonic lens is much sharper at the center of the image (at f/1.4) but the border performance of the Nokton is still better than the border performance from the Panasonic. This is so because the Nokton has a much larger lens.
If you prefer the manual focusing and ultrafast Voigtlaender lens you can get it right now at [shoplink 15659 ebay]eBay (Click here)[/shoplink] and at Amazon France (Cheapest price),
The Leica will be available in early August and you can preorder at Adorama (Click here), J&R (Click here) and Digitalrev (Click here).
Now let’s vote:
[poll id=”72″]
96 Responses
Leica’s beter
people are too lazy to focus manually these days. always relying on something to focus it for you.
Why???
What I see in the sample images….
1) the Noktor f1.4 isn’t focused correctly, imho no way that the Noktor is sharper in corner than in center… + it’s mutch sharper in center than in the picture….
2) It’s not some big, different distance? what avreathing was different??? (ok sure mm of lens are never 100% correct, but sutch difference? and why it’s bigger in center and smaller in corner compered to Leica ??? Different photo, different sytuation,different lighting too??? )
3) lighting … the books on Leica has some strong reflections …. while the books on Noktor dodn’t, this can’t be done just by the lens. So the lighting was diferent. Compering contrast on pictures, pointless!!!
4) Leica too many aberation (will be realy bad on bokeh, whats the main purporse of sutch lens), lots of post procesing (probably in camera) which isn’t good either for me.
Over all the test looks realy bad to me … a amatuer test saying practicaly nothing.
+1
I don’t buy this “test”. The lighting looks entirely different. Like shooting a similar scene on sunny and cloudy days. Even the framing varies.
This proves only that the tester doesn’t know how to control shooting conditions.
i buy this test. nokton is better. the leica AF is no good
Please don’t confuse the Nokton with the Noktor, that is a very different lens from a very very different company.
+1
Please, don’t insult Voigtlander by calling Nokton “Noktor”.
better^
Why not shoot test images at f4, f5.6, f8, f11?
Or f1.0… oh, wait… 😉
yeah i find that kinda annoying too, why does everyone assume we are only interested in using the lens wide open always. they are after all the only 25mm lenses officially available.
rant over 🙂
🙂 Would be nice to see 0.95 anyway. just to compare
There are! See here http://mokona25.tistory.com/11
Here you go: http://mokona25.tistory.com/11
edit: Never mind, someone beat me to it.
The Leica is a little disappointing given the price and the 50/2.8 equivalence. Didn’t know the 0.95 was so poor though.
Do we have to bring up the term equivalence in every topic? LOL, seriously, this is becoming a FF vs M43 Equivalence Forum. I wonder why we don’t see any FF vs APS-C equivalence website around.
Just don’t feed the trolls LOL
The Voigtländer 25/0.95 is a trash with extremely deep DOF even wide open.
Just compare it to the Polaroid 20×24 system: F33 equivalence!
😉
Pity that Leica M doesn’t have autofocus.
Man, you’re a bad troll…
If you’re not… you don’t really understand the concept of a rangefinder camera, do you? Have you ever tried a Leica M camera?
Well all “numbers” are easer for me to understand in FF equivalent. This is not a FF vs M43 comper, this only say’s what are you getting for your money!!!!
Ok there is the Pentax 1/2.3″ system coming … so you will be totaly happy with 25mm f1.4 lens??? You whant transfer this number to FF equivalent to understand what thay mean???
Realy I can’t imagine the wiev angel of 25mm lens on 1/2.3″ senzor, neither I can a 25mm lens on 43mm senzor. But a 50mm lens on FF is mutch easer for me …. Some it’s with f-number I can better imagine the DOF whan I recalculate the f-number to FF equivalent…..
I hope you understand my point of View…..
You’re wrong. The DOF doesn’t depend on the sensor size/pixel density. Take a photo of a ruler. If the DOF is 1mm on one sensor, it is 1mm on any other sensor (at the same distance from the lens).
I see that the DOF is 1mm. Why do you insist that in’t “effectively” 2mm?
“Didn’t know the 0.95 was so poor though.”
Until this test everyone was saying it’s the best lens ever. Now it’s poor… and we are still making 2.8 comparisms… wow narrow depth of field, on the internet it seems there is no other type of photography, wow narrow depth of field
Just makes me lol and lol
The most important reasons people buy prime lens is to get shallow depth of field(nice bokeh) and fast shutter speed.
you can add
1. quality
2. low light performance
3. improved composition by the photographer
4. size
to shallow of depth of field and faster shutter
#3 should read ACTUAL composition by photographer.
Instead of blasting away and cropping their way to a “composition”. Sorry, but in my book, cropping simply ain’t composing.
One of the real pleasures and challenges of shooting with prime lenses is working with the limitation of a single focal length. It forces me to think a bit more. To slow down a bit. Move and shift and use the entire frame. the fact that primes are brighter and sharper than zooms is a plus.
I think they serve quite different purpose even for the same focal length.
If you are not shooting action, the Voigtlander lens is more flexible, with the large aperture and much much closer minimum focus distance.
The Leica is probably sharper above F 2.8, and of course, smaller and have the AF.
All in all, more variety to the system is more welcome.
I saw a review few months ago between old Leica 4/3 25/1.4 againts Nokton VC 25/0.95 @ Luminous landscape and Nokton is sharper and has more contrast @ 1.4 than the Old PL 25/1.4@1.4,… These could be mean that the new Leica more sharper than the old one ,.. I dont know but I’m glad i have the old one.
I would differ, I think the old 25mm lecia is the sharpest
They both look like nice lenses. I think I will go for the Leica 25mm 1.4 for the option of AF. Around the centre the Leica looks a bit sharper.
Its pretty good at 1.4 and really sharp at 2. I dont know if its just me but it looks like the 25 f0.95 only starts to sharpen at f2.8.
Something seems terribly off with that test…
The supposed f/1.4 photo with the Nokton really looks like f/0.95.
I thought the same – at this center images the Voigtlaender is very soft at 1.4. At the edge Leica & Voigtlaender look equal at 1.4, but the Nokton improves at stopping down while the Leica behaves like the FT sister.
Maybe a trick to get more background blur… 😉
Honestly, I’d wait for a more serious piece of comparing until deciding.
+11 No kidding.
The “tester” seems irked that the Voigtländer is double the price of the Leica and is out to prove the Leica “superior” regardless of the method. Sort of in the mode of “scientists” and creationists out to disprove climate change and evolution.
Meandering a little, but while creationism and evolution are both unproved theories, hasn’t climate change been shown to be a fact already, both scientifically and empirically (although maybe not politically)?
>Meandering a little, but while creationism and evolution are both unproved theories, hasn’t climate change been shown to be a fact already, both scientifically and empirically (although maybe not politically)?
Why I think that both evolution and global warming are reality, I think that evolution is more proven then global warming.
Where is the full size image- not just the crops,… I”m tired to read about these DoF issue ,.. when we are exiting to talking about the glas not the sensor size ,.. Seems like those people never learn ,.. Or just learn about Dof,.. Thx admin
Hmm this gets me wondering about the 20mm or the 25mm micro panasonics. They’re a bit different, but if I can only start with one, what to pick. I thought the 25mm leica was going to be about the same price as the non-micro, which was $900.
Why are the shots framed differently? Angle of view is substantially wider for leica. Indicates distances are different? Would be interesting to see the 20mm pancake too.
Brod1er: I did a comparison between the Voigtlander 25/0.95 and the 20/1.7 pancake – stopped down in daylight. In my test, the Voigtlander was sharper in the center; the Lumix pancake lens performed better in the extreme corners.
http://www.bmupix.com/journal/2010/12/5/voigtlander-nokton-25mm-f095-corner-sharpness.html
I’ve now sold the Voigtlander. I found it too heavy as a general purpose prime. The lack of AF also made it less versatile. But optically it is an excellent lens.
Very nice test Björn! I will post a link from 43rumors inside my next “a little bit of everything” post! 🙂
Thanks, admin. I prefer more realistic test photos, even if it means waiting days – even weeks – for a day with suitable weather. But good things come to those who wait 🙂
I have a copy of the Nokton 25. It is much sharper at f/1.4 than the test suggests. In fact it’s as sharp in the center as the 4/3 Summilux 25.
IMO the comparison is not very useful. Obviously those two lenses are very different and serve different shooting styles. For most users the Leica makes more sense as it will allow faster use in most cases. The Nokton offers an astonishing level of creative control due to its close focusing, bokeh characteristics and distance scale. However, it’s twice as heavy and requires a level of familiarity with “olden day” techniques. Both lenses are excellent.
Thanks for the post sneye. It looks to me as if there is something wrong with the .95 centre images. There is just no detail in them at all.
I like well made manual lenses, so if I had to get either of these, I’d get the Voigtlander. But for a normal FOV lens, I think I’d prefer the much smaller 20mm pancake.
Thanks Bjorn! As several people have stated, these three lenses are all quite different yet very good in their particular ways. Collectively by offering so many options they are a real strength for mft. Nikon offers five 50mm lenses, but I think these three offer more options and interest and creativity.
The Leica looks quite good in the center. But the edges have too much CA for me. Not to be a bore, but the 20/1.7 does not have that problem at all, even wide open.
This is not correct. The 20/1.7 has quite noticeable CA in the corners. At least my copy does.
then you either have a bad copy, or you do not use it on a panasonic body, or we have a totally different definition of CA 🙂
this is a takeout from the pics at dpreview of the guy wearing an adidas jacket, left is the 20/1.7, right is the 25/1.4, show me the one that has the bad CA…
http://i200.photobucket.com/albums/aa253/frankvcp/screen-capture-1.jpg
I am glad to see this test even if it isn’t a great one. Most of the discussion so far has been 20/1.7 v 25/1.4. This is the queestion that I am interested in – which 25mm to get, if any. I hope to see many more tests, and hopefully some real whole image comparisons as I am more interested in the overall characteristics of a lense than on crops of books.
i would never base my opinion on someone else’s test. for me its just buying the thing and hope it will satisfy me.
I agree that the real test is using something for yourself and selling it if it doesn’t work out for you. But if you are on a limited budget, then other people’s shots can at least give you a start. They can raise enough interest to give something a go.
my budget is also limited, but still, i experienced in the past that a positive final verdict was no guarantee for me, sometimes an average tested product was much higher appreciated by me, subjective factor plays an important role imo.
Does anybody know something near 50 mm and better than F1.2 for MFT?
The upcoming Oly 45/F1.8 would be stellar, but I’d prefer wider aperture.
(I’d be happy even with Noktor 50/F0.95, but the price tag is not just high – it’s inacceptable.)
You don’t have many options. Voigtlander Nokton 50/1.1 offers the best compromise between image quality and price, but it’s not very good wide open according to what I’ve seen. The Noktor 50/0.95 is unacceptable to me and the Leicas are very good but outrageously expensive. Other options are the Nikon 50/1.2 AIS and the famous Canon 50/1.2 (not useful on m4/3 because it lacks an aperture ring), neither of which impress me.
Now, why would you need such a large aperture? Do you shoot in the dark?
I do, and YES! I love a fast aperture for it. Most of the pictures of my baby are done indoors, and while I occasionally bounce flash, sometimes It’s nice without.
The canon FD 50-55mm F1.2 is decent. can be had for $200-$500 depending on seller. You shouldn’t pay more than $300 unless it’s aspherical or “L”. Sharpness is nice at F2, by which point the glow at F1.2 is mostly gone. F1.2 is ok – but really don’t expect miracles. The Nikon 50mm F1.2 is more expensive, and more of the same.
The Nokton F1.1 is supposed to be pretty nice – but I don’t think I can justify spending that much for a while. Plus, at 1.1 you’d want some form of focusing assistance – perhaps “peeking” ala nex cameras.
I have a pentax version of the 85mm and it’s quite nice – even wide open. But the focal length makes it a little difficult indoors unless you’re in a large room. You’re walking around with an effective 170mm.
BTW, if you’re after super shallow DOF you should consider the Samyang 85/1.4. It’s sharp enough wide open and has rather smooth OOF rendering.
I love my Minolta MD 50/1.2, super contrasty and sharp
Yes, have that lens as well. It’s not as sharp by far as the Nokton though when fully open.
Yes, I need it for shallow DOF – and You’re right, the Samyang would be a good choice. Any rumors about releasing it on MFT mount?
Why faster than f/1.2 on MFT? I have the Hexanon 57mm f/1.4 and it’s plenty shallow for portraits: one eye is soft when shooting a face diagonally. There’s a f/1.2 Hexanon, but it’s very large, and I’m sure the other f/1.2 or faster lenses are large as well.
Not to open Pandora’s Box, but do you mean 50mm equivalent or actual (35mm, FF) 50mm?
The Voigtländer Nokton 40mm f1.4 is reported to be very good and very small. I have the 35mm f1.4 and love it. It’s kind of a special lens.
sneye, Ulli and SPF: all excellent points! We must be a pack of FotoGeezers, eh? 😉
I mean actual focal length.
My guy seems to be this thing:
http://www.fotosbolt.com/objektiv-adapter-fenykepezogep-galeria/tomioka/auto-revuenon-1-4-55-2
I can buy a Ricoh rebadged version (perfect condition!) for 350 Romanian Leu (just a bit more than 100 USD) and the adapter costs less than 20 USD.
I think it’s a good deal…
Its ok lens, but it works like 110mm f2.8 on m4/3s you know? 25mm work like 50mm lens (or so called “normal” lens). Sure you have shalow DOF with that lens, but Nocton can focus from 25 cm (or so) and it has DOF as 50mm f1.9 (and it behaves similary, just let much more light in.. so you can shoot at ridiculously low ISO). You can shoot at ISO 200 at night.. not much lens can give you that.
Minolta Rokkor 58mm 1.2 is really nice and impressive at 1.2, and very sharp at 2.0. But bulky…
The size and autofocus makes the Leica more appealing to me…
it’s a nice luxury to be able to select between 2 such good lenses in the same system, that’s one of the true benefits of the open standard.
also for the given build quality/performance i don’t find the voigtlander zu be overpriced, try a price-quote on leica-lenses.. which have similar build quality
you don’t compare 0.95 vs 1.4 like that .
both lenses serve different purpose too , I would get both and enjoy both.
0.95 still much faster lens than 1.4 . For what Nokton cost, its a steal.
my Canon 50mm F1.0 is actually softer than Nokon 0.95
Softer on full-frame or m4/3s? Not many ppl actually have Canon 50mm f1.0 L, very rare, very expensive..
I just checked the original post here: http://mokona25.tistory.com/11
In terms of sharpness, the “leica” does a better job at f1.4. From f2.0 on, the nokton is sharper in every comparison. See f4 and f5.6!
Nokton has also much less CA (doesn’t reply on any correction!) and better contrast.
I would like to see a bokeh comparison too…real world….not this pixel peeping stuff. I am sure both lenses have an overall “feel” to them.
Based on these images I think the P/L is looking pretty good just from the standpoint of cost and auto focus…but I need to see more.
I bet Leica will win on bokeh, to me nokton have rough bokeh.
Is it just me or has the photographer underexposed the Voïgtlander samples above? It would be nice to see the two lenses compared with proper exposure for both.
That’s not the Nokton well focused
Or, at least, my copy is way better
The center is sharp even wide open , @ f1.4 is much better than that
Brian- I agree the Nokton looks underexposed. However I assume the tester used set aperture/speed/ISO? if so, maybe the test reveals the nokton is not as bright as the f stops imply. Looks like it is at least half stop slower ie f1.4 on the leica is equivalent of f1.2 on the nokton. Can anyone confirm?
It is always annoying here when you have to look at the photos with a piece chopped of on the right side. This photo has it and the E-P3 photo has it.
Like this site very much but Admin, do something about this, please.
I have the voigt and those samples are not very accurate at all…mine is super sharp over all apertures (corner sharpness gets softer wider open between f1.4 to f0.95 …show me any f0.95 lense with corner sharpness!!!)
Dont get me started about digitalrevs video review.
Can someone please post a decent test. This is just so amateurish.
This you can not call a test. I am a lucky Nokton user and I would say, this lens you must have a exercise on it.
Nokton is for me a very purpose-conscious lens. If you get a Nokton and lucky with the quality, it’s just awesome. When you are frustrated, just try another week, or month to get into it. And when you still unlucky with it, you can sell it on eBay and you will be lucky because this lens won’t lose the price.
Me? I feel very lucky WITH it. 😉
I am very interested to see the difference between 43 and m43 25mm/F1.4. Are there any comparison?
—-edit—-
I posted some examples on flickr.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/56412413@N05/sets/72157626942911089/detail/
I made these photos after reading negative reports about Nokton on the Steve Huff site (which I actually like very much). That’s why I shoot every photos with aperture wide open. ;-p
I hope some of you like them.
Obviously for photographing books on a shelf, the Voigtlander is better. Except when the Pana is better. Since books on a shelf are the subject of 97.2% of all the most popular photographs on Flickr, which is the only place that counts, then whichever one you prefer is clearly the better choice.
Or not. The fact is that for real-world photography this is a ridiculously irrelevant comparison. (Even more ridiculous than the never-ending “equivalence” argument. Which one is more equivalent to an f/2.7 Aero Ektar on a Super Technika loaded with Super Double-X? I don’t question that some people legitimately need to care about this — but if you do care, you already know the answer you prefer, so why even discuss it?)
People who want to shoot in ultra-low light obviously will want the Nokton, especially if they’re primarily video shooters — manual focus isn’t much of a disadvantage when shooting video, and sometimes is an actual advantage. People who want/need autofocus will want the Panasonic.
In terms of sharpness (whatever that might mean to you) I suspect that BOTH of them will deliver excellent results most of the time when shooting three-dimensional objects, which is what most people do most of the time when using a wide-aperture “normal” lens. The “test” photo of a flat subject at a close distance simply isn’t representative of how the real lenses are used.
A voice of reason!
The thing is that equivalency or whatever it is, you still need to Learn how to work with and adjust to a lens and camera combo. Spewing a litany of specs and test result doesn’t change a thing. It takes a bit of time to “get it” and be able to work with it at least semi-consciously. You still have to discover and adjust or give up and buy something “better”. There are pros and cons, advantages and disadvatages with everything. The trick is learning to adjust yourself (myself).
@anonymous (below) +11
I own the Nokton. I find it soft wide open and down to about f4 but very sharp after that. Many tests – not just the one in this article – appear to indicate the same thing. I have no doubt that the Leica is sharper – they are arguably the premier lens-maker in the world (I own both Leica and Voigtlander lenses and shoot them regularly with my M6).
However, the advantages of the Leica will likely disappear when shooting HD video (the reason I bought the lens). HD video is a) down-sampled relatively low-res compared to digital photography; and b) in constant motion, and critical sharpness is not as important as when shooting. Also, the narrower dof of the Nokton is more important to me when filming than a razor-sharp image. Finally, the Nokton is likely much easier to focus manually (by virtual of the fact that that is what it is 100% designed for). The Nokton and Leica seem designed with two different purposes in mind.
The real comparison, IMO, is between the Leica and the Panasonic 20/1.7. In that matchup does the Leica justify its price premium over the Panasonic? Do the advantages of the Leica outweigh those of the high portable Panasonic pancake. Inquiring minds want to know.
I also own the Nokton, and while it is clearly soft at f/0.95, it gets sharp fast. 1.4 is pretty sharp, and from about 2 to 4 it is very sharp.
Have a look at the lenstip review:
http://lenstip.com/276.1-Lens_review-Voigtlander_Nokton_25_mm_f_0.95.html
Seems to me that with the design intent of m43 being reduced size and weight with pretty good to high quality images, the VC is more about bragging rights than practical use for stills. I bought a Senko 25mm 0.95, and to be honest, for stills it’s a lousy lens (apart from the occasional “art” shot). However for video, it’s actually pretty useful, because, like you say, the image is moving, and lo-res compared to stills. These super-fast lenses are going to be soft wide open (unless you spend multi-thousands for a super-high quality, high cost lens designed to compensate for all the trade-offs inherent in the physics of lens design). So for a portrait lens, the Lumix will be the perfect m43 glass, and possibly even a suitable walking around lens. The VC is bigger, manual focus, soft wide open (a normal result of the design) and brings little added-value for stills. It would be a great, fast short-telephoto for video, but doesn’t make sense to me for stills compared to the native, AF offerings from Panasonic. So really it’s a toss up between the 20/1.7 and the 25/1.4 for stills, I think. For video, I’d choose the VC. Just my $0.02.
My preference would be for the PanaLeica, because I think it’s about the right size and not overtly expensive. I would like to see Photozone test the new lens so it can be compared by their methodology directly with the Voigtlaender lens and the old 4/3 PanaLeica lens.
I find a lot of the test subjects used are flat and boring. I would like to see full size pictures taken with the two lenses of a subject with lots of fine surface texture at various apertures.
My expectations of the PanaLeica lens would be that it would be fairly good at f1.4 and that it ought to give excellent performance at f2.8.
My reasons for purchasing such a lens would be to be able to obtain excellent optical quality and to be able to use shorter shutter speeds and lower ISO values, indoors or outdoors.
I don’t get this fixation that some people seem to have with reducing depth of field. I haven’t seen Claude or Constable portray the world with a narrow depth of field.
The poll is missing at least one option, possibly two: none or both. I will not buy any of these, I’ll be happier with the Panny 20mm.
Does anyone know how they calculated the hyperfocal focusing scales on the Voitlander? circle of confusion? Seeking clarity on that one please.
It looks like the Voightlander was shot with incorrect focus to me. Not a good test. Therefore, cannot comment which one is actually better.
Interesting post as I was looking at purchasing and pairing the voigtlander with a GH2 before the announcement of the new leica lens.
Which lens would be more suited to live events shooting such as weddings and parties? The stock 14-140 would be used during the day when there is good light but during the reception party where light is potentially low or getting the shallow depth of field look the 25mm lenses are being considered.
Any pros and cons on which lens I should get for a GH2?
Thanks,
Daniel
It starts to make me believe that comparison is faulty , Mainly to increase sale of Panasonic 25mm 1.4 ? I took several shots with Nokton 0.95 , sharpness is nothing like that on the sample ? It definitely looks like its Out of Focus ?
For video, the Noktor lens is excellent. For still photos, the Leica lens is fascinating. The question is therefore: Are you a moviemaker or a photographer?
My primary use will be to shoot weddings and therefore a moviemaker and for personal use a photographer to capture everyday things such as family or travel shots.
Will the autofocus on the Leica have any benefits for movie mode or will it be forever hunting and ruining the shot? I don’t want to be forever pulling focus but do want a clean shot for b-roll and key-scenes to mix GH2 footage with a traditional camcorder.
Please, it’s “NoktoN”!
Wow! It’s my Sample hahaha… my chois is LEICA DG!
The old 4/3 25 f/1.4 was really tempting me to buy a 4/3 camera, but I never did.
I was quite excited to hear about the m4/3 25mm f/1.4!
It appears, though, that this is an entirely different lens.
After reading many reviews and seeing many samples, my assessment of the new m4/3 25mm f/1.4:
– Extremely center optimiized at the expense of sharpness in corners.
– Far, far, FAR, *FAR* too much CA.
It’s the CA that really, really kills it. I thought maybe the CA only shows up on Panasonic backs or Olympus backs, but no, it shows equally on both…
Executive summary:
A purple mess.
Man, some of you are WAY too grumpy. Some really ridiculous comments in here.