43 Rumors

Good options. Voigtlander 50/1.1 is quite expensive at B&H. it should be around US$ 744 in HK.

I use both the 50/1.1 Nokton and 50/0.95 Canon on Micro 4/3 and they do work well. (Writeup on my blog: http://ranger9.net/?p=425)

The Nokton performs pretty much like any good lens, only faster. At full aperture, images from the Canon have a very quirky look — which some people hate, but I like it.

One caveat about the Canon is that the photo version came only in a special mount that fits only the Canon 7 and 7s rangefinder cameras. Technicians can convert it to a Leica M mount, which allows it to be used on Micro 4/3 via an adapter, but the conversion adds to the cost. This lens also was available for video in a C mount, but it’s so big and heavy that I’d worry about putting it on a C-mount Micro 4/3 adapter.

If you simply want a 50-ish lens with an aperture of f/1.2 or faster, there also are various reasonably-priced SLR lenses that can be adapted to Micro 4/3 (I know of several people who especially like the 58/1.2 Minolta Rokkor) but they all wind up being big and awkward once an adapter is added. Another adaptable option that’s fairly easy to find and not wildy expensive is the rangefinder Canon 50mm f/1.2 lens in Leica screw mount; this would be a more compact package on Micro 4/3 than an SLR, but it’s an early-1950s design and its performance is lackluster at best, IMO.

So yes, there are a lot of other choices and some of them are very good. But if you want an ultraspeed lens for Micro 4/3 that you can buy new in the box and that doesn’t need an adapter, Noktor seems to be it so far!

Like the extreme shallow depth of field look of the 0.95 lenses, the seem to imitate the experience of when something in your overall vision is being intensely focussed on to the exclusion of almost everything else. I think that’s why people like the effect of shallow depth of field – mimics human vision. However I used to have a Canon FL 55MM F1.2, it was a poor performer – very soft and muddy contrast on the GH1. Maybe it was a duff one. These lenses are so old, I feel they mist up inside and I’ve even heard reports of lenses containing nuclear materials which ‘yellow’ over time and need intense UV rays to clear them out!! Something to watch out for – some of these old lenses are in better condition than others.

I have a big problem regarding this approach.

Although the original CCTV lens has not been designed specially for M4/3 cameras, the manufacturer still grants somehow that the lens does a decent job on the MFT image circle. Worth to mention that probably a couple of trusted test will test this lens as well.

But, if I buyed a second-hand lens with an obsolete design from e-bay nobody would guarrantee a reasonably low vignetting, CA, etc. – at least not “officially”. First buy, then try is a rather unsafe way to aquire expensive accessories…

Nikon Nikkor 50mm 1.2 — Considered to be the sharpest nikon fast prime out there with it’s peak sharpness f2-f2.8 — Available for average $450 on ebay and brand new at adorama for $700.

One comment for the people who are noting that various ultraspeed lenses are “mushy” — yes, some of that is because they are extreme optical designs, but some of it is unavoidable because of the very narrow depth of field at full aperture.

This narrow DOF is one reason for using such a lens. But it also means that most of the image area will be ‘way out of focus. If those out-of-focus areas are fairly light in tone, unavoidably a lot of that light will get scattered into other areas of the image, leading to grayish highlights, weak-looking blacks, loss of contrast around fine details, etc.

I don’t know all the geometry involved, but I suspect that the softness of the OOF highlights and the angle of scatter depend on the size of the aperture opening. I also suspect that with a 50mm lens, f/1.4 (35.7mm aperture size) is about the largest where these issues are easy to manage — that’s probably why 50mm lenses with max apertures of f/1.4 – f/1.5 have always been relatively “mainstream”, while lenses of f/1.2 or faster have always been a bit “exotic”!

@fortytwenty
>The Nikkor f1.2, although my favourite fast 50mm of the 3, has an adapter about an inch long and this makes a difference to the portability of the combination on m4/3. The key thing with the Noktor is that it requires no adapter and so (I imagine) will present a far smaller package.
Leica M adapter is very thin. As far as I know Nokton 50mm F/1.1 weights less than Noktor (despite having 2 more lens) and has about the same size (with the adapter).