Culling The 50mm-ish M Lens Herd: Voigtländer Nokton 40mm F1.2 For M.

Culling The 50mm-ish M Lens Herd: Voigtländer Nokton 40mm F1.2 For M.

After a recent effort to stop acquiring more, I have pivoted to consolidation. Reverse GAS. Practical GAS, as if there could be such a thing. Sensible GAS? That sounds even crazier. Bottom line after the dust settled I realized some implications might be in order. A bit of, “Do I really need this and that and is there one solution that could replace those?”

I am not new to this. That is precisely what I did when I pivoted from two Tamron zooms, the 28-75mm and 70-180mm,…

…to one, the 35-150mm f/2-2.8.

And as I have documented in this space that has gone very well.

Walked into SE Camera yesterday as a part of the next consolidation.

What I planned to do:

With the GX7/20mm f/1.7 working better I gave up on the “small” full frame setup.

I am in the midst of trading my Tamron 17-28mm and Sony 40mm f/2.5 G…

…for the Tamron 20-40mm f/2.8. The plan was to sell off the two lenses to fund the 20-40mm. Which I did.

What I did not plan on:

I have three M lenses that are close in focal length but not in function. A ZEISS 50mm f/2 (the grown up serious one),…

…7Artisans 50mm f/1.1 (the wonky but fast one),…

…and a 7Artisans 35mm f/1.4 (the wider and pretty fast one that is better than it has any business being).

I was perfectly happy with having all three. Made sense to me in fact. They were distinct enough that I had no issues with keeping them.

• ZEISS Planar 50mm f/2
  • Sensible, buttoned down lens for when I want a high quality pic, especially of people.

• 7Artisans 50mm f/1.1
  • For people pics that are not sharp, but where that extra bit of extra light makes for an interesting pic and great for low light.

• 7Artisans 35mm f/1.5
  • Leaning more towards the ZEISS with more buttoned down IQ than its f/1.1 brother above, but with a bit wider focal length to make for pleasing environmental pics.

Then I walk in and they have a used Voigtlander 40mm f/1.2 on the shelf. I tested it. Hold on a minute.

• Grown up IQ like the ZEISS.
• Nearly as fast as the f/1.1.
• Almost as wide as the 35mm.

Went from 0-60 right then and there with little hesitation. I traded the ZEISS I had on me on the spot and I am bringing the f/1.1 and the 35mm to complete the three for one swap.

So lens consolidation. Two Sony lenses for one to start. Now three M lenses for one. Almost reverse GAS. Better yet with no out of pocket expense.

And I am not the least bit worried that I have made a mistake. I have a solid history with fast 50mm-ish Voigtlander Nokton lenses.

Exhibit A and B as to why I am not concerned about the results using film. Looking forward to trying out with a little adapted TECHART AF action. And as comes as no surprise in short order I confirmed that it is the business on digital M.

Here are the first pics with it below with a couple of my first thoughts below them. These were all taken off the cuff with no planning or forethought in mind. Perfect rangefinder fodder.

Thoughts.

First the things that are not the main point here in rangefinder land.

Sharpness.

• Can be sharp. Take care to focus wide open and you get acceptable results. Will do even better stopped down a bit.

Colors.

• Pleasing.

Bokeh.

• Nice and plentiful.

Aberrations of the chromatic or longitudinal variety.

• Mostly well controlled as much as I can tell and what is seen is easy to edit out.

Why do I say that these metrics above are not the main thing? Glad I imagined you asked.

Because any number of lenses across many brands, mounts, and sensor sizes and image capturing media can nail all of these attributes. For me that is not what rangefinders are about. If that is all that you are looking for there are much less expensive and more sensible ways to go. Rangefinder imaging comes down to two things for me.

1. Did I enjoy the process of capturing images.
2. Am I happy with the resulting images.

After much introspection and pondering trying to make it make sense that is where I have landed.

There is no technical or sensible explanation to be had.

I have more fun when I use a rangefinder.

There is always something I like about the resulting images that I can never, even to this day, put my finger on.

But I have stopped trying to make sense of it. I have no interest in strained attempts at poetic prose to describe it. I have no interest in disparaging those who do not share the same affliction as I.

They are the sensible ones, with their AF, IBIS, lower cost of entry image capturing devices, and I applaud them. I understand. Unlike some rangefinder types I appreciate and embrace the accessible and easy to use as well. If I did not have the good fortune of options I would likely choose a more sensible approach also.

That being said.

This lens is a good time and creates some images I really like. Moreso, as stated above, it nicely blends the attributes of the three lenses I traded towards it. I had no idea this would happen when I walked into the camera shop this day, but I am most certainly happy it did.

And as an added bonus I cleared out my bag a bit and left with a bit of change in my pocket.

A good day.

Happy capturing.

-ELW