RoamingScott wrote:
B&H offered to lend me BOTH the Septon and 40 Nok for my review, best news all week after this thread
I think the car show photos are pretty good examples of how pleasing it can be in the center and in the focal plane but just kinda wacky in the bokeh even in the beginning of the outer third of frame.
Nice. Are you considering comparing it to the 40 ultron?
I'm with you on the outer thirds of the septon at those apertures but I also wouldn't mind stopping it down some more if that improves things.
So I'm curious about the middle apertures f2.8-f5.6, especially 2.8 and f4 for general purpose scenes where the subject isn't super close but not necessarily at infinity -- mainly because I tend not to do a lot of those.
At f8 I think I'd be happy with this or the 35/1.4 classic for casual shots with some postprocessing. I'm not sure how they compare exactly though. I've seen rather sharp samples from the classic at f8.
Also looking forward to the first 1-2m portraits with this at f2, 2.8.
Mar 24, 2026 at 07:04 PM
Notice: Undefined offset: 0 in /var/www/vhosts/fredmiranda.com/httpdocs/forum/viewedits.php on line 155
RoamingScott wrote:
B&H offered to lend me BOTH the Septon and 40 Nok for my review, best news all week after this thread
I think the car show photos are pretty good examples of how pleasing it can be in the center and in the focal plane but just kinda wacky in the bokeh even in the beginning of the outer third of frame.
Nice. Are you considering comparing it to the 40 ultron?
I still need to figure out a good way to correct distortion with the CV 40/2 ultron (f-mount). I've had some nice images that I think kind of remind me of some samples of the 40/1.4 classic but cleaner background blur. Like a middle-ground between the 1.2 nokton and the septon.
I'm with you on the outer thirds of the septon at those apertures but I also wouldn't mind stopping it down some more if that improves things.
So I'm curious about the middle apertures f2.8-f5.6, especially 2.8 and f4 for general purpose scenes where the subject isn't super close but not necessarily at infinity -- mainly because I tend not to do a lot of those.
At f8 I think I'd be happy with this or the 35/1.4 classic for casual shots with some postprocessing. I'm not sure how they compare exactly though. I've seen rather sharp samples from the classic at f8.
Also looking forward to the first 1-2m portraits with this at f2, 2.8.
Mar 24, 2026 at 04:13 PM
Notice: Undefined offset: 0 in /var/www/vhosts/fredmiranda.com/httpdocs/forum/viewedits.php on line 155
RoamingScott wrote:
B&H offered to lend me BOTH the Septon and 40 Nok for my review, best news all week after this thread
I think the car show photos are pretty good examples of how pleasing it can be in the center and in the focal plane but just kinda wacky in the bokeh even in the beginning of the outer third of frame.
Nice. Are you considering comparing it to the 40 ultron?
I still need to figure out a good way to correct distortion with the CV 40/2 ultron (f-mount). I've had some nice images that I think kind of remind me of some samples of the 40/1.4 classic but cleaner background blur. Like a middle-ground between the 1.2 nokton and the septon.
I'm with you on the outer thirds of the septon at those apertures but I also wouldn't mind stopping it down some more if that improves things.
So I'm curious about the middle apertures f2.8-f5.6, especially 2.8 and f4 for general purpose scenes where the subject isn't super close but not necessarily at infinity -- mainly because I tend not to do a lot of those.
At f8 I think I'd be happy with this or the 35/1.4 classic for non-landscape/citiscape walkabout shots with some postprocessing. I'm not sure how they compare exactly though. I've seen rather sharp samples from the classic at f8.
Also looking forward to the first 1-2m portraits with this at f2, 2.8.
