thighslapper Posted March 10, 2011 Share #1 Posted March 10, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Whilst I concede the current 50/0.95 is a miracle of optical engineering and I can think of many excuses for why I really must get one........ I am a bit concerned about the 'real world' performance of this lens...... particularly at 0.95.... which as far as I can see is the only reason to get it.... I escaped buying one of these before xmas when Leica Mayfair offered me one (in a mad fit of generosity solms had sent them 3) ...... and asked to think about it .... the next day they phoned for a quick decision as a gentleman from california was in the store and wanted it .... which, after some dithering, I generously donated to him ...... he subsequently left with an M9 Titanium and all the lenses they had available (£40k) ..... and did the same again for a second M9 Titanium and more lenses (£40k) in the new year (and he wasn't interested in getting the 20% vat back....). Must look like Rambo when fully tooled up with Leica gear....... Being slightly more continent in my financial affairs I returned to try one again before I had another phone call tempting me to buy one........ this was a dull overcast london day.... first shot is at 0.95 and the second at 2.8 taken through the shop window. I was already aware of the fringing issue but surprised at how easy it was to cause it and the impact. It was noticeable on interior shots too with basically anything in frame that was white. I know from several threads that several buyers have returned lenses as they have found this unacceptable. Just how big a problem is this in everyday use and does it vary between lenses and M9's ???? I think this is one piece of Leica extravagance I will pass on..... unless someone can convince me otherwise..... ps. the car was Lord Youngs..... he was in collecting his repaired M9 which had a shutter fault. Nice chap. You do tend to meet a better class of people in Leica stores..... Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/146018-convince-me-i-need-a-noctilux/?do=findComment&comment=1612255'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 10, 2011 Posted March 10, 2011 Hi thighslapper, Take a look here Convince me I need a Noctilux........ I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Griswold Posted March 10, 2011 Share #2 Posted March 10, 2011 From I have heard, lots of people lust for the Noctilux for years and finally buy it to discover that the DOF is just too shallow wide open and too chunky in size and weight. I could be wrong. In your test shots what was the RGB value of the chrome trim which looks blown out in the jpegs? Part of that may be inherent flare, part 255 clipping. I think for most situations a nice Summilux would be just fine. Smaller and lighter too.... part of the Leica esthetic. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ecar Posted March 10, 2011 Share #3 Posted March 10, 2011 (edited) Sure - everyone *needs* one... I was in the same boat as yours. Tried it, found the purple highlights unbearable (somehow, although not as extreme as those you are showing, they looked much worse than those generated by my Nocti f/1, which I was going to sell to buy the latest and greatest), and never looked back. My rationale was the following: - if I need to stop it down to get rid of the fringing, then I'd rather use the 50 Lux; - otherwise, I'd rather have the Mandler design rendering of the f/1 anytime, even if this implies slightly less light getting to the sensor wide open and perhaps a tad of focus shift at medium apertures. Maybe the 50/1 is the one you need... Edited March 10, 2011 by Ecar Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted March 10, 2011 Share #4 Posted March 10, 2011 (edited) Not sure that Lord Young is a better class of fellow!! http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2010/nov/19/lord-young-quits-over-never-had-it-so-good-gaffe And sorry I am a Guardian reader Back to the question I find that for us mere mortals the summilux is one hell of a lens and unless I had the money of Lord Young I wouldn't really consider the nocti Edited March 10, 2011 by viramati Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikep996 Posted March 10, 2011 Share #5 Posted March 10, 2011 Can't speak for the digital aspect but I had a Noct for about a year (around 2000). Despite my intentions, I never found a lot of use for it other than bragging rights. It was too big/heavy just to get another F stop compared to my 50 summilux. So I ended up never carrying it anywhere. Sold it to a guy in Israel (Ebay) for 2k. Maybe THAT wasn't such a great plan but it seemed like a good idea at the time. I can't personally see much use for it UNLESS you specifically need that 1 stop of speed for a lot of the style of shooting you do. I thought I'd use it a lot in clubs and such but it didn't really work out well for me. Of course, YMMV. 1 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindolfi Posted March 10, 2011 Share #6 Posted March 10, 2011 (edited) The purple fringing is caused by a combination of three things [1] longitudinal secondary chromatic aberration [2] focus behind the plane with bright objects [3] blooming You also have focus at objects behind the chrome trims of the car at f/0.95 Here you can see how this works with a Summilux 75/1.4 at f/1.4 focussed at the front rim of the spoon (middle image), 10 cm behind the spoon (top image) and 10 cm in front of the spoon (bottom image). In the top image you can see the purple fringing, In the bottom image green fringing. So it shows the lens is not corrected for secondary chromatic aberration, so it is not an apo lens. The Noctilux 50/0.95 must also have residual chromatic aberration, based on the purple fringing. The effect is amplified by the blooming due to high level of exposure of the white pixels. Edited March 10, 2011 by Lindolfi 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jeff S Posted March 10, 2011 Share #7 Posted March 10, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) The Summilux asph fully meets my needs. Here, however, is a partial discussion of the new Noctilux, which like the older version (to a somewhat lesser but noticeable degree) is subject to blue fringing and flare. Jeff Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
viramati Posted March 10, 2011 Share #8 Posted March 10, 2011 Fascinating insight. thanks Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clandrel Posted March 10, 2011 Share #9 Posted March 10, 2011 Well... Most people who doesnt own one, complaints about size, weight, purple fringing and so on... I used to say it too! I received mine today, and even though I've only tested it today, I can say that this lens is special. I also believe the 50 lux and 35 lux are special lenses, but the Nocti is something different. It has, to me, lots of character and gives every frame something special. A certain vibe, which to me is the reason for buying it. Heavy and big? Yes, compared to other Leica glass. But if I wanna carry light, I'll put my 28 Elmarit on the M9. If I want something with more character and "personality", I'll manage the weight (remember that the Nocti still is smaller than the Nikkor 35/1.4, so it's not THAT big). I was lucky though. I found one in Madrid, which cost me around $9000. I can keep this lens for many years, but still get my money back, If I really want to. But I have a feeling this is a keeper. It's a jewel! It's the best built Leica lens I've ever owned, and it was such a pleasure unpacking the box. Covered in velvet... /c Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnbuckley Posted March 10, 2011 Share #10 Posted March 10, 2011 Yes, you will get purple fringing shooting wide open in bright sunlight, unless you use an ND filter. I have to tell you: since I bought a Noctilux 0.95 last summer, I use it more than any other lens. I can't persuade you to part with $10k. I can tell you I don't think any other lens could have taken the below two shots, and there are more like it on the Zenfolio site linked below. Welcome, dear visitor! As registered member you'd see an image here… Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! 5 Quote Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/146018-convince-me-i-need-a-noctilux/?do=findComment&comment=1612371'>More sharing options...
Mikep996 Posted March 10, 2011 Share #11 Posted March 10, 2011 "Most people who doesnt own one, complaints about size, weight, purple fringing and so on... I used to say it too!" And most people who own one talk about how special it is - just like I did after buying one.. After buying it, it was the only lens I used for at least a month! A year later I hadn't shot anything with it for probably 3-4 months! And this is when I shot 50 Velvia 90% of the time. Nowadays, with the ISO capability of digital, I don't see any use for it as far as low light is concerned. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
earleygallery Posted March 10, 2011 Share #12 Posted March 10, 2011 Save your money. It's easy to get the Nocti look in photoshop with the smudge n blur tools when you want it. 3 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted March 10, 2011 Author Share #13 Posted March 10, 2011 Yes, you will get purple fringing shooting wide open in bright sunlight, unless you use an ND filter. I have to tell you: since I bought a Noctilux 0.95 last summer, I use it more than any other lens. I can't persuade you to part with $10k. I can tell you I don't think any other lens could have taken the below two shots, and there are more like it on the Zenfolio site linked below. Thanks John....... these pics are the sort of images I EXPECT..... I assume with use you learn to avoid using it wide open in situations of high contrast...... it's just some idea of how restrictive this is in real life that I need to get a handle on.... I can live with a lens that can be used most of the time and get acceptable images most of the time..... but once it drops below that I cannot see the attractions being enough to lever my wallet open..... Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clandrel Posted March 10, 2011 Share #14 Posted March 10, 2011 Save your money. It's easy to get the Nocti look in photoshop with the smudge n blur tools when you want it. You're talking about the f1. We're talking about the 0.95 ASPH:) Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lindolfi Posted March 10, 2011 Share #15 Posted March 10, 2011 Save your money. It's easy to get the Nocti look in photoshop with the smudge n blur tools when you want it. I don't agree on this. It is (almost) impossible to simulate DOF in PhotoShop in an image with lots of depth information. You would have to take the full scene in 3D apart in many planes, apply blurring to all planes in different amounts with blur of the right kind (difficult!), and assemble again. Even then you will not get the influence of light rays passing through the planes you render in translucent objects like those made of glass. That is one reason I truly love DOF and bokeh of a real lens. There is simply no substitution. 2 Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
epand56 Posted March 10, 2011 Share #16 Posted March 10, 2011 When you buy a 10,000 $ lens you HAVE to say it's great. This means nothing. I don't think I would use the 50/0.95 all that much. I do not particularly like John picture #2 and I suppose I could take #1 with my 50 or my 35 Lux. I saw just a couple pictures, since the 0.95 is on the market, that were more or less worth the price of this lens. Most of the other are worth an Olga camera. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Washington Posted March 10, 2011 Share #17 Posted March 10, 2011 (edited) Personally, and from experience, I do not think you do. I am not knocking the lens in question a bit. My favorite is still the good ole f2 Summicron. I have been using this lens in one form or another for 40 years. ( Good lord, that HAS to be a lie) Anyway, the latest edition is terrific! Edited March 10, 2011 by Washington typo Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted March 10, 2011 Share #18 Posted March 10, 2011 (edited) I've spent the last two months shooting my f1 Noct almost exclusively. Out of the 780 shots taken during that time (I just checked Lightroom), all but a handful were taken with the Noct. And of those, all but perhaps 2 or 3 were taken at f1. I use a 6-stop ND filter when outside during daylight hours. I've long wedded myself to a single lens for long stretches at a time. But this is the first time I've ever limited myself to a single f-stop. It's not nearly as constraining as you would think. Even owning a handful of other exceptional Leica lenses - including the legendary and beloved 50 Lux ASPH - I have fallen deeply in love with the Noct. It's hard to say exactly why, other than that the signature is unique and beautiful. I think, counterintuitively, you buy it not for the extra stop - but for that signature. I'm wondering how I'll ever get it off my camera. The f.095 version holds the additional advantage of having a similar look to the 50 Lux ASPH at f1.4 and above. Kind of like a magical marriage of the old f1 Noct and the Lux. How can you not love that? Own the Night Edited March 11, 2011 by Jager Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikep996 Posted March 11, 2011 Share #19 Posted March 11, 2011 "I'm wondering how I'll ever get it off my camera." Revisit this thread in a year and tell us if you are still using it. Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Steve Fines Posted March 11, 2011 Share #20 Posted March 11, 2011 I had the good fortune of finding a 50/0.95 in December. My wife was feeling guilty about something and encouraged me to pick it up. I didn't ask. It is heavy. No really - it is seriously heavy. DSLR heavy. It is big. Harder to focus than my other Leica lenses. I miss a good chunk of my 0.95 shots. Dof is razor thin. But, every time I nail one there is the "wow - that is niiice" reaction. Seriously - it is really nice. Of course I have to say that, having dropped 10K, but as it was a guilt free, encouraged by the wife 10K, I think my opinion may be slightly less biased? Maybe wishful thinking, but who knows. The Canon 85/1.2 has a similar fringing at 1.2. The Canon 50/1.0 has the same thing. Just part of the deal. Takes some more work sometimes, but it can be dealt with in post-processing. Anyway, two thumbs up from me. As Ferris Bueller said, "... it is so choice. If you have the means, I highly recommend picking one up." Quote Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.