Justifying the 0.95 Noctilux

[Googaliser]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Face to face with the new 0.95, a tough decision had to be made.

Justifying the unjustifiable is all part of the fun of buying exotic glass but how on earth can you rationalise the idea of purchasing something as ridiculous as the 0.95 ? I think I’ve tested this almost uniquely male skill to the very limit on this one, but after endless fag-packet calculations and much head scratching, I’ve finally arrived at the point where I’ve convinced myself that buying the Nocti borders on being a good idea. Well, almost. I’ll try to explain…

 

I still run a Nikon D3 system, although it sees less and less use the more comfortable i get with the M9. In fact,the main justification was low-light - but recently - despite the lower noise floor - I actually prefer the way the M9 and Lux's see the world. Plus the D3 ergonomics feel very dated by comparison - which is kind of ironic. So by adding up the amount my D3 system will fetch on good old Ebay - I actually come out at a bigger number than the cost of the Nocti. Lets just gloss over the fact that it is a single lens.

 

So good bye 58 1.2, 28 1.4, 50 1.4G and my trusty D3. Time to give Solm's finest a go and see what it does for the creative juices. It also eliminates the 'which should I bring to the party dilema'

 

So for anyone wondering D3 or M9 ? Here is a formerly very loyal Nikon user voting with his feet.

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[yanidel]

To me and my budget, there is no way I can justify €8000 euros for a lens. My max is about €2'000, meaning I meanly buy used.

But more than its price, which in the end is only relevant to one's personal situation, I can't justify putting 700 additonal grams on my M9. I know it compares favorably with a D3 system but a big reason for why I use a M system is to avoid huge lenses in the first place.

Also, and this is personal, those superfast lens are made mainly for special effects given the thin DOF will generate bokeh full of character and aberrations. So why have a perfect modern look in center of an image with a crazy bokeh around ? For that reason, I feel my €1700 60mm Hex 1.2 is more consistent as it has aberrations wide open all over the place with a DOF almost the same as Noctilux due to longer focal. Stopped down it becomes a razor sharp modern lens and I am sure it would give the Noctilux a run. Now, buying a superfast to stop it down is definitely not the point.

 

Not sure my justification convinced you ...

[Googaliser]

To me and my budget, there is no way I can justify €8000 euros for a lens. My max is about €2'000, meaning I meanly buy used.

But more than its price, which in the end is only relevant to one's personal situation, I can't justify putting 700 additonal grams on my M9. I know it compares favorably with a D3 system but a big reason for why I use a M system is to avoid huge lenses in the first place.

Also, and this is personal, those superfast lens are made mainly for special effects given the thin DOF will generate bokeh full of character and aberrations. So why have a perfect modern look in center of an image with a crazy bokeh around ? For that reason, I feel my €1700 60mm Hex 1.2 is more consistent as it has aberrations wide open all over the place with a DOF almost the same as Noctilux due to longer focal. Stopped down it becomes a razor sharp modern lens and I am sure it would give the Noctilux a run. Now, buying a superfast to stop it down is definitely not the point.

 

Not sure my justification convinced you ...

 

You make a lot of sense, Indeed, after 30mins of testing my arm had SLR ache. This was clearly an emotional decision on my behalf. Its an adventure and I will see where it leads. If it is simply an overpriced Summilux on steroids - at least there will be demand for it if I sell. If it opens-up new creative vistas - well maybe my fools logic has merit. There's only one way to find out, and an imminent trip to Indonesia should answer the imponderables!

[mardag]

Hi,

 

I see that you are using the noct-nikkor 58 1.2. I had this lens for a couple of years together with the d200 until I finally switched to canon 5dmark II 50 1.2 and 85 1.2.

I´m very happy with these lenses but have always whished to one day buy the noctilux due to its rendering (bokeh). Two months ago I aquired a lecia M2 with a 35 summicron v4 and I´m now lusting for a M9 and a noctilux. What´s your thoughts on the old (F1) vs the new noctilux (0.95) with regard to bokeh and how do you think the noct-nikkor compare to these and to the 50 1.4 summiluxes either the pre ASPH or the ASPH.

 

Best

 

Markus

[yanidel]

You make a lot of sense, Indeed, after 30mins of testing my arm had SLR ache. This was clearly an emotional decision on my behalf. Its an adventure and I will see where it leads. If it is simply an overpriced Summilux on steroids - at least there will be demand for it if I sell. If it opens-up new creative vistas - well maybe my fools logic has merit. There's only one way to find out, and an imminent trip to Indonesia should answer the imponderables!

Indeed, you creative vistas will be what make the final shots good or bad. Not sure that using a F0.95 vs F1 will influence that. Report back when you finish your trip, Indonesia such a wonderful place, enjoy !

[Googaliser]

Hi,

 

I see that you are using the noct-nikkor 58 1.2. I had this lens for a couple of years together with the d200 until I finally switched to canon 5dmark II 50 1.2 and 85 1.2.

I´m very happy with these lenses but have always whished to one day buy the noctilux due to its rendering (bokeh). Two months ago I aquired a lecia M2 with a 35 summicron v4 and I´m now lusting for a M9 and a noctilux. What´s your thoughts on the old (F1) vs the new noctilux (0.95) with regard to bokeh and how do you think the noct-nikkor compare to these and to the 50 1.4 summiluxes either the pre ASPH or the ASPH.

 

Best

 

Markus

 

Hi Markus - I have never used a Noctilux before and like you have been keen to for years. So thankfully I can't be drawn on the 0.95 versus older versions debate (which seems quite balanced).

The issue with the 58 1.2 on the D3 was focussing (no real viewfinder aids). Whilst I love the way the lens renders - too often I was guessing at the focal plane and thus had a low keeper rate. I actually have a lot more confidence in the RF system in low light than I do with the D3. I always shot the 1.2 wide-open and intend to do so with the Nocti - which is now back at my desk and will act as a paper-weight until this evening when I will do some proper testing :)

[noah_addis]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you're going to get rid of your other system and go all M, I'd pick up a second M9 as a backup. (And this advice would be the same for any system, it has nothing to do with the reliability of the M9, which has been good in my experience.)

 

There is no real justification for such a purchase. I tried to justify my 24/1.4 the same way, I sold off a lot of my Nikon gear to get it. Then the M9 came out and it was obsolete for my needs since it needed a finder and was too wide for my taste and the M9 high-iso performance made it less necessary.

 

If a future firmware update makes the M9 better by a stop, which could theoretically happen, then you could just use a 50 'Lux Asph and be done. (Or a 50 'Lux Pre-Asph, which has something of the old Noct character.)

 

But if you really want it and can afford it, get it. No need to justify it.

[Nikkor AIS]

Good for you. Simplicity is a good thing. On the other hand you could get the classic 50 1.0 Noctilux for less than half the cost of the new .95 version. If you think the new version is 5,00 better than , well what can I say. As for what to bring to the party why not both The D3 and the M9. The 58 1.2 Nocturnal is personal favorite as well as the Nikkor 28 1.4D. What's not to love about hand ground aspherical lenses made by masters that are now retired or dead. Two of the very best lens ever made by Nikon. In many ways teamed with the D3 the perfect low light one two punch IMO. I think your own words "trusty D3" should at least make you pause before dumping your Nikon gear.

I get that buying new gear can get the juices flowing but "stating that D3 ergonomics are dated compared to the M9 is kind of funny.

Vote with your feet as wish, just don't run down the D3, because it is one of the best DSLR ever made. And has served you and me both.

Now saying that, I would be glad to buy your Nikkor 58 1.2 Nocturnal for a fair price if your are determined to get rid of it.

 

Gregory

 

wwwrogaltacdesign@smugmug.com

[mardag]

Hi,

 

I used to look at the green dot in the viewfinder corner and I figured out that when focusing from close tho infinity as soon as the dot started blinking the focus is spot on when the dot is stable I had gone to far. Sounds crazy but it worked:)

[EricC]

What´s your thoughts on the old (F1) vs the new noctilux (0.95) with regard to bokeh and how do you think the noct-nikkor compare to these and to the 50 1.4 summiluxes either the pre ASPH or the ASPH.

 

Best

 

Markus

 

Have a look here :-

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m9-forum/100320-new-old-noctilux.html

[JTrunck]

I shoot NIkon now. My M9 is on order. I have a 50 lux on order too. That said, I have looked at the 0.95 Noc too. Here is my recommendation to you:

 

If you don't already own a 50 lux, buy the Noct. It you do own the 50 Lux, still buy it. It is obvious you want it. Enjoy shooting with it and don't look back.

 

Seems like your shooting focal length range is within the M9 abilities, so why keep the Nikon gear. Sell it and buy what you really want.

 

Also, you will be buying a very unique lens that very few of us will ever own. That gives you chortling rights too.

 

All of that said, read David Farkas's blog and entry about the 0,95 Noct first, then buy it.

 

Good Shooting,

 

Jim

 

http://www.jimtrunck.com

[mardag]

Thanks,

 

I went through all these kind of threads, I guess that on one hand I´m drawn towards the M9 due to it´s medium format character of the ccd plate but also the possibility to get a characteristic from the leica lenses (3D, pop, bokeh) that are not found in my canon lenses (althogh I have some good ones). I really liked the noct-nikkor when I had it though it lost contrast a lot when shooting against the sun. Now I´m looking for that look again in leica lenses and wonder how it compares to the summiluxes

 

Markus

[wattsy]

If you have the money to spare and fancy a new toy then get it. No need to justify it. Otherwise, selling an entire kit to buy one speciality (aka "one trick") lens strikes me as a rather impulsive thing to do.

 

Incidentally, I'm curious that you will be able to raise the cost of a new 0.95 Noctilux (£7000 after Christmas) by selling the gear you've listed. Is the 58/F1.2 a particularly valuable lens?

[M. Valdemar]

You'll be tired of lugging this $11,000 heavy boat anchor around after a few days, and just as soon the novelty of shooting wide open will wear off.

 

Why don't you just buy a used Canon 0.95 to see how you like it, and then dump the Canon and recover your money before you make any rash decisions.

 

This is just an infantile desire to own something exotic. You're being tyrannized by your left brain or male menopause or something.

[wattsy]

You're being tyrannized by your left brain or male menopause or something.

 

LOL. The other thing worth thinking about is that, outside your circle of camera gear enthusiasts, nobody will give a monkey's about a 50/F0.95 lens.

[gwelland]

If you have the money to spare and fancy a new toy then get it. No need to justify it. Otherwise, selling an entire kit to buy one speciality (aka "one trick") lens strikes me as a rather impulsive thing to do.

 

I went through a similar decision to buy one of the last (not collector boxed) f/1 Noctilux's purely for it's wide open character and creative 'look'. That involved the sacrifice of my Nikon 28/1.4D, and a couple of less used Leica lenses too to get it. I do have a 50 'cron as well to partner the Noctilux and no doubt I'll trade that out when 50 'lux fever has died down again and they're more easily available again.

 

Now if I were looking for a single 50mm lens that was essentially the 50 'lux with night vision then the f/0.95 would be very appealing. I find that people's description of the bulk of the Noctilux is over rated and I know that I find it no problem at all, particularly compared to carrying around my Nikon DSLR bodies & lenses, even a D3x & 50/1.4G or 28/1.4.

 

Of course, if you are looking for the current state of the art as far as night vision is concerned then there's always the new stunning D3s ...

[Googaliser]

You'll be tired of lugging this $11,000 heavy boat anchor around after a few days, and just as soon the novelty of shooting wide open will wear off.

 

Why don't you just buy a used Canon 0.95 to see how you like it, and then dump the Canon and recover your money before you make any rash decisions.

 

This is just an infantile desire to own something exotic. You're being tyrannized by your left brain or male menopause or something.

 

I'm tired of lugging my Nikon kit around - its ironic that a 600gram Leica lens is desribed as 'heavy' when one compares it to the weight of a fast SLR set-up.

 

In terms of the 'risk' of this... Well, there isn't any in my mind. The 0.95 will be subject to an 8.5% price rise in the UK in January, plus I bought it below list. I have no doubt that I can sell it at or near what I paid for it any time in the next 12 months. So what's the harm in trying it ? If I do end-up missing the Nikon - I move back. If I love what the 0.95 does - I made the right decision.

 

So no male menopause here - just making use of commercial optionality to further my photographic interests.

 

Remember - the 'cost' of something is not its ticket price. It is the opportunity cost of the money plus how much you lose if you re-sell. In those terms, I am comfortable that the potential up-side far exceeds those risks.

[charlesphoto99]

The reason I still have a D3 and shoot with it (usually on assignment) isn't any of the lenses you listed. It's lenses like the 14-24 and the 135 f2 that have gotten me out of tight spots that the M8/9 wouldn't be able to handle. I also have a few Zeiss lenses for it that are superb (as well as an old style 55 macro) for when I need to get closer or need higher iso.

The Nikon 28 1.4 is an over rated lens imo but the 14-24 is one of a kind (and makes the Nocti look tiny!).

 

But that's not saying I wouldn't love to have one! Have fun with the lens!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Googaliser]

The reason I still have a D3 and shoot with it (usually on assignment) isn't any of the lenses you listed. It's lenses like the 14-24 and the 135 f2 that have gotten me out of tight spots that the M8/9 wouldn't be able to handle. I also have a few Zeiss lenses for it that are superb (as well as an old style 55 macro) for when I need to get closer or need higher iso.

The Nikon 28 1.4 is an over rated lens imo but the 14-24 is one of a kind (and makes the Nocti look tiny!).

 

But that's not saying I wouldn't love to have one! Have fun with the lens!

 

You are so right - the 14-24 is probably my favourite Nikon lens - the IQ is just unbelievable - not just because it is a zoom - but also the focal lengths it covers. I do love the 28mm though - although it looks very soft now I can compare it to the lux's.

 

That said, I don't use the 14-24 in low light (unless on a tripod) - and I have moved to Medium Format for landscape. Hasselblad's HCD 28mm is stunning also and I prefer the format.

 

So whilst I am letting the Nikon system go - I do also run a Hasselblad system for landscape and studio. Thus I am moving from 3 systems to 2 - which isn't as extreme as my original post may have sounded.

[marknorton]

Lots of good comment here.

 

The new Noctilux is much easier to use than the old one but it's a big lens and you pay handsomely for what it does over, say, the Summilux. Only you can say whether the low light capability/super shallow DoF justifies the cost. A bit like overdosing on a fish-eye or IR photography, it's an obsession you learn to tame. Not every shot benefits from the wide-open Noctilux treatment.

 

Personally, I'd never dump my D3, still less my D3x (and lenses) to buy a single speciality Leica lens. I simply use them too much in those situations where the M is just not suitable.