johnbuckley Posted December 9, 2009 Share #21 Posted December 9, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) My 2 cents -- or roughly $9000 discount on the new Nocti: as several other forum members will attest, the Nokton 50mm 1.1 is a very nice lens, and costs somewhere around $1100. I understand the hankering for a Noctilux, but this is the most practical alternative to it that I know of. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 9, 2009 Posted December 9, 2009 Hi johnbuckley, Take a look here Justifying the 0.95 Noctilux. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Googaliser Posted December 9, 2009 Author Share #22 Posted December 9, 2009 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. Its funny - I never saw myself selling the D3 either, but it rarely gets used these days and when it does - I prefer the way the M9 sees the world - for my type of photography. Its so personal - no right or wrongs. The Nocti purchase hastened the Nikon decision - it didn't make it. Two separate thought processes. By combining them I helped mitigate the risk of buyers remorse - thats all. My 200mm f2 just sold on Ebay. Another great Nikon lens. Its funny - that is a *heavy* lens (2.5Kg ish) - but I could comfortably walk around with it for an hour or two. Nocti 'heavy' ? Nah.... just a bit weighty. In fact - the M9 body feels better balanced with the 0.95 than with any other M lens I have used. Balance matters as much as weight for extended use. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwelland Posted December 9, 2009 Share #23 Posted December 9, 2009 Justification is somewhat over rated ... If getting and using the Noctilux f/0.95 makes your life better, easier or more enjoyable, it's justified. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
newyorkone Posted December 9, 2009 Share #24 Posted December 9, 2009 If at all possible, keep the 58 Noct. That is a lens that will continue to go up in value. It's an investment. Even if Nikon releases a new version (when pigs fly), the old 58 Noct will still have the unique fingerprint that makes it a highly sought after lens. If you must sell it, then don't let it go for cheap. Although you might have to let it go for lower that you normally would because the economy is in the toilet right now. I'm loving the previous Noctilux on my month old M9. I'm getting much more keepers that I did when I shot the Noctilux with the M8... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
kidigital Posted December 9, 2009 Share #25 Posted December 9, 2009 Bravo ... go with your instincts. If you need the justification, the Noct will loose less value than the D3 over the next 12 months. Also, everyone seems to have a different feeling about what moves them in an image. I'm one of those individuals who happens to really enjoy narrow depth of field as opportunity to add a different feel to an image ... feeling, emotion, separation. Of course, not every image needs to be shot wide open, but I rarely tire of the "gimmick" and very much try to find and use lenses that provide the best of shallow depth of field like the noctilux, 75lux, 58/1.2, and zeiss 110/2 in medium format. Kurt Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Googaliser Posted December 9, 2009 Author Share #26 Posted December 9, 2009 Over the last 3 years - I can rarely remember an occasion when I have sold a lens for less than I paid for it. From purely an economic standpoint - lenses actually aren't a bad investment if you buy wisely. Digital bodies however have shocking time decay. Its odd that on an M9 forum people balk at the cost of the 0.95 Nocti. Anyone who bought an M8, 8.2 and now M9 will be looking at the cost of a Nocti in depreciation over a 5 year period - let alone if you run two bodies. Where will the Nocti retail price be in 5 years ? I would wager significantly higher than where it is now.... An M9 - probably $1500... Oh... and you get to use the lenses too Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwelland Posted December 9, 2009 Share #27 Posted December 9, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) The new Noctilux has had a positive effect on the older Noctilux too - I sold my first Noctilux last year on trade against an M8.2 and was able to pick up a better performing copy last month from a dealer for less than I traded the last one. However, that may have been a temporal fluke. I'm not sure that I'd agree that all Leica glass goes up in value, unless of course you buy it used. For new glass you have to look over a much longer time period for any appreciation to occur. Compared to cameras though, in particular digital , you are absolutely right about the negative/zero depreciation for glass. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
ArtZ Posted December 9, 2009 Share #28 Posted December 9, 2009 C'mon guys! This thread is just insane. Don't you feel ashamed to re-read some of your answers and comments? Sorry, I need to go to throw up... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
stevem7 Posted December 9, 2009 Share #29 Posted December 9, 2009 In case anyone wants more samples from the new Noctilux, I just posted my "real world" review of the .95 Noct and also have some comparisons with the F1 Noct. The Leica 50 Noctilux F 0.95 Lens Review | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jplomley Posted December 9, 2009 Share #30 Posted December 9, 2009 Ah c'mon Steve, don't be posting stuff like this right before XMas. You are one sick puppy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted December 9, 2009 Share #31 Posted December 9, 2009 LOL! What a great thread! I love the thought process, Goog. Reminds me of myself in way too many ways! Enjoy the new Noct. I couldn't agree more with your logic! Definitely post some images of Indonesia. And London - which should be great for some nighttime stuff, I would think - when you get back. Terrific old and new Noct images here, Steve and Steve... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Riccis Posted December 10, 2009 Share #32 Posted December 10, 2009 In case anyone wants more samples from the new Noctilux, I just posted my "real world" review of the .95 Noct and also have some comparisons with the F1 Noct. The Leica 50 Noctilux F 0.95 Lens Review | STEVE HUFF PHOTOS Steve: This is a fantastic image regardless of what camera/lens combo was used to make it. Cheers, Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Googaliser Posted December 10, 2009 Author Share #33 Posted December 10, 2009 LOL! What a great thread! I love the thought process, Goog. Reminds me of myself in way too many ways! Enjoy the new Noct. I couldn't agree more with your logic! Definitely post some images of Indonesia. And London - which should be great for some nighttime stuff, I would think - when you get back. Terrific old and new Noct images here, Steve and Steve... Thanks for the support Jeff - I was starting to worry that I was *very* alone out there, floating around in my own little universe Steve H - great article... Helps ratify my decision despite taking a few knocks here . Will post pictures as and when - what is clear is that a steep learning curve awaits (half the fun). Thanks everyone for your comments, Rgds Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
doug_m Posted December 10, 2009 Share #34 Posted December 10, 2009 I never used the old Nocti but I must say that the new Nocti is a very special lens. For me, there is artistically nothing like nailing a great portrait or other shot at the shallow DOF provided by 0.95 at ISO 160 (or 80 pulled) even though the 50 lux ASPH is a fantastic lens. Steve Huff- those posted photos are great! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larryk34 Posted December 10, 2009 Share #35 Posted December 10, 2009 €8000 euros, but that's just for the first shot. The second one only costs you 4000, the third one 2000 per shot, and so forth. In not time you'll be down to 100 per shot, then 10 and 1. So, what are you waiting for? The more you use it the cheaper it gets. And if you ever sell it, you may get it all back plus some. In case you're wondering, my wife taught me that trick. So, the key for most of us is what the wife will say anyway. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwelland Posted December 10, 2009 Share #36 Posted December 10, 2009 I LIKE that 'logic' - kind of like the film/photo cost amortization model although good luck for the rest of us passing that by SWMBO/CFO/significant other. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
larryk34 Posted December 10, 2009 Share #37 Posted December 10, 2009 After checking out the review, I'm sold on the lens. But still waiting to receive and pay for an M9. What the review really makes me want to do is try out my pre-asph 50mm Lux on the M9. It was preempted by the 35 Lux Asph on the M8. Now it may get some real playing time, especially knowing how similar the results will be to the new .95 Noctilux. Getting back to "normal" lens perspectives on the M9 was my main motive for ordering it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted December 10, 2009 Share #38 Posted December 10, 2009 this lens is a mammoth in the m-lens line up. that aspherical element, that little tiny extra bit of light and bokeh over the f1 but with lux-asph. sharpness to boot. is it justifiable? of course, anything is justifiable if you have the incentive and the cash to finance it, resale value? why would you sell anything like this if you bought it? it's a keeper so make it work for you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
noah_addis Posted December 10, 2009 Share #39 Posted December 10, 2009 Interesting review Steve. I prefer your images from the older F/1 Noctilux. I'm not a super-shallow DOF fan, but the older Noctilux images have more character than the more well-behaved F/0.95 version, though obviously the latter is a technically superior lens. For me it seems like a 50 'Lux Asph and an F/1 Noctilux would give you the best of both worlds--modern quality and a classic look. That would be my choice if I had the cash. I don't shoot much with a 50 though, so I'll probably just keep my 50 'Lux Pre-Asph, which also has a lot of character. Larryk34--I think you'll find the 50 'Lux Pre-Asph has a bit more of the old Leica look and is closer to the old Noctilux. I loved it on the M8 and have only briefly tried it on the M9, but I like what I've seen so far. I think it will be an amazing combination. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
tom0511 Posted December 10, 2009 Share #40 Posted December 10, 2009 Personally I am tempted by the new Nocti as well but the price is just soo steep and I am not sure yet if the Nocti can really offer much more over a 50asph Lux, which I use now. I jumped on the 24/1.4 which is also a lens which you can not buy from a rational thinking, but 8k for the Nocti is just too steep IMO. I would not sell my Nikon stuff for it. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.