doug_m Posted December 13, 2009 Share #81 Posted December 13, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) Here is my example of why I like the Nocti 0.95 + M9 so much. The file is only 60 plus MB- my posting skills are pretty poor- sorry. The baby girl is 6 months old. Shot at f 0.95, 1/750, ISO 640. The ISO 640 was a mistake that seemed to work. The crop is about 50%. Also posted on the photo forum. 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! 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/106204-justifying-the-095-noctilux/?do=findComment&comment=1149171'>More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted December 13, 2009 Posted December 13, 2009 Hi doug_m, Take a look here Justifying the 0.95 Noctilux. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
doug_m Posted December 13, 2009 Share #82 Posted December 13, 2009 Oops, I meant 60 KB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
doug_m Posted December 13, 2009 Share #83 Posted December 13, 2009 Oops again, the cropped image is only about 36% of the original image size- not 50 %. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Logic108 Posted December 13, 2009 Share #84 Posted December 13, 2009 I think it is interesting to note that reviewers have said that the Noctilux at f/1.4 is pretty much the same as the Summilux at f/1.4. But obviously the Noctilux will give a lot of shooting pleasure to those that have it. My personal view is that I don't want heavy lenses. I came from a loaded down SLR system and won't ever want to feel as encumbered again. I love it that my lux is so small but has such amazing capabilities. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
cheewai_m6 Posted December 14, 2009 Share #85 Posted December 14, 2009 my personal view is that the nocti, old or new, is meant to be shot wide open in dark situations. the only reason i would use this lens, is to shoot wide open and at no other f stop. for that reason, if it wasn't at night time, i would just use the lux (if i had both). i would never buy a nocti, it's only 1 stop faster than a lux and the size of the lens FOR ME, is not worth 1 stop. not that i can't appreciate a nocti shot. it's unique wide open. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
batmobile Posted December 14, 2009 Share #86 Posted December 14, 2009 Here is my example of why I like the Nocti 0.95 + M9 so much. The file is only 60 plus MB- my posting skills are pretty poor- sorry. The baby girl is 6 months old. Shot at f 0.95, 1/750, ISO 640. The ISO 640 was a mistake that seemed to work. The crop is about 50%. Also posted on the photo forum. No disrespect, but this shot could have been shot on pretty well any 50mm lens and does not in my view show anything unique about the lens. Even on a 50 lux asph, you'd have saved nearly $7K and still ended up with a shot that was not meaningfully different. With a 50 1.5 Nokton you would have $9600 left and still have a shot that is effectively identical. I think the lens being discussed is an amazing piece of engineering but suspect there are very few that can argue for ownership based on utility or need. I am not knocking it, because if you want one, buy one and enjoy it! Wanting one is reason enough for those who can afford it. Some would spend the money on an expensive holiday. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted December 14, 2009 Share #87 Posted December 14, 2009 Advertisement (gone after registration) I don't want a noctilux . . . I don't want a noctilux . . . I don't want a noctilux . . . I don't want a noctilux . . . I don't want a noctilux. Maybe, just maybe; if I say it enough times I'll really believe it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
charlesphoto99 Posted December 14, 2009 Share #88 Posted December 14, 2009 No disrespect, but this shot could have been shot on pretty well any 50mm lens and does not in my view show anything unique about the lens. Even on a 50 lux asph, you'd have saved nearly $7K and still ended up with a shot that was not meaningfully different. With a 50 1.5 Nokton you would have $9600 left and still have a shot that is effectively identical. I think the lens being discussed is an amazing piece of engineering but suspect there are very few that can argue for ownership based on utility or need. I am not knocking it, because if you want one, buy one and enjoy it! Wanting one is reason enough for those who can afford it. Some would spend the money on an expensive holiday. That was my thinking exactly. Like why the 50% crop? In fact this shot looks like it could have been taken with just about anything prosumer, dslr or p&s, therefore saving about $6500 on a body as well. May as well put that money in the kids college fund. Just because a lens is hugely expensive doesn't mean it's going to automatically make better photographs. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted December 14, 2009 Share #89 Posted December 14, 2009 That was my thinking exactly. Like why the 50% crop? In fact this shot looks like it could have been taken with just about anything prosumer, dslr or p&s, therefore saving about $6500 on a body as well. May as well put that money in the kids college fund. Just because a lens is hugely expensive doesn't mean it's going to automatically make better photographs. It will automatically make better photographs at f.095 and f1.0 then any other lens out there. Do you want to dispute that fact? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted December 14, 2009 Share #90 Posted December 14, 2009 I don't want a noctilux . . . I don't want a noctilux . . . I don't want a noctilux . . . I don't want a noctilux . . . I don't want a noctilux. Maybe, just maybe; if I say it enough times I'll really believe it! I don't want a Noctilux, and I mean it. If I had that much cash to burn I think I would rather get that other very fast lens made by Voiglander at a tenth of the cost, and use the rest of the cash to help some pretty desperate people in need in these very difficult economic times. Unemployment in California is up to 12.7 %. Quite frankly, at a time like this, I would be embarrassed to be purchasing a $10,000.00 lens I could take to a party. I sense that some of us on this forum need to get a life. I apologize in advance for raining on anyone's parade. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted December 14, 2009 Share #91 Posted December 14, 2009 I don't want a Noctilux, and I mean it. If I had that much cash to burn I think I would rather get that other very fast lens made by Voiglander at a tenth of the cost, and use the rest of the cash to help some pretty desperate people in need in these very difficult economic times. Unemployment in California is up to 12.7 %. Quite frankly, at a time like this, I would be embarrassed to be purchasing a $10,000.00 lens I could take to a party. I sense that some of us on this forum need to get a life. I apologize in advance for raining on anyone's parade. Well, those people in Solms need to earn a living as well, and if everyone stopped spending money we would all be in trouble. Still Wilfredo, I take your point. truth is that I don't want one either - I had an old version for a year, but the problem was that I really didn't like to use it in the places where it was useful (more being scared of dropping it than anything else). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gwelland Posted December 14, 2009 Share #92 Posted December 14, 2009 Wilfredo: There is a counter argument that your Noctilux purchase would help keep some currently employed people still employed both locally where the product was sold, the distribution chain from Leica, plus of course back at the Leica factory ... in these desperate times stimulation of the economy is the only sustainable way to lift people from their economic woes - at the macro level at least. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted December 14, 2009 Share #93 Posted December 14, 2009 Here is my example of why I like the Nocti 0.95 + M9 so much. The file is only 60 plus MB- my posting skills are pretty poor- sorry. The baby girl is 6 months old. Shot at f 0.95, 1/750, ISO 640. The ISO 640 was a mistake that seemed to work. The crop is about 50%. Also posted on the photo forum. Doug, This is a very lovely shot but it doesn't justify paying $10,000.00 for a lens by any stretch of the imagination. Again I apologize to the Nocti consumers for being a wet noodle, but I believe honesty is at a premium. Honesty is far more valuable than the need to have something that doesn't measure up in terms of usefulness when compared to the cost.. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
NB23 Posted December 14, 2009 Share #94 Posted December 14, 2009 I don't want a Noctilux, and I mean it. If I had that much cash to burn I think I would rather get that other very fast lens made by Voiglander at a tenth of the cost, and use the rest of the cash to help some pretty desperate people in need in these very difficult economic times. Unemployment in California is up to 12.7 %. Quite frankly, at a time like this, I would be embarrassed to be purchasing a $10,000.00 lens I could take to a party. I sense that some of us on this forum need to get a life. I apologize in advance for raining on anyone's parade. Let's turn the tables around for a moment: according to what you said it is not the Noctilux owners who would need to get a life. And I have to applaud the people that do have 10,000$ to spend on a lens or on a pair of shoes. They succeeded, as opposed to many people who... lost their jobs. Again, they are not the ones who should be getting a life: they have one Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted December 14, 2009 Share #95 Posted December 14, 2009 Wilfredo: There is a counter argument that your Noctilux purchase would help keep some currently employed people still employed both locally where the product was sold, the distribution chain from Leica, plus of course back at the Leica factory ... in these desperate times stimulation of the economy is the only sustainable way to lift people from their economic woes - at the macro level at least. That's a nice way to ease the conscience, but I won't buy it. If you want to spend money, spend it where it will make a difference. Extravagant purchases will not help the ranks of the unemployed. Please don't turn the purchase of a Nocti into an altruistic event, an act of kindness and generosity to stimulate the economy. It isn't that and that is not the reason why people purchase this lens. Forget it! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted December 14, 2009 Share #96 Posted December 14, 2009 They succeeded, as opposed to many people who... lost their jobs. Interesting viewpoint. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wilfredo Posted December 14, 2009 Share #97 Posted December 14, 2009 Let's turn the tables around for a moment: according to what you said it is not the Noctilux owners who would need to get a life.And I have to applaud the people that do have 10,000$ to spend on a lens or on a pair of shoes. They succeeded, as opposed to many people who... lost their jobs. Again, they are not the ones who should be getting a life: they have one We have a very different set of values. I suppose those corporate thieves who were handed millions in government bailout money (so they can spend $10,000.00 on a pair of shoes) also succeeded in your view, and should be applauded for "having a life." Under those circumstances "having a life" means taking away the right to a dignified living for countless others. You can't have it both ways, the scales become lopsided with your view of "having a life." Enough said, this club is too expensive for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
brill64 Posted December 14, 2009 Share #98 Posted December 14, 2009 No disrespect, but this shot could have been shot on pretty well any 50mm lens and does not in my view show anything unique about the lens. Even on a 50 lux asph, you'd have saved nearly $7K and still ended up with a shot that was not meaningfully different. With a 50 1.5 Nokton you would have $9600 left and still have a shot that is effectively identical. I think the lens being discussed is an amazing piece of engineering but suspect there are very few that can argue for ownership based on utility or need. I am not knocking it, because if you want one, buy one and enjoy it! Wanting one is reason enough for those who can afford it. Some would spend the money on an expensive holiday. ..ouch!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jonoslack Posted December 14, 2009 Share #99 Posted December 14, 2009 That's a nice way to ease the conscience, but I won't buy it. If you want to spend money, spend it where it will make a difference. Extravagant purchases will not help the ranks of the unemployed. Please don't turn the purchase of a Nocti into an altruistic event, an act of kindness and generosity to stimulate the economy. It isn't that and that is not the reason why people purchase this lens. Forget it! Wilfredo - I don't think anyone was suggesting that it was an altruistic event. Still, your logic would preclude buying anything but the most basic cars and no other luxuries, of course, from a moral point of view this is the right thing to do . . but it wouldn't be good if the whole world did it.! I've been to Solms, I can assure you that the people who work their are normal people who need jobs as well. The reason the lens is so expensive is that it's hand made in small numbers by normally paid people. They need their jobs too. all the best p.s. I still don't want one Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
dewittehd Posted December 14, 2009 Share #100 Posted December 14, 2009 IMHO if you have to ask "can I justify this" then you can't. If you had a need you wouldn't have to justify :-)) Jean Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.