Noctilux as a Portrait lens on M8

[Guest BigSplash]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I took my Noctilux (Version1) this weekend to a lunch party and found myself taking pictures of friends indoors. Frankly I was amased with the results! I have read that 90mm on a FF camera is the best lens for portraits, and more recently the 75mm has been touted as the best portrait lens as it gives more options in post processing to crop the image, while retaining the depth of field benefits of that level of focal length.

The 50mm Noctilux on a M8 is equivalent to 67mm but has the awesome f1 depth of field as a benefit.

I have used the Noctilux on M8 quite a lot for photographing people and continue to be amased by its performance. The 75mm Summilux is another gem for people / portrait type photography.

[Advertisement]

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

[wattsy]

No offence Frank but you make it sound like you've discovered something new.

[Redridge]

he did discover it.... for himself, that is.

[Guest BigSplash]

You are sort of correct. In the books I have read about Leica they tend to refer to the Noctilux as somehow a special lens which I guess it is. I have seen comments that Leica actually produced a f 0.8 lens for X ray machines and again the Noctilux was referred to in such terms.

 

There has been a thread on the forum about using the Noctilux as a general purpose 50mm lens however at £7000 for a new one and about £3500 for a used one I wonder!

 

There also has been reference to the old Version 1 (this is the one I have) that yielded 30% in production (ie they tossed 70% in the bin) that it has a special bokeh whereas the new Noctilux is much sharper.

 

Personally I have used my Noctilux historically for available light photography with candles typically as my light source so I was intrigued to see how it would perform for indoor people images (portraits) and I was very surprised.

 

Watssy maybe this is old hat for you in which case I am sorry to disturb you. For me it was indeed a discovery, that I hope others that are lucky enough to own one of these "special" lenses give it a go. As I said the 75mm Summilux is excellent also but it is no longer made by Leica I believe.

[andybarton]

I am amazed that someone has owned a Noctilux for some time and hasn't explored its capabilities to the full already.

[Jamie Roberts]

Frank, yes, the Nocti is an excellent "soft contrast" portrait lens. It's one of the reasons--beyond the technical hype--that it's so well-regarded IMO.

 

Try it around f1.2 to 1.6 for people...

 

Another portrait lens you might like on your M8--if you like the Nocti--is the 90 'Cron pre-ASPH.

 

At f2, it's very beautiful as well (though it's actually sharper than the Nocti wide open, but lower contrast than the 75 at f2--and you get the compression / magnification of a 90mm lens, too).

[Guest BigSplash]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Frank, yes, the Nocti is an excellent "soft contrast" portrait lens. It's one of the reasons--beyond the technical hype--that it's so well-regarded IMO.

 

Try it around f1.2 to 1.6 for people...

 

Another portrait lens you might like on your M8--if you like the Nocti--is the 90 'Cron pre-ASPH.

 

At f2, it's very beautiful as well (though it's actually sharper than the Nocti wide open, but lower contrast than the 75 at f2--and you get the compression / magnification of a 90mm lens, too).

 

Thanks Jamie. I have the old 90mm Summicron and this has been my portrait lens typically used as you suggest at f2 for 20 years. I agree with you although find it less good on the M8 due to the crop factor. I bought the 75mm f1.4 a few years ago and find that very good for portraits on the M8.

 

I remain staggered by the Noctilux however at f1 .

 

Andy I guess I did not tend to use such an expensive, heavy chunk of glass for "normal" type usage as it seemed overkill. It is also a big beast with its huge lenshood to cart around when I compare it to my 50mm summicron or the MATE . My mistake I shall try to improve and recognise how stupid I was (to share my experience here!)

[biglouis]

I don't have a Noctilux but I do use my Elmar 50/2.8 quite often as a portrait lens. I think the op was remarking on the unusual 'equivalent' focal length properties of a 67mm lens.

[Guest BigSplash]

I don't have a Noctilux but I do use my Elmar 50/2.8 quite often as a portrait lens. I think the op was remarking on the unusual 'equivalent' focal length properties of a 67mm lens.

Big Louis ...I was indeed referring to as you suggest the focal length properties and depth of field at 67mm lens. I was also referring to the limited depth of field at full aperture of the Noctilux that surprised me at a distance for head and shoulders when shot from a distance of about 4 metres.

The candle shot below was taken some time ago with the Noctilux with a M4 and ASA 64 transparency...and that is the sort of image I thought Noctilux's are exclusively used for.

 

The other image was taken last weekend and it shows the power IMHO of the Noctilux for general portrait usage without flash.

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!

[andybarton]

I agree Frank, they are very hard to focus accurately.

[Guest BigSplash]

I agree Frank. They are very hard to focus accurately.

Andy getting the focus right at f1 is not easy although I think that you are trying to tell me something here?

 

I recognise that the shots are not sharp focussed which I easily could have achieved at f8 or with other lenses that would have given me more latitude.

 

IMHO portraits that I have paid very good money for taken in a studio have a slight fuzziness to them compared to a pinprick accurately focussed snapshot of head and shoulders. It was that effect that surprised me here using the Noctilux at f1. and at 1/6000 at ISO 160 by the way!

[jaapv]

Interesting to note all exif has been stripped from these images.

[Guest BigSplash]

Interesting to note all exif has been stripped from these images.

Do you mean the metadata files? I simply used Photoshop CS4 and save for web so I guess it gets stripped automatically? Why do you need that data?

[andybarton]

So, you paid £3-4,000 for a highly specialised lens and take unsharp photographs and that's seen as a benefit?

 

Each to his own.

[redbaron]

Frank, I used to shoot a lot of portraits for annual reports. I've got some tips if you want them.

[Guest BigSplash]

Frank, I used to shoot a lot of portraits for annual reports. I've got some tips if you want them.

 

Yes please ...Thanks. I am actually very keen to learn.

[Guest BigSplash]

So, you paid £3-4,000 for a highly specialised lens to take unsharp photographs and that's seen as a benefit?

 

Each to his own.

 

I shall with your advice try to improve.

[earleygallery]

It's actually quite easy to take unsharp/fuzzy photos with any lens, you don't need a Noctilux for that! I guess there's a certain skill in focussing so you obtain that just out of focus look though

 

Another trick for you to try is breathing on the lens just before shooting, wiping vaseline on a filter, or using an old stocking as a soft focus filter.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[jaapv]

Do you mean the metadata files? I simply used Photoshop CS4 and save for web so I guess it gets stripped automatically? Why do you need that data?

Well, for one thing to see your shutterspeed and try to judge how much camera shake has contributed to the general unsharpness. And CS4 does not strip automatically. That has to be done deliberately.

[stunsworth]

Jaap, it does if you use the "save for web" option.

 

The Noctilux is very difficult to focus wide open and close up. That was one of the reasons I sold mine - I wasn't getting reliable results. The fact that I could move the lens barrel further than the DOF at f1 and see no change in the viewfinder meant that I couldn't rely on getting an in focus shot.