Noctilux as a Portrait lens on M8

[redbaron]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Good to hear. First, focus on the front eye and use enough depth of field to include the tip of the nose. Watch for distractions in the background and either re-compose or remove them in post-processing. But most importantly, edit the shots you show to clients or anyone, for that matter. For some reason you're only as good as your bad work, never your best work. I'm sure you've got lots of shots that are correctly focussed that could be used as examples of limited depth of field. Most people are also sensitive about at least one part of their appearance. Watch out for shiny heads, bad teeth, etc. Either re-compose or fix later. Are you able to recover any detail from the bright spot on the chap's head, or is it blown?

[jaapv]

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

 

.

Does it?- good thing I never use it. I would dislike losing my copyright info.

[Guest BigSplash]

Thanks RedBaron.....very good advice that I shall certainly follow.

[Guest BigSplash]

Thanks RedBaron.....very good advice that I shall certainly follow.

 

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.

 

I just looked at the depth of field scale on the lens and it seems that at 3metres the DOF at f1 is about 5 cm (difficult to actually read the values as the f1 marks are very close together)

Steve this explains a lot as out of many images that I took last weekend many were indeed out of focus.

I always focus on the eye ball and have no issues normally with 75mm or 90mm lenses or 50mm sumicron.

I managed images last weekend using the Noctilux at f1 with pinprick accurately focussed necklaces but out of focus eyes, and in focus ears etc. so maybe the trick is to move further from the subject. ?

 

Anyhow I shall not give up!

 

Jaapv the shutter speed for the M8 image was actually 1/60th (not 1/600th) ..I revisited the Metadata file so camera shake probably did contribute. I used 1/6000th for external shots.

 

regards

[jaapv]

let's make the discussion real here;

 

At 3 m, on the M8 the official DOF figures are:

 

Noctilux 1.0: 16 cm

Summilux 75 10 cm

Summicron 90 10 cm

 

So it is simply untrue that the Noctilux is more difficult to focus, in fact it is easier than other portrait lenses wide open.

 

Note, btw, that these are DOFmaster figures, which means that they are more or less effective for a small print of about 10x15 cm or a web image. In real life on a sensor divide them by two to get a decent result.

[SJP]

Hope you don't mind Frank, I took the liberty to do some further tweaking of the pictures.

 

Some additional attempts with C1 - I went to B&W as I could not adjust the color to my satisfaction from jpegs, the DNG's would allow more latitude for correction than the jpegs you show here.

 

Dilek candle shot is a tough to get right from the current jpeg I think the banding can be eliminated if neccesary, but I left it in as the overall effect is somewhat better.

 

Mr. Mario is a nice portrait actually. I think the highlight on his forehead would be recoverable from the original file.

 

Shooting at low light with a M8 is quite difficult even with a noctilux as the dynamic range is usually higher than the sensor can handle.

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!

[Guest BigSplash]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hope you don't mind Frank, I took the liberty to do some further tweaking of the pictures.

 

Some additional attempts with C1 - I went to B&W as I could not adjust the color to my satisfaction from jpegs, the DNG's would allow more latitude for correction than the jpegs you show here.

 

Dilek candle shot is a tough to get right from the current jpeg I think the banding can be eliminated if neccesary, but I left it in as the overall effect is somewhat better.

 

Mr. Mario is a nice portrait actually. I think the highlight on his forehead would be recoverable from the original file.

 

Shooting at low light with a M8 is quite difficult even with a noctilux as the dynamic range is usually higher than the sensor can handle.

 

Steve Many thanks ...very nice job! Again I have learned something new ....I have so far not done B/W with my digital images but I must say it does give a more classic look and feel. Thanks again

[Guest BigSplash]

let's make the discussion real here;

 

At 3 m, on the M8 the official DOF figures are:

 

Noctilux 1.0: 16 cm

Summilux 75 10 cm

Summicron 90 10 cm

 

So it is simply untrue that the Noctilux is more difficult to focus, in fact it is easier than other portrait lenses wide open.

 

Note, btw, that these are DOFmaster figures, which means that they are more or less effective for a small print of about 10x15 cm or a web image. In real life on a sensor divide them by two to get a decent result.

 

Jaapv thank you very much ...I tried to get the data by reading the lens barrel. Can you let me know the link where the DOF data is stored for Leica lenses (including old ones)?

 

It seems I must be pretty stupid not being able to focus to within 16cm so I shall now go and sit in the bad boy's chair. Steve may want to come and join me as he sold his Noctilux due to his difficulty with focussing. I haven't yet given up.

 

Jaapv could you let me know how you focus your Noctilux as I'd like to learn from you and get real. I try to get the images in the RF to coincide such that they "suddenly" snap together to get a high contrast image That is the point of focus, and I try to use eyeballs for this. Do you do it differently?

[stunsworth]

Jaapv thank you very much ...I tried to get the data by reading the lens barrel. Can you let me know the link where the DOF data is stored for Leica lenses (including old ones)?

 

The markings on the lens barrel are wildly optimistic. The reasons for this have been discused many times on the forum.

[jaapv]

Online Depth of Field Calculator And halve the value you find.

 

 

 

On focussing: There are three types of rangefinder focussing - the coincidence of lines. which is the simplest method, the coincidence of a pattern, which, once mastered, is the most used, and the maximizing of contrast, which is the most precise.

To the last: when you have focussed according to one of the coincidence methods, a minimal adjustment will cause the image in the rangefinder window to "snap" into maximum contrast. That is when you have achieved maximum focus.

 

You do not always have to turn the focussing ring; you can move your head backwards or forwards as well. And always return the focussing ring to infinity. That way you will not get lost in the focussing scale and you will remember which way to turn. Search the forum for threads on focus-recompose, that is another important subject.

[Jamie Roberts]

Anyway, isn't the first shot a chrome? Last I looked, Kodak didn't supply EXIF information from slide film

 

Next, to those who might take you to task, Frank, perhaps a little too harshly for not getting tack sharp at f1.0 by candlelight or available light, I'd say I'd rather have your second, printable portrait decently exposed than totally unprintable through underexposure (and shutter shake) at f5.6.

 

Of course, the Nocti *is* sharp wide open. It's just not as sharp as a 50 cron or Lux ASPH. So your technique needs work. Keep practicing.

 

Personally, and I've said this before and people have made fun of it, so I'm not going to get into this again, I focus my Nocti in near total darkness by finding something in the same plane of focus as eyes (it's difficult sometimes to see or lock onto someone's eyes) and focusing on that instead. At f1 to f2 it's not as hard to focus as people might think, but contrast helps me.

[giordano]

At 3 m, on the M8 the official DOF figures are:

 

Noctilux 1.0: 16 cm

Summilux 75 10 cm

Summicron 90 10 cm

 

So it is simply untrue that the Noctilux is more difficult to focus, in fact it is easier than other portrait lenses wide open.

 

That's an unrealistic example because the sitter's face in the Noctilux shot will be two-thirds the size it is in the 75mm shot and just over half the size it is in the 90mm shot. To allow for the additional cropping and enlargement you need to use a smaller circle of confusion for the Noctilux than for the others, which brings the depth of field down to - you guessed it - about 10cm.

[SJP]

That's an unrealistic example because the sitter's face in the Noctilux shot will be two-thirds the size it is in the 75mm shot and just over half the size it is in the 90mm shot. To allow for the additional cropping and enlargement you need to use a smaller circle of confusion for the Noctilux than for the others, which brings the depth of field down to - you guessed it - about 10cm.

Alternatively there is the "two stops" rule of thumb, which yields (use as if f/0.5 at CoC is 31 micron, or f/0.75 at 23 micron) about 15 cm:

 

So-max 3.08m

So-min 2.926m

Overall depth of field 0.15m

[Jamie Roberts]

That's an unrealistic example because the sitter's face in the Noctilux shot will be two-thirds the size it is in the 75mm shot and just over half the size it is in the 90mm shot. To allow for the additional cropping and enlargement you need to use a smaller circle of confusion for the Noctilux than for the others, which brings the depth of field down to - you guessed it - about 10cm.

 

Unless you're happy with the crop and enlargement stays the same (IOW, you don't need to make the 50 into a 75 or 90 So comparing different FOVs from a distance, not the same FOV from multiple distances, the Nocti is easier to focus.

[redbaron]

BTW; DoF extends twice as far behind the plain of focus than it does in front. For example, if you photograph a long ruler laid flat and focus on the 50cm mark DoF will extend 10cm towards the camera and 20cm away from it, with a Dof of 30cm.

[giordano]

BTW; DoF extends twice as far behind the plain of focus than it does in front.

 

Sometimes it does, the rest of the time it doesn't.

For example, if you photograph a long ruler laid flat and focus on the 50cm mark DoF will extend 10cm towards the camera and 20cm away from it, with a Dof of 30cm.

Not with any camera I own it doesn't. What focal length, aperture and circle of confusion gives you that combination of focal distance and depth of field?

 

What actually happens is that close up (magnification 1:1), depth of field lies equally before and beyond the focal distance. As the focal distance increases, the distribution of depth of field shifts gradually until at the hyperfocal distance there is infinite depth of field beyond, and 50% of the hyperfocal distance before.

 

For each combination of focal length, aperture and CoC, there is only one distance at which the ratio is exactly 1:2, and this is surprisingly far from the camera:

 

35mm, f/5.6, 30µm: distance c. 3.6m

35mm, f/1.4, 30µm: distance c. 13m

75mm, f/8, 30µm: distance c. 11m

75mm, f/2.5, 30µm: distance c. 34m.

 

As Jaap has said here several times, usually it's a better rule of thumb to assume approximately equal DOF before and beyond the focus distance.

[Ecar]

FWIW I use focus bracketing in challenging situation - e.g., close up, low light - and I typically get one keeper. Not very academic perhaps, and requires some practice and a bit of fingerspitzgefuhl (or "finger feeling", as you say in Germany), but it works for me.

And a viewfinder magnifier can help too.

Ditto for the Lux 75 or the Cron 90 pre-ASPH.

[jaapv]

Sometimes it does, the rest of the time it doesn't.

Not with any camera I own it doesn't. What focal length, aperture and circle of confusion gives you that combination of focal distance and depth of field?

 

What actually happens is that close up (magnification 1:1), depth of field lies equally before and beyond the focal distance. As the focal distance increases, the distribution of depth of field shifts gradually until at the hyperfocal distance there is infinite depth of field beyond, and 50% of the hyperfocal distance before.

 

For each combination of focal length, aperture and CoC, there is only one distance at which the ratio is exactly 1:2, and this is surprisingly far from the camera:

 

35mm, f/5.6, 30µm: distance c. 3.6m

35mm, f/1.4, 30µm: distance c. 13m

75mm, f/8, 30µm: distance c. 11m

75mm, f/2.5, 30µm: distance c. 34m.

 

As Jaap has said here several times, usually it's a better rule of thumb to assume approximately equal DOF before and beyond the focus distance.

Indeed. And only one plane is sharp: the one you focussed on. And never rely on hyperfocal if the horizon needs to be sharp. If that is the case, focus on infinity and let the sharpness of the foreground fall as it may.

[redbaron]

I stand corrected. Partly. I'll be sticking to my rule of thumb for the distances I work at using the lenses I use.

 

Frank, you might have some testing to do.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[steamboat]

Frank--I "bracket" my focusing with the Noctilux, especially when shooting portraits. Focus, shoot. Then move the camera about half an inch closer, shoot. Move the camera about 1 to 1.5" back, shoot. You get the idea. Don't "bracket" by adusting the focus..just adjust YOUR distance to the subject. It works well. With M8 it's easy since advance is automatic (trickier with single stroke M film cameras). Good luck - it is a great lens.