Noctilux: Why do you love it, or why not?

[menos I M6]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Interesting observation Dirk. It's great to see you and your Noct have already bonded. Have you use is on a Lecia M film body yet.?

 

…

Taken with 50 1.0 Noctilux @1.0 with ND filter on Leica M3/M7/MP on Ektapress 160/800

 

 

Gregory

 

Have shot a few Fuji rolls on the M7 and some Tri-X on the M6, both mainly, to verify the RF setting with the Noct.

I am a lazy guy though and didn't have the film developed yet ;-)

Too much fun grabbing the M8.2 and having instant shots.

Looking forward to the weekend.

[Nikkor AIS]

To lazy to go to the lab? I love going to the lab. Dispite using up my out of date film and getting low res scans it's still fun. Besides, without me they wold go out of business. Some more from my last haul. The more I use this lens the more I love it.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The black dots on the rope where what looked like tiny little bee's.

 

Taken with Noctilux 50 1.0 with B+W Nd filter @ 1.0 on Leica M7 and Ektapress 160 asa film

 

Gregory

[amedick]

Gregory, I really like the look of your film shots, especially shot #1.

 

Pico, Peter_n, thanks for the comments / feedback on my shots.

 

I must say, the Noctilux seems to really grow on you with use.

 

Wonder if a Noctilux LUF book is something that would be worth putting together, showing f1.0 / 0.95 wide open examples and extremes. Or pehaps an appendix or chapter in the book being proposed by Bill P......

 

John

[Nikkor AIS]

Thanks John,

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gregory

[Bundestrainer]

Just want to reanimate this thread because it has so many nice photos in it? Could you add some more?

[Gerard]

No.

 

And that's what I really don't like about this lens...

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

...I don't own one!

 

 

[edmond_terakopian]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Here's a set of images starting right with the first shots I took on my Noctilux ASPH:

 

 

Cheers,

 

Edmond

[IkarusJohn]

Thanks for posting the link, Edmond. I like your images.

 

I have mixed feelings about this lens (I have a deep down desire to own one, but I suspect it's just GAS). Most of the images I see posted using this lens, I have to be honest, I hate. Images taken too close, wide open, with a hopelessly thin depth of field - you just wonder why it is that you're looking at only an eyelash in focus. This then means that the out of focus areas are hard to read, and they distract. And the bokeh looks difficult to manage to me - blobby and also distracting in a very unpleasant way.

 

So, I came to the view that the lens is tricky to handle, and I'm not taking anywhere enough pictures to master it.

 

Your pictures (and Thorsten's and those from the LFI article - sorry, it's not to hand and I can't remember the photographer's name), are conversely very fine. One reason, I suspect, is that you give your subjects a little more distance, so the narrow depth of field is not so unforgiving, and you appear to have given thought to the out of focus areas (plain old composition, I guess). I also suspect that not all of your Noct pictures in the link are taken wide open (though Thorsten says he takes all his photos at maximum aperture - I often wonder if he uses ND filters).

 

So, thanks again, for reminding me that it is possible to take nice pictures with this strange lens.

 

Cheers

John

[Lord Fluff]

Just for balance, since this thread is 99% love.....

 

I've used the 1.0 and 0.95. I am enamoured of neither.

 

- ruins the whole dynamic of a nice compact RF camera

- face it, the f1 is only f1 right in the middle anyway

- viewfinder blockage annoys me

- silly prices for any version now - go buy a Nokton 1.1, no-one will know

- MFD of 1m is a deal breaker for me

- horrid stiff focussing (0.95 less so). No idea why people equate stiff with accurate.

- makes people think a shot of a sign, or bag of crisps, or a leaf is inherently interesting just because of the "unique rendering"

- pre-asph lux also turns out shallow DOF shots, unique blah blah, at a fraction of the price and without above issues.

 

It's an interesting anomaly of a lens, but not for me.

[IkarusJohn]

I just looked up this thread and saw postings by Gregory, and realised my adverse comments could be read as criticism of his pictures.

 

That is not the case. My less than complimentary comments were not aimed at those pictures.

 

Cheers

John

[menos I M6]

Just for balance, since this thread is 99% love.....

 

I've used the 1.0 and 0.95. I am enamoured of neither.

You can't balance this out for the people, who are in love with the lens ;-)

 

- ruins the whole dynamic of a nice compact RF camera

Not really, as the package of a naked M (without contraptions) and Noctilux is still the smallest possible package of a superfast 50 and 24x36 negative

It handles beautifully as well, as long, as you are no weakling though ;-)

 

- face it, the f1 is only f1 right in the middle anyway

Which is the whole point of it, as no Summilux is going to get you to f1 anywhere, right ;-)

But for me (and many others, I presume) it is not just about the light collecting and typical f1 Noct character of light falloff, but about the unique signature rendering of the finest detail (ever see a big f1 print or a processed RAW file blown up on a screen, demonstrating this?), it is about the insane rendering of bright light sources of the Noctilux even wide open, the smooth tones and just about the perfect contrast for the digital age.

 

These are the reasons, my Noctilux f1 finds itself almost always in my bag, whereas my 50 Lux ASPH just collects dust - seriously, the Lux is a dead boring lens by comparison.

 

If shooting the Noctilux f1 would mean, to make a handstand and carrying a hinkelstone in a backpack, I would still consider it as a daily shooter.

 

- viewfinder blockage annoys me

It annoys users only so much, as they don't know, to use the Noctilux on a regular basis (no offense). When I used it the first time, it drove me nuts, but as you use it enough and as you use it on a rangefinder camera with a very close visual connection to your surroundings and view outside of the frame, you learn to focus and frame with this limitation.

Can't see the bottom right corner? Move the camera and see the bottom right corner!

It surprisingly is really as simple as that.

 

- silly prices for any version now - go buy a Nokton 1.1, no-one will know

People constantly beating on the going price of the Noctilux or any high priced consumer good for that matter often forget about the economics of expensive tools.

The cost are always initial sales price - resale value - always.

So far, the market has been very favorable to Noctilux users.

You could have bought a new Noctilux f1 10 years ago, dragged it around the planet, scraped it's paint off in the process and resell it Today for more money, than you paid for it.

 

You certainly can't do that with any Voigtlander lens.

 

- MFD of 1m is a deal breaker for me

Move your feet ;-) Really, it's not a lens, to shoot flowers and bees - you could buy a 75 Lux for that purpose though.

The modern lens' abilities in close focussing are incredible (a 50's Nikkor-S.C 5cm 1.4 is no slouch either, long time before Leitz got wind about the usefulness of close focussing normal lenses).

These close focussing lenses won't do no f1 though :-(

One could complain that lack of easy transportability of hot tomato soup is lacking, compared to a baguette, but it is a moot point, as no baguette will taste like hot tomato soup, right?

 

- horrid stiff focussing (0.95 less so). No idea why people equate stiff with accurate.

You must have had an broken sample, as on mine and the two or three others, I tried, no focussing was remotely stiff.

Incredibly, my Noctilux f1 continues after a year of heavy use, to focus silky, buttery smooth without any scratchiness, stickiness, heaviness, … opposed, to many 50 Lux ASPH, I have tried, which in fact feel like cheesy crap in handling focussing, compared to a well maintained Noct.

 

- makes people think a shot of a sign, or bag of crisps, or a leaf is inherently interesting just because of the "unique rendering"

You overstate - what you see is the playful early phase of ownership, where one admires every possibility, to disconnect whatever meaningless subject from whatever uninteresting background, just for the sake of it.

Many users do overcome this phase - these are the users, who continue, to love and use their Noctilux after playing is over.

What dominates the internet though are many thousands of pictures from short term users, who had to try one, to find it not being for them.

After all the doubts, I had, I knew on the first day after buying mine, that this will be MY LENS. I try, to prevent the dof shooting samples and use it, for what I bought it - shooting in Summilux forbidden light.

 

- pre-asph lux also turns out shallow DOF shots, unique blah blah, at a fraction of the price and without above issues.

It will not collect more light, which is the point of the Noctilux.

Your list seems to state that the main point of using a Noctilux is not, that it allows, to shoot in lower light.

This might be true for many users. I have found, that the Noctilux moves the comfort zone in low light. I shoot regularly in light, where a Summilux does cause issues.

 

 

It's an interesting anomaly of a lens, but not for me.

Absolutely - and you are not alone.

The raw numbers of manufactured units alone prove, that using a specialist lens like this is not for everybody.

Some though, some do indeed love their Noctilux ;-)

 

I just found, that I can search my own flickr photo stream for the tag "Noctilux" … getting old ;-)

 

teknopunk.com tagged "Noctilux on flickr

 

teknopunk.com tagged "Noctilux on flickr as slideshow

 

A few samples:

 

 

"the godfather" the godfather | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

"racing with hot food" racing with hot food | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

"spectator - 2011 Le Mans 24h" spectator - 2011 Le Mans 24h | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

"romantic call" romantic call | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

[menos I M6]

And a few more:

 

"…" Untitled | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

"…" Untitled | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

"man loves dog loves man" man loves dog loves man | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

"dancing dragon" dancing dragon | Flickr - Photo Sharing!

 

Most of these are shot during nightly hours.

 

I love the nights.

I love the Noctilux (and wish, I would have saved myself all the other gear crap, I went through, t find this revelation).

Oh … and I love the places and people, I am living and shooting ;-)

[IkarusJohn]

Nice images, Dirk.

[Lord Fluff]

You can't balance this out for the people, who are in love with the lens ;-)

 

 

Indeed - but the thread is open to those who are non-believers too But a very enjoyable response to my grumpy one Menos, thank you. However! Don't expect me to roll over

 

It handles beautifully as well, as long, as you are no weakling though ;-)

 

It's certainly smaller than my 1DmkIV and 85/1.2 combo - but I guess it depends on how you see the M system - and for me that huge lens spoils the whole point, much in the way a 135mm lens would.

 

Can't see the bottom right corner? Move the camera and see the bottom right corner!

It surprisingly is really as simple as that.

 

I admire your ingenuity! It's hardly an aid to composition though, which I thought was what M photography was all about. I'm not a both-eyes-open kinda guy though, perhaps this matters.

 

So far, the market has been very favorable to Noctilux users.

You could have bought a new Noctilux f1 10 years ago, dragged it around the planet, scraped it's paint off in the process and resell it Today for more money, than you paid for it.

 

You certainly can't do that with any Voigtlander lens.

 

 

And I doubt you could do that if you bought a Nocti f1 at current prices either. Two things have helped enormously for the current f1 ticket price - the M9's popularity and the price of the new 0.95. Both have meant demand has way outstripped supply, so up go the prices. There is huge interest in the Nocti for those who simply wish to show off with their new M9, so the prices remain beyond reach for those on more normal budgets. I think you'd find that if the new Nokton 35/1.2 is double the price of the old one, then its price used will rise too, though the lack of the word "Leica" on it should keep it a bargain.

 

Move your feet ;-) Really, it's not a lens, to shoot flowers and bees

 

Or a lot of the things I seem to like to shoot, brides being one, my dog being another...

Again, my post was about why it doesn't work *for me* - clearly a lot of your (lovely) shots are from distance, which is not my style, as a rule.

 

You must have had an broken sample, as on mine and the two or three others, I tried, no focussing was remotely stiff.

 

It's possible. Only three lenses have ever struck me as unusable (for me) - two 75 luxes I tried, and an f1 Nocti. The shops in each case claimed that 'they're all like that'. Again, my benchmark is my black paint pre-asph lux, where I can focus from close to far or back in an instant - the Nocti I tried required concerted winding with concerted effort. No fun.

 

What dominates the internet though are many thousands of pictures from short term users, who had to try one, to find it not being for them.

 

I think this has worn me down, I admit. There really is an awful lot of "oooh look at this picture of a rusty hinge, what an amazing lens" and shots which, yes have a very blurry background, but could have come from any number of alternatives.

 

After all the doubts, I had, I knew on the first day after buying mine, that this will be MY LENS. I try, to prevent the dof shooting samples and use it, for what I bought it - shooting in Summilux forbidden light.

 

Then all power to you. If you shoot film then I'm sure it is a saviour, and in days gone by it enabled pics in light than no other lens could - right now a camera with great high ISO performance will do so with ease.

 

I'm not anti-Nocti at all, but my limited experience with it makes it less appealing than a Nokton 1.1, which in itself is less appealing to me than my Millennium Lux *even though* shallow DOF and low light accounts for a large portion of my work.

[edmond_terakopian]

Thanks for posting the link, Edmond. I like your images.

 

I have mixed feelings about this lens (I have a deep down desire to own one, but I suspect it's just GAS). Most of the images I see posted using this lens, I have to be honest, I hate. Images taken too close, wide open, with a hopelessly thin depth of field - you just wonder why it is that you're looking at only an eyelash in focus. This then means that the out of focus areas are hard to read, and they distract. And the bokeh looks difficult to manage to me - blobby and also distracting in a very unpleasant way.

 

So, I came to the view that the lens is tricky to handle, and I'm not taking anywhere enough pictures to master it.

 

Your pictures (and Thorsten's and those from the LFI article - sorry, it's not to hand and I can't remember the photographer's name), are conversely very fine. One reason, I suspect, is that you give your subjects a little more distance, so the narrow depth of field is not so unforgiving, and you appear to have given thought to the out of focus areas (plain old composition, I guess). I also suspect that not all of your Noct pictures in the link are taken wide open (though Thorsten says he takes all his photos at maximum aperture - I often wonder if he uses ND filters).

 

So, thanks again, for reminding me that it is possible to take nice pictures with this strange lens.

 

Cheers

John

 

Thanks John for your kind words.

 

Ok, firstly, what does GAS mean?!?!! I've seen it used before and have no idea!!

 

What I'll say about the Noctilux ASPH is that it's an amazing 50mm lens. Forget the bokeh for a second. It's stunning and I do, depending on what I'm shooting, shoot at other apertures. The amazing thing with the latest version (f0.95) is that it's not just a specific occasion lens wide open like the previous models which rendered with a beautiful soft glow - it's pin sharp. The previous one wide open was ideal for portraits, weddings, and generally arty stuff, but you always had to have a normal 50mm as well for 'normal' things - for me, I couldn't photograph a politician with the beautiful glow of the f1 Nocti - it would just look wrong!! :-) The f0.95 though is just sharp and beautifully rendered.

 

Ok, back onto bokeh - it's lovely having this beautifully milky bokey as it makes your subject really pop - however my personal approach isn't to go for bokeh primarily - most people seem to do this (judging by comments I get on Flickr) - I compose and make my image and part of that is judging what I want it to look like as far as DOF is concerned.

I do love the look of the image when it's at f0.95 though, but this is a conscious decision and not one that I make purely because the lens can do it.

 

Naturally the other huge interest for me is just being able to work in such low light!

 

If you can get hold of the British Journal of Photography, I had a double page review of the Noctilux in the June issue.

 

Cheers,

 

Edmond

 

PS - I do have two B+W ND filters for when I want to shoot wide open in bright conditions.

[IkarusJohn]

GAS - gear acquisition syndrome

 

Sadly, I don't get the BJP. I haven't seen it here in NZ. Is your article likely to be available online?

 

Cheers

Joh

[edmond_terakopian]

GAS - gear acquisition syndrome

 

Sadly, I don't get the BJP. I haven't seen it here in NZ. Is your article likely to be available online?

 

Cheers

Joh

 

 

Ahhhhh! Thanks, now I know :-)

I guess it's better than being into automobiles ;-)

 

I've had a look British Journal of Photography and it doesn't look like that review was put online. If enough people email the magazine, maybe they will? A few months after publication I tend to publish the articles onto my blog though, so maybe you can see it there if BJP don't put it online.

 

Regards,

 

Edmond

[mardag]

I´ve had the noctilux 0.95 for a coulple of weeks now and I like it a lot though I will probably buy a summilux for the closer focusing distance and the additional contrast for closer portraits.

 

Some shots wide open:

BARNPORTRÄTT BLAND VÅRBLOMMORNA – BRÖLLOPSFOTOGRAF/STOCKHOLM

 

Loyd Chambers compared the 0.95 and the summilux ASPH and found that the summilux is a tad better (higher contrast,sharper) between f1.4- 2 but the noctilux is better from f4 -

Overall he rated them fairly equal. I find this comparison quite interesting and the nocti qualities suits how I use it, either you shoot the noctilux wide open and get the special "look" or you stop it down and you´ll have a better(slightly) performance than the summilux. It´s just the minimum focusing distance that is the problem and the exceptional performance of the summilux wide open is of course compelling. One need both:)

[sm23221]

I've been using my Nx 0.95 extensively since it was introduced. It is the best lens I have ever used for landscapes at mid-aperture. Of course I do use it for other types of shots, mostly landscapes even at the 0.95 aperture when great background separation is needed. One might ask: "Well, why not just use a Lux 50? Simply because it is well worth the extra weight and size to have the 0.95 available when I require it - and I've required it on many unforeseen occasions. Owning a Lux 50 SEEMS like a better rational choice but the reality is that the 0.95 is not there when needed and owning one in addition to a Lux 50 will just add an extra lens and more weight to the bag.

 

So my advice is this: If you can tolerate the added weight, size and expense in favor of the 0.95 aperture, opt for this lens rather than the Lux 50.

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[menos I M6]

Indeed - but the thread is open to those who are non-believers too … But a very enjoyable response to my grumpy one Menos, thank you. However! Don't expect me to roll over …

…

Then all power to you. If you shoot film then I'm sure it is a saviour, and in days gone by it enabled pics in light than no other lens could - right now a camera with great high ISO performance will do so with ease.

 

I'm not anti-Nocti at all, but my limited experience with it makes it less appealing than a Nokton 1.1, which in itself is less appealing to me than my Millennium Lux *even though* shallow DOF and low light accounts for a large portion of my work.

 

Lord, I think, we two are on the same frequency here

I completely understand your reasoning and sometimes have to be reminded about other human individuals living on planet earth as well, when I go ecstatic about something I am enthusiastic about ;-)

 

It is interesting, that you mention the 135mm focal length, being another thing, not fitting into your picture of best use for the M ;-)

As it happens, a 135 APO-Telyt is one of my favorite lenses - I shoot motor sports with it - another thing, many people claim not suited or even impossible with a M (although many great photographers did exactly that half a century ago, while nobody exclaimed about the difficulty of doing so ).

 

I am also of the opinion, that even Today, the M has a very strong standing as a low light camera with it's pros and cons. I am one, who really wishes, that native metering to ISO6400 on every Leica body returns, as it has been standard since the M6 and that high ISO performance of the sensor will be further improved (the M9 is already a very good performer, coming from a M8.2).

 

I do use also a Nikon D3 with some very fast lenses, but although it leaves any M in the dust, when it comes to performance in night shooting, fast action or adverse weather conditions, it is mostly put to the side, to serve as a scanner for my film negatives, as any M is just a lot more natural to me (not to talk about lugging).

This is, where the bulk and weight arguments of many people, questioning the Noctilux' reason of being on modern Leicas run off my skin like teflon.

 

What I find interesting about rangefinder shooting in general is, how extremely free users are in their so very different uses of the technology - I mean, we have "light and small" users, superfast lens users, collectors, contraption shooters (see Washington here on LUF) … everybody with their own very valid and respectable area of usage with these soo limiting oldtimer concept, stubborn cameras

 

I just love that aspect, especially about the M and their broad group of users … soo much room to play … so much fun!

 

Btw… I would love, to get my hands on a pre ASPH Lux, now, that I know, that the latest ASPH lenses indeed do not deliver my preferred imaging characteristics.

What I do always find out though, when deciding, to leave the Noctilux at home and instead going with the Lux or the 5cm Nikkor-S.C 1.4 is, that indeed, I run into issues with too little light for too small f1.4. It is indeed so much, that I am used to the Noctilux.