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

[Jamie Roberts]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I'm really intrigued by the .95 the more I see of it. Edmond T's stuff posted and linked here is just extraordinary... and really shows what that lens can do in the right hands

 

I thought I'd hate it as a portrait lens too--the 50 Lux ASPH, is, if anything, sometimes a bit too critically sharp on the M9 where other Mandler-era lenses seem more forgiving...,though the 50 Lux is a perfectly great lens....But I do like the way the .95 draws people, from what I've seen in this thread...

 

I keep shooting with the 1.0 Nocti, though I still need to get it into Leica with the M9 and the rest of my lenses to reconcile mid-distance focus...I need to bracket the Nocti way too much, though it's fine at portrait distances. But I'm also thinking of selling a couple of my less-used lenses to help fund a Nocti .95. If I do though, I don't think I'm going to sell the Nocti 1.0...

 

In the meantime, I put some new engagement shots up on my blog, and they're mostly the Nocti 1.0... (a couple are with the 35 Lux ASPH). Some are even stopped down to 5.6 and f8!

 

james roberts photography blog

 

Here's one shot with the M9 from yesterday with the 1.0 at around f1.4...no post, just out of C1.

 

I'm not sure if you usually see politicians arm in arm in a garden near sunset, but if you ever did, this might not be a ridiculous lens to shoot them with (just kidding Edmond )

 

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!

[edmond_terakopian]

Many thanks James for your kind words; very much appreciated :-)

 

Maybe I can set a trend for romantic photography of politicians?! :-D

 

Lovely shot by the way :-)

 

Cheers,

 

Edmond

[Advertisement]

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

[Jamie Roberts]

Many thanks James for your kind words; very much appreciated :-)

 

Maybe I can set a trend for romantic photography of politicians?! :-D

 

Lovely shot by the way :-)

 

Cheers,

 

Edmond

 

Thanks so much to you, too, Edmond; I appreciate it as well!

[Ib M]

Just got Noctilux 50mm f/0.95, and I think it is fantastic.

But thought it may be difficult to focus on long distances, it is generally known or should it be sent for calibration.

 

A few examples of pictures

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!

[menos I M6]

Just got Noctilux 50mm f/0.95, and I think it is fantastic.

But thought it may be difficult to focus on long distances, it is generally known or should it be sent for calibration.

 

A few examples of pictures

 

Before you send anything for calibration, check the camera, lens and your eyesight carefully.

The Noctilux demands these three variables, to play well together.

 

1) Check infinity focus with the lens' mechanical infinity stop (not the viewfinder).

Do photographs appear sharp at infinity?

Are they not sharp? At which f-stop do they become sharp?

 

2) Does the rangefinder coincide @ infinity, when turning the focus ring to it's mechanical infinity stop?

 

3) Place a ruler @ 45º and about 1.5m away from the lens - focus on a distinct mark on the ruler, check, how focus is off in the images on a computer (forget the camera screen, it can only give you a vague idea).

 

These three checks are for finding, if the particular lens has been collimated properly AND in combination with your particular camera does focus @ infinity properly.

If photos appear tack sharp @ infinity (when using the mechanical infinity stop), the lens is collimated properly (and paired to your camera at that) for infinity.

 

If also the RF patch coincides perfectly @ infinity, the cameras rangefinder and the lens' RF cam are perfectly aligned for infinity focus.

 

Now comes the most difficult part:

When now also the close focus is spot on (check images on computer screen after ruler test), both the lens' RF cam AND your camera's rangefinder close focus setting pair well.

 

If all of this fits nicely, check your other lenses - fast, long and most used lenses having the priority, slow, wide angle and least used lenses coming next.

 

The most important test, after verifying this is, to take the lens out and shoot trigger happy around @ your most preferred subject distance and find out, if you can reliably focus and shoot the lens in practice.

Such a fast lens also demands a lot of practice, to get used to a shooting technique, reliably focussing.

Realize, that also the slightest movement of your body will throw focus off (focus recompose is more tricky @ f0.95, focussing horizontal and composing vertical afterwards is almost a given focus failure, etc…).

 

I use a f1 Noctilux as my main lens, set up my camera's rangefinders myself and adjust all non Leica lenses as well, I can get my hands on.

[pico]

Before you send anything for calibration, check the camera, lens and your eyesight carefully.

The Noctilux demands these three variables, to play well together.

 

1) Check infinity focus with the lens' mechanical infinity stop (not the viewfinder).

Do photographs appear sharp at infinity?

Are they not sharp? At which f-stop do they become sharp?

 

2) Does the rangefinder coincide @ infinity, when turning the focus ring to it's mechanical infinity stop?

 

3) Place a ruler @ 45º and about 1.5m away from the lens - focus on a distinct mark on the ruler, check, how focus is off in the images on a computer (forget the camera screen, it can only give you a vague idea).

 

These three checks are for finding, if the particular lens has been collimated properly AND in combination with your particular camera does focus @ infinity properly.

If photos appear tack sharp @ infinity (when using the mechanical infinity stop), the lens is collimated properly (and paired to your camera at that) for infinity.

 

If also the RF patch coincides perfectly @ infinity, the cameras rangefinder and the lens' RF cam are perfectly aligned for infinity focus.

 

Now comes the most difficult part:

When now also the close focus is spot on (check images on computer screen after ruler test), both the lens' RF cam AND your camera's rangefinder close focus setting pair well.

 

If all of this fits nicely, check your other lenses - fast, long and most used lenses having the priority, slow, wide angle and least used lenses coming next.

 

The most important test, after verifying this is, to take the lens out and shoot trigger happy around @ your most preferred subject distance and find out, if you can reliably focus and shoot the lens in practice.

Such a fast lens also demands a lot of practice, to get used to a shooting technique, reliably focussing.

Realize, that also the slightest movement of your body will throw focus off (focus recompose is more tricky @ f0.95, focussing horizontal and composing vertical afterwards is almost a given focus failure, etc…).

 

I use a f1 Noctilux as my main lens, set up my camera's rangefinders myself and adjust all non Leica lenses as well, I can get my hands on.

 

YES INDEED. BEFORE USE THE LENS FROM Solm, even before you use it to make a homely picture (for which it is intended), first run though a regime as above which has abudant scientific methods difficult to master.

 

By all means do not use a Nocutilux until you master military standards for quality.

Edited July 15, 2011 by pico

[menos I M6]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

YES INDEED. BEFORE USE THE LENS FROM Solm, even before you use it to make a homely picture (for which it is intended), first run though a regime as above which has abudant scientific methods difficult to master.

 

By all means do not use a Nocutilux until you master military standards for quality.

 

Not helpful.

 

If Pico here doesn't care, to check a lens before going through the hassle of sending it back to Solms on a several months trip for a setting, that is potentially not needed, doesn't mean, everybody here should not care to do this 10min check.

 

Again … not good Pico.

[wattsy]

I think Pico makes a fair point.

[Lord Fluff]

No, I'm not sure he does.

 

We are talking about one very expensive lens here. I'm not sure that saying Leica designed it for homely pictures is fair, or accurate. And if the results are causing issues it makes sense to at least spend a little time doing some regimented tests, especially since sending it, together with your camera, to Solms, will mean being unable to shoot any 'homely pics' for quite some time.

 

Admittedly I earn money from my gear, maybe that makes a difference, but every new lens or camera I buy gets taken into the garden for the same set of boring test shots, brick wall included. Within half an hour I know if there are any issues, or if I can relax and know that any subsequent missed shots were just user error.

 

For example - these tests established for me that the Nokton 50/1.1 has so much focus shift at the distances I shoot, that it would not work for me - had I not spent just a little time testing for this I'd still have the lens and be wondering why I missed so many shots at f2.8.

 

Menos' tests do not require 'military standards', just a little time and care, which will be well invested. Pico, I think your dismissive attitude here is misplaced.

[Ib M]

Thanks for a detailed explanation. Have tried to test out the explanation that came with menos. And it seems that optimal lighting conditions and a little care gives a much better result. And also ordered Viewfinder Magnifier M 1.25x, maybe it can help for an easier focus.

So I am hopeful for the future.

[Guest]

By all means do not use a Nocutilux until you master military standards for quality.

 

!

 

Or your subjects for standing still.

 

If you simply want to sport exclusive gear, why not get a real collectable item?

Or put a 28-35-50mm on your M9?

It's far easier to focus. Mind you I "only" have the 50LuxA and not a Noctilux. It's a challenge never the less wide open.

 

With the tri prices being where they are right now, I don't use mine at all any more. I'm happy with the 35CronA 80% of the time and the 1.4/24mm occasionally.

[MarkP]

!

With the tri prices being where they are right now, I don't use mine at all any more.

 

Meaning tri (the tri-elmar) is too expensive to use:confused:, or tri (you) are too expensive to use:confused:?

 

Regards,

Mark

[pico]

A lens as expensive as a new Noctilux should operate perfectly on the nominal, standard body.

 

All who disagree can sign a petition that I'm sure would be a gold mine for marketing mavens.

[menos I M6]

A lens as expensive as a new Noctilux should operate perfectly on the nominal, standard body.

…

 

Absolutely agree.

 

Often though, this is not the case with manufacturing tolerances paying a toll.

Mine as other user's M9 came out of the box with a misaligned rangefinder.

 

It was easy enough, to take care of though on a rainy afternoon, to walk through the entire lens range and calibrating the M9's RF.

 

With the wealth of second hand Noctilux lenses being available on the market, chances are, that many of them are set different from each other, as they have been mated to individual bodies and/ or set NOT to the exact same standard by Leica or independent technicians.

When I got my f1 sample second hand, I deliberately tested it against reference lenses, I bought new from Leica, which where known, to be spot on - I go lucky and my f1 is a perfect sample (which is possibly why I can't find the many issues, other users are reporting about difficulties of focussing wide open).

 

Even if I buy "just" a 300 EUR Nikon SLR lens, I do work it through the paces first, to estimate, if it works, as expected or not.

I don't want a bag full of lemons.

 

When I buy second hand lenses, I prefer buying in a shop, where I test several of the same model first and pick only the one, that works perfectly to my reference lenses and bodies.

[Lord Fluff]

A lens as expensive as a new Noctilux should operate perfectly on the nominal, standard body.

 

 

Yes it *should*. In fact anything you buy *should* work properly - that's not to say that, by definition, it will, or that checking it is foolish.

 

Not to mention the massive assumption you make there that everyone's body is 'nominal, standard' - which is hardly a given.

[Bundestrainer]

I think it is good to add another photo. Obviously, a Noctilux isn't necessary for such a photo. Maybe you might like it anyhow.

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!

[pico]

Yes it *should*. In fact anything you buy *should* work properly - that's not to say that, by definition, it will, or that checking it is foolish.

 

Not to mention the massive assumption you make there that everyone's body is 'nominal, standard' - which is hardly a given.

 

Yes, the M body should also be perfect. Thanks for the addition.

[Lord Fluff]

I'm sorry Pico, now you've really lost me. I have no idea what you're trying to say anymore.

 

Menos and I are just saying - if you just bought something, test to see if it works right. Most probably it will be fine, but it's worth knowing where you stand before sending things to be 'fixed'.

 

This is not a revolutionary idea, except, seemingly, to you.

[Jamie Roberts]

Here's the problem, and one that's happened to me on my M8, M9, Canon 5d and Nikon D3 (where I can correct it at least, myself!)...

 

It's one of tolerances. All the tolerances can be within spec, but combined together, can cause problems. So you buy lens A and camera B. The camera is within tolerances on the - side of the tolerance. The lens is in "the middle" and you see that everthing works.

 

You buy lens C. Due to manufacturing or use, it's mount tolerance is on the + side of OK. All of a sudden you have a problem. Both camera and lens are within tolerance but the additional leeway of lens C makes the whole system "not work properly".

 

And this only speaks to the lens mount, and to perfectly working stuff. If your sensor is "just" within tolerance too, then you've got another problem. It doesn't help that everyone is looking at stuff at 100% either So I can't actually get all my lenses right now to work properly on my M9, not least because my Noctilux was set up by Solms to work with my previous M8. It's great close up, but off in middle distances right now. That's ok because I know that, but it's frustrating. Same goes, by the way, for my 35 Lux ASPH, which is "opposite" to the way the Nocti is set up... it's a more important lens for me to have focus consistently though, so my camera needs to be biased towards it. When I do that, my 50 Lux ASPH works really well too, but not quite the same as the 35 Lux. Unfortunately, then my 75 Lux goes out... My 28 works no matter what due to increased DOF

 

This happens in the dSLR world too, believe me. Pages and pages and pages get written about this, and with autofocus it's even a bit worse: when the camera tells you something is in focus by gosh it better be in focus! But often it's not, which is why manufacturers have begun to put adjustment tools right in the camera itself.

 

My D3 is totally ok. So was my (brand new) 135 f2 Nikkor. But it required a +20 adjustment (as much as you can make) to make it work with the body I had.

 

Anyway, all of this is even more critical with a Nocti being shot between .95 / f1 and f2... When you have the lens and body aligned, they're surprisingly easy (I find) to focus. When you don't, it's a nightmare, and I often wonder how many people complaining about them actually have a small tolerance mismatch which shows up as large focus errors when they see the results

 

Practically, for me, it means the M9 *and* the lenses need to go in once the busy season is over so I can shoot the Noctilux at different distances and be confident I'm getting what I want without having to stop down.

Edited July 16, 2011 by Jamie Roberts

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pico]

I'm sorry Pico, now you've really lost me. I have no idea what you're trying to say anymore.

 

Menos and I are just saying - if you just bought something, test to see if it works right. Most probably it will be fine, but it's worth knowing where you stand before sending things to be 'fixed'.

 

This is not a revolutionary idea, except, seemingly, to you.

 

Menos: It was easy enough, to take care of though on a rainy afternoon, to walk through the entire lens range and calibrating the M9's RF.

 

That's easy for Menos, but is beyond my ability, although I do build **LF cameras, but no longer with rangefinders, and with age I've developed a tremor that makes precision adjustments exceedingly difficult unless I load up on meds which is uncomfortable. Still, it should not be necessary to rebuild a new camera or lens right away.

 

Of course I test my new cameras. The M9 was sterling. Right on, even with the 75mm Summilux which I consider quite the challenge for perfect focus at F/1.4. And sometimes after reading of problems here, I think my M9 might be better than new after promptly being entirely rebuilt in New Jersey after being terribly smashed in an accident.

 

Now if I were to get a new Noctilux I would expect it to be right-on. Of course I won't buy unless I win the lottery. (On pension now.) I occasionally use a Canon F/.95 on the 7S and focus is correct, although performance is wretched. I have two of those lenses and they are equally horrible.

 

** OT: Right beside me I have a fully alloy 4x5 for shooting geological spaces in infra-red. It focuses, does all it should. I just finished rebuilding it yesterday for a 135mm Planar (4x5). Now I have to go through the tests to find if all that 4x5 IR film that's been in deep-freeze for 10 years is good. I doubt it is:) Otherwise it returns to duty as a rugged, weather resistant LF.

 

Geological spaces like this which must be redone in 4x5. It does not survive enlarging very well.