Noctilux, 50mm 1.4, or 50mm 2.0?

[billh]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

If you were buying two lenses I'd go for the Nocti and Summicron. If you only want to buy a single lens then I'd go for the Summilux. It's an exceptional lens.

 

The Nocti can focus very accurately, but that comes at the expense of speed, it can seem to take forever to turn the focussing ring. Don't think of it just as an f1 lens, it's excellent at all apertures and is the most flare resistant lens I've ever used.

 

This is very succinct, but accurate. Steve has produced wonderful images with the Noctilux. I see it the same way. For me the Noctilux was much more of a specialists lens on the film Ms than on the M8. I mean it required previsualization and creativity to be successful with film, but with the digital camera it can be quite sharp at f1.0, which was not the case with film, and for me this increases versatility. The two other advantages are it is low contrast and therefore opens the shadows (mitigates the excessive contrast) you typically find in the low light settings, and the out of focus areas are attractive (more so than the 50 f1.4ASPH). When I bought the 50f1.4 ASPH, the Noctilux sat unused on the shelf. However, with the M8 I use it quite a lot, and would more if I had an IR filter for it. (It is one of two filters I ordered from Leica). As Steve says, the 50 f1.4 ASPH is far easier to focus quickly, it focuses very smoothly (if you order one, insist to the dealer about first checking the 50 f1.4ASPH lenses and only send on that focuses smoothly ALL the way to the closest focus point. That is a big deal. My dealer went through several lenses before finding one for me. These are really two very different lenses, with the Noctilux being more of a specialist lens, and (in my opinion) the more versatile of the two. Ideally, especially if you shoot in low light frequently, you would own a Noctilux. The M8 is relatively noisy (compared the the Canons so many of us use), that I try not to go to, mush less above ISO640 unless I really have to - and for that F1.0 is an advantage. Ideally you should borrow both and try them before choosing (if you are only going to buy one of them).

[Advertisement]

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

[robsteve]

If you were buying two lenses I'd go for the Nocti and Summicron. If you only want to buy a single lens then I'd go for the Summilux. It's an exceptional lens.

 

The Nocti can focus very accurately, but that comes at the expense of speed, it can seem to take forever to turn the focussing ring. Don't think of it just as an f1 lens, it's excellent at all apertures and is the most flare resistant lens I've ever used.

 

 

I agree with Steve and it is exactly what I did. At one point I also owned a Summilux, but it only got used once or twice. I typically went Summicron during the day and Noctilux at night or for interior shots.

 

Here is Steve in Paris shooting his Noctilux, taken at f1 on with my Noctilux

[peterb]

To me, (while I don't own one as of yet) the M8 has given the Noctilux a new lease on life.

 

At 50mm with a 50mm POV on the M6 it was just an okay (but very pricey) normal lens. Don't get me wrong. It was an awesome lens with that extra stop over any other lens in the Leitz arsenal, but, in the end, it was still a 50mm lens which for me, anyway, was a so-so POV.

 

On the M8, however, the 50 becomes a slightly enhanced 67mm (or so) telephoto. And that is the big difference. The image qualities along with its unequaled shallow depth of field make it the lens du jour for this camera. As some on this thread have pointed out for portraits that can be a deal maker that could pay for its exhorbitant initial cost in one or two sittings (if you charge for shots, that is).

 

Plus with 1/8000 sec. of a top speed, the Nocti can now be used at noon without a ND filter attached (on top of your IR filter, of course).

 

But what I find most interesting is, now that the M8 is out, that there have been so many discussions about even considering the purchase of the Nocti that I haven't really seen since I started coming to this forum.

 

That, in and of itself, is more telling about the Noctilux and the relationship to the M8 than anything else.

 

P

[michael_b_elmer]

The most versatile lens for the M8 is no doubt the 35 Lux asph. A combination of that lens with the 24/2.8, a 50 mm and a 75 mm lens would be close to the ideal set of lenses, although the 28/2.0 would be nice to have also.

 

With regard to 50 mm lenses, here are my two Eurocents:

 

I have had a Summicron 50 mm (marked"1913-1983") since 1983. It has, however, not been on any of my cameras for the last 20 years, and after many years of keeping it in the closet, I have now decided to sell it.

 

I also have two Summilux 50 mm, one BP, one Tit, and they are also on their way to being sold. Wonderful lenses, and much, much better than the 'cron. I am certain that the fingerprint and bokeh of those lenses cannot be beaten by the new asph version, but I must admit that I haven't tried the 50 lux asph and will not invest in it. The BP and Tit versions do not fit with my black M8, so that is one of my reasons for having decided to sell them.

 

Now, on my M8 sits a newly acquired Noctilux. I have wanted that lens for many years, and my experience confirms that this lens is in fact a wonder with its own quite special fingerprint and bokeh. It may seem a bit heavy, but in my opinion weight is an advantage for steady shooting. Shooting wide or almost wide open with this lens opens photographic possibilities, that you cannot (fully) get with any of the other 50 mm lenses.

[mitchell]

Oy vey. So much good advice and I still can't make up my mind.

 

Going the cheap (well for Leica) and light route for my M6 ttl, I bought a 90/2.8, a 50/2, and a 35/2.

 

Now that I have a M8 and getting interested at night shooting, I'm want a Nocti, or one of the Lux's.

 

I think the 90 won't get much use on the M8 except close up bird feeder shots on a tripod, where the higher usable ISO of the M8 may be an advantage over DMR.

 

The wise move would be the 35 Lux. I can get more money for the 35/2. I could get a Nocti in the future, and maybe a 28, and 75. If I end up, with all of these, I would be selling all the M lenses I have now.

 

Maybe there is a lesson here for people new to M's. Don't buy the less expensive if, like me, you're going to pine for the pricier ones in the future.

 

How do the 50 and 35 Lux's compare to each other?

 

Best,

 

Mitchell

[tom0511]

Here is a link to some images I took with the rd1 and various 50mm lenses.

50mm_leica_m_lenses Photo Gallery by TOM at pbase.com

(some are not correctly focused, but also look at bokeh, color, contrast)

I like the 50/1.4asph best. Smooth and sharp at the same time. Fast and small. (However mine does backfocus and needs to go to Solms).

I also like the 50/1.0; A special dreamy look, good contrast even wide open.

I like the way it focuses and think the long way might even be helpful for prcise focus.

I own this lens because I got a really good deal, otherwise I would just use the 50/1.4asph and nothing else at 50mm.

[glenerrolrd]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Thanks Rodger . i love when you guys spend my money. i guess there is some payback:D :D

you started it!

[Guest guy_mancuso]

you started it!

 

 

Man do I know that. LOL

[macgarvin]

This is very succinct, but accurate. ... As Steve says, the 50 f1.4 ASPH is far easier to focus quickly, it focuses very smoothly (if you order one, insist to the dealer about first checking the 50 f1.4ASPH lenses and only... These are really two very different lenses, with the Noctilux being more of a specialist lens, and (in my opinion) the more versatile of the two. Ideally, especially if you shoot in low light frequently, you would own a Noctilux. The M8 is relatively noisy (compared the the Canons so many of us use), that I try not to go to, mush less above ISO640 unless I really have to - and for that F1.0 is an advantage .

 

Bill et al,

 

I use a Canon 5D and 1.2 85mm L series II lens a lot - on this latest version of this lens I find the autofocus fast and accurate even in candlelight (better than I can do it manually). Like the Noctilux It is a wonderful lens. But it is heavy! (though my wrists are now much stronger ), which means that exposures have to be 1/125 to be reliably sharp.

 

I have already looked very hard at the M8 (now on order) and Noctilux combination at a dealers. This was the first time that I have used a rangefinder in 30 years. While I found that I could focus quickly and reliably with the Noctilux on eg someone's glasses frame (and it was the glasses I wanted in focus!), I found it much more difficult to focus relably on an eye (which often is where I want the focus).

 

What are peoples opinions regarding whether this was just my lack of (visual) experience using a rangefinder, or are they fundamentally more difficult to focus? I know that generally a rangefinder is supposed to be very quick to focus - is low light, low contrast and critical depth of field a particularly difficult combination?

 

Malcolm

[bab]

I still dont see the exact comment i was looking for regarding cranking up the ISO to 600 to get a few extra stops. Is the quality of the raw image with or w/o a noise enhancement filter superior with what 50mm lens and at what F stop...as it seems from reading that the 50mm 1.0 at f1.4-f4 is not a contrasty as the 50mm 1.4 is.

 

 

Also I would be interested to know if the prints at 16x20 and larger show the diffrence?

 

 

Thanks

 

Barry

[tom0511]

Bill et al,

 

What are peoples opinions regarding whether this was just my lack of (visual) experience using a rangefinder, or are they fundamentally more difficult to focus? I know that generally a rangefinder is supposed to be very quick to focus - is low light, low contrast and critical depth of field a particularly difficult combination?

 

Malcolm

 

I have a M8 (and long time rangefinder experience), a DMR and Nikon d2x.

I do find that I can focus fast lenses with the M8, I would still say that the d2x gives me a little higher percentage (for example with the 85/1.4)

IMO it depends a lot how fast/slow the subject is moving.

For me:

easiest:d2x

2nd: M8

last and kind of hard: manual focus SLR

[billh]

Bill et al,

 

I use a Canon 5D and 1.2 85mm L series II lens a lot - on this latest version of this lens I find the autofocus fast and accurate even in candlelight (better than I can do it manually). Like the Noctilux It is a wonderful lens. But it is heavy! (though my wrists are now much stronger ), which means that exposures have to be 1/125 to be reliably sharp.

 

I have already looked very hard at the M8 (now on order) and Noctilux combination at a dealers. This was the first time that I have used a rangefinder in 30 years. While I found that I could focus quickly and reliably with the Noctilux on eg someone's glasses frame (and it was the glasses I wanted in focus!), I found it much more difficult to focus relably on an eye (which often is where I want the focus).

 

What are peoples opinions regarding whether this was just my lack of (visual) experience using a rangefinder, or are they fundamentally more difficult to focus? I know that generally a rangefinder is supposed to be very quick to focus - is low light, low contrast and critical depth of field a particularly difficult combination?

 

Malcolm

 

I have the older version of the 85 f1.2, and I love that lens. I do not love the weight of the 1Ds2 and the 85 f1.2, but because of two things, the AF and the clean high ISOs, you will get more in focus shots with it than with a rangefinder and the f1.0 lens, especially if there is movement.

 

This is a 60th second, f1.2, ISO3200

 

http://homepage.mac.com/billh96007/.Pictures/85mm/9445,ISO3200,85@f1.2.jpg

 

And this is action with the old slow 85 at f1.2,

http://homepage.mac.com/billh96007/.Pictures/85mm/Kona,f1.2,0429.jpg

[macgarvin]

Thanks Tom, Bill, very helpful (and unbiased) advice .... I have some weighing up to do ... smaller size and weight/ more duff shots/what else could I do with the money! ... especially as as the only time I have to take filters off with the Canon is with the 1.2L, in low light conditions such as candlelight (infrared?). The Noctilux would be as well as the 1.2L, rather than instead of ...

 

But the effects from the narrow depth of field with this class of lens, with the vignetting wide open, and the spherical distortion of the background, is (to my eye) wonderful, so it would a lens I would be likely to reach for frequently once I have the M8, and the M8 is on order ...

 

Best wishes all, for the new year, Malcolm

 

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!