sm23221 Posted March 11, 2011 Share #21 Posted March 11, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) It's the best lens I have ever owned/used, period. One can get used to the weight and there really is no substitute for the smooth 0.95 bokeh rendering. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted March 11, 2011 Posted March 11, 2011 Hi sm23221, Take a look here Convince me I need a Noctilux........ I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Washington Posted March 11, 2011 Share #22 Posted March 11, 2011 I am absolutely sure you fellows with this lens love it to death and rightfully so. Me, although I admit to owning a CV f1.1….. hardly ever have the need for such "fast glass". Again, this is not criticism but just my "practical" preferences. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
bybrett Posted March 11, 2011 Share #23 Posted March 11, 2011 Noctilux f0.95 not Photoshop. 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/146018-convince-me-i-need-a-noctilux/?do=findComment&comment=1612672'>More sharing options...
nic Posted March 11, 2011 Share #24 Posted March 11, 2011 fantastic !!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
haroldp Posted March 11, 2011 Share #25 Posted March 11, 2011 If you are not certain why you need a noctilux, then you probably do not. DOF on the Summiliux at F1.4, with any subject that can move, is challenging enough for me. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnbuckley Posted March 11, 2011 Share #26 Posted March 11, 2011 I've spent the last two months shooting my f1 Noct almost exclusively. Out of the 780 shots taken during that time (I just checked Lightroom), all but a handful were taken with the Noct. And of those, all but perhaps 2 or 3 were taken at f1. I use a 6-stop ND filter when outside during daylight hours. I've long wedded myself to a single lens for long stretches at a time. But this is the first time I've ever limited myself to a single f-stop. It's not nearly as constraining as you would think. Even owning a handful of other exceptional Leica lenses - including the legendary and beloved 50 Lux ASPH - I have fallen deeply in love with the Noct. It's hard to say exactly why, other than that the signature is unique and beautiful. I think, counterintuitively, you buy it not for the extra stop - but for that signature. I'm wondering how I'll ever get it off my camera. The f.095 version holds the additional advantage of having a similar look to the 50 Lux ASPH at f1.4 and above. Kind of like a magical marriage of the old f1 Noct and the Lux. How can you not love that? Own the Night Jeff - as usual, I find myself agreeing with you, and love your essay on the joys of the Noctilux posted on the page you linked to. JB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
neli Posted March 12, 2011 Share #27 Posted March 12, 2011 Advertisement (gone after registration) Save your money. It's easy to get the Nocti look in photoshop with the smudge n blur tools when you want it. money where mouth please. it'd be a lot of work in photoshop. and yes, i have one and it is my main lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveYork Posted March 12, 2011 Share #28 Posted March 12, 2011 It was only a couple years ago that the consensus of opinion with M users was that the Noctilux was considered a real specialty lens (read here -- something not very practical). Time and time again, I would hear people who owned the lens say 'it's so big and heavy, and after all, it's only a stop faster then the Summilux." Then suddenly they became popular. I'm not sure why. The refigured Noctilux is optically better. The old design dated from the 60's, I believe. But I think also the M9 brought a lot of SLR folks into the fold, and they were used to carrying around big lenses. My feeling is that unless you really need that extra stop of speed, or really want that narrow depth of field when shot wide open, the better option is to pass on it. It's a lot of money. Go travel instead. Is that true about the dude from California? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
SteveYork Posted March 12, 2011 Share #29 Posted March 12, 2011 The old Noctilux had a very distinctive look, especially when shot wide open. I'm not so sure about the new one. I can understand someone picking up this old model for this unique look. That's another reason for the lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
neli Posted March 12, 2011 Share #30 Posted March 12, 2011 The new Nocti has a beautiful signature. It's difficult to explain why the lens is so fascinating, and I do understand why it polarizes opinions. On paper it's a stop faster and twice the weight of the Summilux, but, you can't put a number on charm and aesthetic. If you like the signature of the lens you simply can't live without it, that's the case for me. The Noctilux, or, at least the idea of the Noctilux, was what brought me into the M fold, but I waited several years before actually buying one, and then they remade the old and it was even better. I don't have the money lying around so I had to think about it good and hard, but once I had it, I was completely underwhelmed and totally annoyed and thought, $10K, for this. Until I learnt how to use it. Buying expensive brushes and paints doesn't automatically make you a great artist, there is some modicum of skill involved at the least. So, I had to learn to photograph with this lens, and it requires thought and knowledge of how it handles at 0.95. There in lies the genius of design that from 1.4 onwards it handles like a summilux, slightly better where flare is concerned, slightly worse on the aberration front, from f2 onwards they are quite hard to tell apart. But who cares about f2 and so on. It's the f0.95, and that is where it has no competition. There are many things you shouldn't do, even though you could, but, if you can afford a Noct, reasonably or otherwise, then you should own one. Only caveat is you may never put another lens on your camera. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
!Nomad64 Posted March 12, 2011 Share #31 Posted March 12, 2011 If I could afford it I'd happily buy one. Unfortunately I cannot and had to "downshift" my urges to a 'lux 50 PreAsph. Not that I complain about that too much, either. Barring the thinner DOF and relevant aftereffects on the final result, what I could achieve at 0.95 I can do at 1.4 by increasing the ISO. I had the chance to test a Nocti f1 which if I'm not wrong is slightly larger in diameter and I did not find the size nor the long focus throw nor the weight anything annoying. I could happily live with that. As to the purple fringing, my suggestion would be "know your gear and use it accordingly". If you know where its weaker spots are, then don't use it in those conditions. And if you have to, then you might want to plan for a bw conversion. That's the way I commonly fix the purple black fabrics issue with my M8 Cheers, Bruno Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
shootinglulu Posted March 12, 2011 Share #32 Posted March 12, 2011 I was in two minds about a lens i could have bought today, i decided against it, i have what i need, and the £1000+ is going to 'Children in need' Instead. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmond_terakopian Posted March 12, 2011 Share #33 Posted March 12, 2011 I think it would be hard to convince you; after all, it's a personal choice. I will say though, the 50mm f0.95 Noctilux is by far the most amazing lens I've bought in 21 years as a pro photographer. I got mine a couple of months ago and I'd say around 80% of all I've shot has been on this Noctilux. It's quite simply a stunning lens with a gorgeous signature. Beautiful. Edmond Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted March 13, 2011 Author Share #34 Posted March 13, 2011 It was only a couple years ago that the consensus of opinion with M users was that the Noctilux was considered a real specialty lens (read here -- something not very practical). Time and time again, I would hear people who owned the lens say 'it's so big and heavy, and after all, it's only a stop faster then the Summilux." Then suddenly they became popular. I'm not sure why. The refigured Noctilux is optically better. The old design dated from the 60's, I believe. But I think also the M9 brought a lot of SLR folks into the fold, and they were used to carrying around big lenses. My feeling is that unless you really need that extra stop of speed, or really want that narrow depth of field when shot wide open, the better option is to pass on it. It's a lot of money. Go travel instead. Is that true about the dude from California? Absolutely..... Not sure I'd even want one M9 titanium..... Cleaned out the store of virtually every available lens ...twice.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
C_R Posted March 13, 2011 Share #35 Posted March 13, 2011 Of course a personal choice. You could look at some Noctilux shots and see if you like them My Flickr http://www.flickr.com/photos/38068178@N08/tags/noctilux/ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
plasticman Posted March 13, 2011 Share #36 Posted March 13, 2011 I have the f1 Noctilux and therefore think it is vastly superior to the 0,95. My opinion in this matter should be trusted precisely as much as those that own the 0,95 and prefer it over the f1. But seriously, the 'my lens is better than your lens' attitude I read over and over on the forum reminds me of the high-school playground. Do you ever hear women wasting their time with that sort of boasting? The 0,95 renders in a completely different way to the f.1. Try both and see which you prefer. If you feel either are your cup of tea, then spend the money. Otherwise spend it on something else, or alternatively keep it in a bank vault so it's safe when you die. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
edmond_terakopian Posted March 13, 2011 Share #37 Posted March 13, 2011 I have the f1 Noctilux and therefore think it is vastly superior to the 0,95.My opinion in this matter should be trusted precisely as much as those that own the 0,95 and prefer it over the f1. But seriously, the 'my lens is better than your lens' attitude I read over and over on the forum reminds me of the high-school playground. Do you ever hear women wasting their time with that sort of boasting? The 0,95 renders in a completely different way to the f.1. Try both and see which you prefer. If you feel either are your cup of tea, then spend the money. Otherwise spend it on something else, or alternatively keep it in a bank vault so it's safe when you die. You are so right about the f1 and f0.95 being so different. As crazy as this sounds, in an ideal world I'd like both versions as they create such different kinds of image. Just in case it helps, here are a set of images from my f0.95 Nocti: Cheers, Edmond Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wattsy Posted March 14, 2011 Share #38 Posted March 14, 2011 But seriously, the 'my lens is better than your lens' attitude I read over and over on the forum reminds me of the high-school playground. Couldn't agree more. Nor can I say I am remotely impressed by anecdotes of people buying up M9 Titanium bodies and "cleaning out the store". As for meeting a "better class of people in Leica stores"...... The forum has changed a lot in recent years. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xmas Posted March 14, 2011 Share #39 Posted March 14, 2011 Hi Fifty years ago you could justify a super speed lens for your rfdr cause Kodachrome was 10 or 25 ISO and the faster films were 'a bit pale' by comparison. Today it seems to be a phase that you have to go through, I have a /1.4 and /1.5 not really used either... bit like AA really. The fastest 5cm lens I've used in the last 2 years is a f/2.5... But yes you need to buy a Noct if you want to buy a Noct. Noel Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
pico Posted March 14, 2011 Share #40 Posted March 14, 2011 I have the f1 Noctilux and therefore think it is vastly superior to the 0,95.My opinion in this matter should be trusted precisely as much as those that own the 0,95 and prefer it over the f1. But seriously, the 'my lens is better than your lens' attitude I read over and over on the forum reminds me of the high-school playground. Oh yeah? Well the lens I do not own is better than any lens you do not own. . Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.