My feet to the fire

[brill64]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

if you are thinking of buying a noctilux or nokton, quite probably you'd most likely have another little 50 tucked away somewhere. what's a leica-m without a 50, after all? it's investment is not a decision to jump into lightly for several reasons - the cost, the weight and bulk in your kit bag. not every shot you take will be necessary at f1, or f1.1 with the nokton. but for some it is totally invaluable. it's been repeated ad infinatum that the noctilux f1 has an extraordinarily beautiful bokeh (i am not alone in finding the 50lux asph. has too sharp a rendering), however f1 is not something you can apply to every situation or lighting condition without it becoming repetitive or impractical. still, saying that, i wish i owned one occasionally but with market prices for a used noctilux climbing steadily up, this isn't something to wish for too long..the nokton f1.1 is a very reasonable and well-built alternative that i have tried and like but can't emphasise enough that with either f1 or f1.1, it's a specialist occasional use lens that requires attention and it's a beast, especially by comparison to my tiny, collapsible 50 elmarit f2.8:)

 

thanks, billib, for the links

[zlatkob]

Don't forget this recent comparison:

LensRentals.com - The Great 50mm Shootout

In terms of center resolution the 50/1.1 Nokton was pretty close to the 50/0.95 Noctilux (see MTF50 center column). However, the 50/0.95 Noctilux was significantly better in the MTF50 average column, which is a weighted comparison of center, mid-range and corner resolution.

 

I don't think you will find Steve Huff favoring the Nokton. Here is a quote from Steve in the comment #11 in his 50/0.95 Noctilux review:

 

"As for the Nokton, no, you can not get the same results with it though it is a fine lens in its own right. The Nokton does not have the micro contrast of the Leica, and it does not have .95. Sure, 1.1 is close and close enough really but if someone has $10k to burn (I do not) then the Noct is the best 50mm lens you can buy for ANY 35mm system IMO."

 

"BTW, I did put this lens through the ringer and it left me with no disappointments. If it had any issues, I would have mentioned them. Still, I love my F1 Noct and I also liked the Voigtlander though it was the less “magical” of the three. It seemed to have the look of a 1.4 lens more than a 1.1."

[lars_bergquist]

Well. I have tried the Nocti 0.95 and as a preliminary I should say that I had no problem focusing it at normal indoor light levels, with my 3/4 century old eyes without any aid but my progressive spectacles.

 

I find however that at light levels lower than a 1.4 lens and ISO 800 can handle, focusing gets quite difficult. Another reason to love my Summilux ASPH. This is really a lens to love. Definition is high even wide open, but both the sharp parts and the bokeh is very harmonious. A recent issue of the LFI tested many 50mm lenses new and old (no Nocti, unfortunately) against the most brutal bokeh target there is, a leafy tree in the background. The current Summilux came out the champion.

 

So what do you get with a lens that is twice as heavy, twice as bulky and twice as expensive than the Summilux? A lens for very occasional use. I know that stopped down, the Nocti equals the Summilux, but you can't stop down the weight and the bulk, or the piggy bank anorexia. Monster lenses are no fun on a Leica M. So the Nocti is for the bokeh nerds, and I am not one of them. And at my age, I prefer to get some sleep at night.

 

The old man from the Age of the 5cm Elmar

[ldhrads]

Late to the table, but I must say I enjoyed my Canon 0.95 when I had it. I had a well done conversion and it really was a great lens. The bokeh was .... out there, but nice. I bought the Noctilux because I stumbled on one and had the spare cash. I had to let the canon go as part of the deal. In the end I'm quite happy with the Noctilux, but If I didn't have it I would still be shooting the Canon. Big differences for me are the transition from focus to OOF which are quite sharp with the Noctilux and seemed to blend a bit more with the Canon. There's no doubt that the center of the image is crisper with the Noctilux than with the Canon. My advice...... shoot the canon for a while until you either can't stand it or have the spare cash to buy the noctilux. you can always turn that back over...