nicks500 Posted October 10, 2012 Share #1 Posted October 10, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi now I know what most of you are going to say but I would like to try and justify myself even after reading all the reviews etc. I am new (or will be) to rangefinders and am selling off some of my slr gear to fund a new Leica M (aka M10) and a lens or two when the M comes out in 2013. So the question is would my money be better spent on a 50mm & 35 summilux or a lovely lovely lovely new Noctilux. I always prefer shooting wide open when possible with lots of beautiful bokeh but I have been told that the Noctilux is harder to focus wide open and not just for the obvious reasons and not a lens for rangefinder beginners. So should I buy a 50mm lux cos I am a newbie (and maybe get another lens when I have worked out what length I want) or blow it on a Noc. and have a steeper leaning curve?, many thanks Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 10, 2012 Posted October 10, 2012 Hi nicks500, Take a look here 50mm+35mm lux's vs noctilux .95. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Paul J Posted October 10, 2012 Share #2 Posted October 10, 2012 Don't think it will take you too long to get the hang of a Noctilux. How much do you need another focal length? How long will it be before you could afford another lens if you get the Noctilux only? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MarcRF Posted October 10, 2012 Share #3 Posted October 10, 2012 well you're used to the weight of slr gear but for me the size, finder blockage and weight of the noct is a deal breaker... got the summilux 50 asph which has stunningly bokeh and great performance too. i'd recommend trying to find some shop where you can look at it and hold it. then you'll see Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lightwrangler Posted October 10, 2012 Share #4 Posted October 10, 2012 You did not say a single word about what you'd like to shoot or what your preferred topic is. I suspect you'd be most happy with 50 & 35 'lux. Those are great lenses, perfect for RF shooting, great bokeh. The Nocti is a very special lens after all. Bulky, difficult, not suitable for all kinds of photography. It's only for people that really need the extra speed or love the special look so much they don't care they can't use it everywhere. Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicks500 Posted October 10, 2012 Author Share #5 Posted October 10, 2012 Hi and thanks for the replies, Not a big fan of landscapes (truth be told I am not very good at it) so possibly wont need another lens for a while, but finder blockage could be an issue but as long as it doesnt go into the 50mm frame lines it shouldnt be a problem? @MarkRF do you wish if you had the extra money you would get a Noc. or do you not need that shallower depth of field? do you think I will be waiting a long time for a Noc. if I ordered one? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MarcRF Posted October 10, 2012 Share #6 Posted October 10, 2012 well... not really, no. the summilux is already big for a M lens but the noctilux is just wrong in my eyes on an M... too massive and bulky. I'm not even talking about the performance. both are divine. thats why I got the summilux which is in my eyes the best trade-off between large aperture, sharpness across the frame and weight/size noctilux is a beautiful lens and a show-off from leica what they can do but I'd spend the money on a 28+maybe a 90 and 1-2 nice trips to take the leica out for some shooting edit: and what I can see from my summilux and 0.58 finder I suggest the finder blockage of the noctilux might be massive... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted October 10, 2012 Share #7 Posted October 10, 2012 Advertisement (gone after registration) agree with what has been written the 35mm f1.4 and 50mm f1.4 are wonderful. Personally I would get a 28mm instead of a 35mm as a pair with the 50mm but thats just me most people who have the 50mm noct 0.95 tend to have it together with a 50mm lux f1.4 which speaks to their bank balance. i.e. if you can afford it have both, if not, have the 50mm lux - better for most things and f1.4 is pretty thin. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicks500 Posted October 10, 2012 Author Share #8 Posted October 10, 2012 Thanks maybe once and for all I will stick with a 50 summilux and not worry about that extra stop (and a bit). I have got a few months till the M comes out so I may change my mind again ;-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
wda Posted October 10, 2012 Share #9 Posted October 10, 2012 Welcome to the forum and impending Leica ownership. I think you will be making the right choice because that is more likely to be available than the Noctilux. If you are firm and ordering the M, why not order the package of body and chosen lens? That will minimise any potential delays. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted October 10, 2012 Share #10 Posted October 10, 2012 I would not trade in my Noctilux 0.95 for anything.... .... but I would NOT have bought this a starter lens with an M or M9. Your other choices are far more sensible. The 50/0.95 is a delight to use and actually easier to focus than the 50/1.4 as the barrel is bigger and travel further ... so you can be more precise. Wide open produces a unique look that you either love or hate ... so definitely try before you (one day maybe) buy.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted October 10, 2012 Share #11 Posted October 10, 2012 or do you not need that shallower depth of field? Welcome to the forum Nick. I'm curious - why have your eyes fallen on the Noctilux as a first lens? Cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan Mathias Posted October 10, 2012 Share #12 Posted October 10, 2012 Welcome to the forum, Nick. I can only wholeheartedly agree with what the others have said here. When I started, I got the Summilux 1.4/50 (11891) as my first lens. After the first round of wide open madness, I realized that I mostly used the lens stopped down between 2.0 and 4.0 as this gives me in most instances sufficient subject separation without turning the picture into a bokeh demonstrator. Would I love to own a Noctilux? Hell yes, and not just to make some of my experiments (night time, freehand, from a moving ship) easier. However, I soon noticed that much more that taking the aperture to 0.95 I longed for a different focal lengths as I also do a lot of land- and cityscapes, architecture and at times find myself separated from my target by, say, a creek or a fence (I try to avoid cropping unless it is absolutely necessary to save the picture). For the price of the Noctilux, I got the Summilux, a Super-Elmar 3.4/21 (11145) and a APO-Summicron 2.0/90 (11884), which gives a lot more versatility than that extra stop on the 50mm lens. That being said, only you can decide what's best for you and if you only intend to shoot at 50mm, then the Noctilux might be best for you. In any case, welcome again and I hope you make liberal use of the forum. I learned so much from the other people here that I cannot begin to describe how much it improved my photography. Cheers, Jan Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 11, 2012 Share #13 Posted October 11, 2012 All the advice given above is sensible, but remember there is little that is sensible about buying a Leica in the first place. My first lens was 35 mm, and I have traded and switched a bit. I have the 35 & 50 Summiluxes, but I can tell you that since I bought the Noctilux, it hasn't come off my M9 for any length of time - it is fantastic for all purposes - I like the long throw on the focus, it does intrude into the 50 mm frame lines, it is heavy and it's expensive But, if I had one lens, this would be it. You don't have to use it wide all the time (stupid idea) - it's versatile and has a character of its own. I also do see the advantage in having one lens, or at least one lens at a time. The 50-28 combination is good, and I often add the 21 if I'm going on a trip. This image is one of my favourite recent images, though I should have boosted the ISO so I could get a handheld shot with the depth of field I needed. Sometimes a flawed shot is better than no shot! Cheers John 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/189831-50mm35mm-luxs-vs-noctilux-95/?do=findComment&comment=2138534'>More sharing options...
philipus Posted October 11, 2012 Share #14 Posted October 11, 2012 This is a very nice photograph John. Looks great in black and white, though from the perspective of shallow depth of field it could have been made with the Summilux. What aperture did you use (my computer doesn't show any exif)? Cheers Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IkarusJohn Posted October 11, 2012 Share #15 Posted October 11, 2012 To be honest, I don't recall. Either 0.95 or 2. I'm finding that B&W is more appealing. I find colour difficult to control. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicks500 Posted October 11, 2012 Author Share #16 Posted October 11, 2012 Thanks again for all these replies.. To answer a couple of questions. I love shooting wide open (the aperture not my legs!) not all the time because yes that would be stupid. With the dslr it was with 85mm f/1.2 and 135mm f/2 for speed and low light issues and lovely bokeh. I would like to use just one lens at the moment and I possibly could afford a Noctilux if I sell my wife. I have seen a nice youtube video on the Noctilux finder blockage and it does eat into a lot of the 50mm frame lines. But seriously I think the 50mm summilux will be more than enough for me for the moment, does that suffer from any finder blockage? I will just have to stop reading articles on people using the Noc and extolling its virtues Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest MarcRF Posted October 11, 2012 Share #17 Posted October 11, 2012 hehe never had that problem... wouldnt even keep the noctilux if I would get as a present... there is some finder blockage with the summilux especially with hood extended but it's like 15% to the lower right... and just so much because I use the 0.58 finder on my M6ttl... but no real deal for me. I think it doesnt matter that much on a finder with higher magnification just think about it... we're talking about standard lenses. the summilux costs 2950€ here which is massive and the noct is 3 times the cost... comparing it to say the summarit or summicron 50mm the image quality is still top notch for non-pixel-peepers and those cost 1200/1750€ just try out the summilux and you'll see why some people refer to it as the reference lens at 50mm focal length (until the apo cron gets tested thoroughly) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
philipus Posted October 11, 2012 Share #18 Posted October 11, 2012 Not the world's best photos perhaps but this is how it looks through my 0.72x VF, first the 50 Summilux Asph then the 35 Summilux Asph II (4S MPro). The M has 0.68x magnification of course. 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/189831-50mm35mm-luxs-vs-noctilux-95/?do=findComment&comment=2138669'>More sharing options...
nicks500 Posted October 11, 2012 Author Share #19 Posted October 11, 2012 good pics...very informative thank you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul J Posted October 11, 2012 Share #20 Posted October 11, 2012 Finder blockage to me at first was a surprise. I don't even notice it now. The times that I do, a quick flick of the camera shows you what it is blocking. Your mind is pretty good at filling in blanks once it knows it's there. If you can live with just one lens for a while, personally, I would buy the Noctilux. Particularly if after a while you will buy another lens. I bought a 35 Summilux and 75 Summilux at the same time and the Noctilux was the lens that was attached almost permanently for 3 months at least. So I could have easily bought just that lens for 3-6 months. Wide Open it's a marvel and and stopped down it's a force to reckoned with. Be aware it's sharp at 0.95 but not as sharp as at 1.4 or 2. Some user reviews will lead you to believe that's as sharp at 0.95 as it is at f4. It's still sharp though and I trust using it on a job where the look suits it. It's gobs sharper than my canon 50mm 1.2 wide open. If you have the money for one now, I thikn if you buy a Summilux now I doubt you will buy a Noctilux any time soon because of the financial out lay. Do I have ANY negatives about it? None what so ever. Except maybe for the paint finish which is the same as any other painted leica lens, it marks quite easy. A lens of this price should have a chrome option. Is there a learning curve? Yes. For me though I think it had more to do with rangefinder focusing that the lens its self and I adapted quite quickly. I couldn't put the camera down when I got it and I got used to the focusing quite quickly. Yes the depth is narrow but I don't find it a problem. It's my standard lens for personal and commercial work and the best lens I have ever owned. Of corse it's all personal and IMO. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.