50mm Summilux vs Noctilux {merged}

[jaapv]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It is better than the Sux 50 AFL....

[enboe]

It's always good to consider all options. If you have the budget for any lens, as evidenced by the Noctilux, then I would recommend some consideration for the new 50 APO Summicron. It's just so sharp from corner to corner at any f/stop.

 

So, if it was my $11K to spend, some thoughts:

 

1) Buy the 50/1.4/ASPH/FLE and a 28/2.0/ASPH. Both are uncompromising landmark designs. I have never heard someone say they didn't like them.

 

2) Buy the 50/2/APO and a 28/2.8/ASPH. The 50/2/APO I've already commented upon, and the 28/2.8/ASPH is a wonderfully-performing, super-compact lens that's great for many if not most walk-around situations. It's a little unsung hero in my opinion.

 

3) Buy the 50/0.95/ASPH because you want to use it below f/2. It's bigger, heavier, and focuses slower, which may or may not work into your style of shooting.

 

Rental is always a possibility too.

 

Eric

[Guest borge]

I'll continue by adding:

 

Buy the Summilux 1.4/50 ASPH and the Summilux 1.4/35 FLE instead of the 0.95/50 Noctilux. You'll have two superb lenses that also shares the same filter size. And both are excellent for low-light. And they both offer 1.4 apertures and are about the same size and weight.

 

The 0.95/50 Noctilux is supposed to be easier to focus than the 1.4/50 Summilux though, due to the longer and possibly smoother focus throw. And it better be, because focusing the 1.4/50 Summilux close up at 1.4 can be a challenge... I can only imagine that focusing close up at 0.95/50 must be a lot more difficult.

 

And remember: The Noctilux can only focus down to 1 meter. The Summilux can focus down to 0.7. This makes a big difference for close-up shots.

[Guest tanks]

Thanks for all the replies. So many divergent opinions, and they all make sense:)

 

I don't worry about the weight much, on Leica M8 I use the 90mm APO f/2 quite a bit, and it doesn't bother me.

 

I am not looking for snapshots on the 0.95 Noctilux situations, I tend to be pretty deliberate so taking the time to focus is not be an issue.

 

That being said, there is a 3 day Leica Academie in NYC at the end of May. I will try the lenses there. By that time, hopefully, B&H will have shipped the M240 to me, and I can try them on the actual camera that the lens is intended for.

[CaptZoom]

There's another consideration, and an important one in my opinion: the Noctilux blocks quite a bit of the viewfinder including the 50mm frame lines, which negates one of the advantages of the rangefinder system: being able to see the action developing in the viewfinder. The 90mm does blocks the viewfinder as well (and as you already know), but you're using a much smaller are of the viewfinder for composing with it. For this reason alone, I would opt for the summilux over the Noctilux if I were to own only one 50mm. But I'm the odd one out- I give much more weight to handling & user interface than I do to image quality (which is not lacking in any lens Leica currently offers). That being said, I certainly understand wanting to add a fast lens to your otherwise superb kit.

[Guest tanks]

Hmmm, wouldn't the EVF and Live View on the M240 alleviate the blockage of the 50mm lines through the viewfinder?

[Guest MarcRF]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

do you always want to use the EVF on the Leica M?

[Guest tanks]

No, of course not. However, I can see using it in some instances if the blockage of some of the 50mm lines is really detrimental to framing. Based on a lot of posted examples of Noctilux, obviously it is not too much of an issue.

[CaptZoom]

Honestly, I didn't even think about the liveview! The liveview will negated the frame blockage, however you'll see only what the lens sees (like an SLR). It's a trade off, one that each of us has to decide if its worth it. I just wanted bring a concern regarding the Noctilux for the OP.

[darylgo]

So many great posts, I own both and have learned greatly from everyone.

 

CaptZoom, the viewfinder blockage is a valid point, despite evf and live view there are advantages to a traditional Leica viewfinder, besides the best live view (optical viewfinder) possible there will be no shutter delay unlike the evf and live view. Optical viewfinders don't have a frame rate or any delay in time, ever.

 

The Noctilux has such a beautiful way of rendering, it's a lens that can and should be used with any subject. If the rendering @ f0.95 is not desired stop it down to whatever you want the lens to accomplish, f1.4 is beautifully sharp as is every other setting, you get everything you could want in one lens. The aperture is used to control desired imaging characteristics with the Noctilux.

[Paul J]

I was quite shocked by the viewfinder blockage at first. I quickly adjusted to it and now I don't notice it until someone speaks of it. I would urge you to try it thoroughly before discarding it to that regard.

 

It must be said the Noctilux is not a one trick pony. It's something it gets labelled with because of users tendency to shoot everything at 0.95 at first. The Bokeh at 2.8 - 5.6 is really wonderful and changes through out the range. Stopped down this lens out performs other lenses I own. I would actually put my neck out and say it's as least as sharp and I would say sharper than my Medium Format lenses it's just the M9 doesn't share the same resolution. Also the tonality and the colour with the Noctilux is something I instantly fell in love with. It's just right.

 

For me it really is the ultimate lens and I could quite easily live with this one lens for the rest of my life if needed.

[billo101]

No 50, I love my kit

[tom0511]

I also own both (plus 50 Summicron).

And as someoneelse before wrote my 50/1.4asph went for calibration to Leica 3 times.

My Noctilux worked well from the beginning.

I prefer the Noctilux rendering, color, I like f0.95 for a special look. I dont like the weight of the Noctilux.

For the last time I havent used my 50 Summilux - its allways either the Noctilux or the Summicron if I need a small lens.

If size and price of the Noctilux dont bother you I would recommend the Noctilux.

[ahl]

Hi Tanks,

I am in the lucky position of having used both lenses(1.0 and 1.4) to photograph singers in a jazz club in very poor light.

There was little difference in focusing accurately but the shorter throw of the lux made life easier. The problem with the Nocti wide open was depth of field: it is very shallow and if the subjest is moving even slightly as singers do the focus will be out. I have many fine photos of a sharp nose or microphone and just a few of sharp eyes. I often ended up using the Nocti at 1.4 or 1.8. So if I have a choice I tend to take the Lux: it is just that bit more versatile, much cheaper, and much lighter. If only allowed 1 50mm it would be the Lux; but I have no experience of the 0.95.

If you can try both for a while by hiring or borrowing each lens the answer will become obvious to you. I know quite a few who bought Nocti in the past did not use them much and sold them only to regret it bitterly and ended up buying them again second-hand.

Whatever your decision they are both great lenses and just use your choice without looking back.

Happy hunting, Alan

[thrid]

Late to the thread, but for what it's worth...

I used to own a Noct f1 (aka 'The Queen of the Night') that I ended up trading for a Summilux-M 1.4/50.

 

Noct negatives:

 

- Heavy

- Very large by Leica M standards

- Blocks a lot of the viewfinder

- You will always end up using the hood, because there is a very large and expensive piece of glass at the end of the lens.

- The hood blocks even more of the viewfinder.

- Depth of field when focused to 1 meter at f1 is about 1 -1.5 cm. Most of your portraits will be out of focus, because you breath and the subjects breathes. Many people end up shooting at f1.4 for this reason, which negates the reason for having the Noct in the first place.

- Focus throw is long (and very accurate), making the Noct less than ideal for shooting action.

- You need to get your rangefinder matched to the lens to get the most out of it.

- The x1.25 magnifier is very helpful, but adds cost (trivial considering the price of the Noct)

 

Pros.

- f1 or f 0.95

- Nearly or completely immune to flare.

- Sharp even wide open.

- Ultra shallow depth of field makes for a unique signature.

- The best ultra high speed 50 on the planet.

 

In the end I sold the Noc mainly for ergonomic reasons. It was too big, too heavy and the focus throw was too long for every day shooting. It also blocked far too much of the viewfinder, especially with the obligatory hood.

 

I ended up not using f1 as much as i thought I would and shooting closeup often resulted in out of focus images, regardless of me being an experienced shooter. If the subject moved the slightest amount the pupil would be out of focus. This may be heresy to some, but i found the optical fingerprint to be too sterile for my taste. The bokeh of the f1 version ranged from creamy smooth to schizophrenic. It appears that the 0.95 is a lot more predictable in this regard,

 

So, I sold it after two years and bought a Summilux-M 1.4/50, which I have been extremely happy with.

I sometimes miss the Noct. It is a unique lens. Maybe I'll pick one up again some time down the road, but I can't recommend it as an everyday lens.

[onaujee]

I think you should go with the 50 1.4 Summilux ASPH and an older Noctilux F/1. This way you get best of both worlds. The F/1 Noctilux has great character, although .95 is sharper wide open I still like this lens over it. Good luck with your choice.

 

best regards,

[MarkP]

I think you should go with the 50 1.4 Summilux ASPH and an older Noctilux F/1. This way you get best of both worlds. The F/1 Noctilux has great character, although .95 is sharper wide open I still like this lens over it. Good luck with your choice.

 

best regards,

 

I have these two lenses and completely agree with you.

[Your Old Dog]

I haven't read the entire thread closely but will offer this up anyway. Unless you are going to do a lot of shooting wide open, there isn't much compelling reason to lug all the weight and the bizzar look it presents on the M9 to the public of the 0.95 I have the Canon version and also the Summilux 50mm. If I was only to have one or the other it would definitely be the Summilux because shooting in the dark is only 1 percent of my shooting.