Noctilux .95???

[dant]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Seems overpriced from what I can tell. The sample pix I've seen from it look poor. But I did see some other samples in a Leica book that looked pretty nice.

 

If you own one or have used one, do you feel it is worth the money? Only thing I can see special about it is 1 stop over my Zeiss F2. If I am missing something clue me in.

 

Thanks

[erl]

Dant, don't try and evaluate any lens by other peoples samples, especially if the samples, in your view, are poor. It may be the fault of the operator, or whatever, and often is.

 

Worth the money? Ask your bank manager, and if you have to, probably it won't be worth it to you.

 

Actually, at f0.95 it is more than two stops 'over' your Zeiss f2. If that is important to you, then it is worthwhile. Also, you need to look at the way it draws. that is a variable, which like 'beauty', can't be measured, only appreciated.

[dant]

How does LEICA 50mm NOCTILUX-M F1 compare to .95?

 

I keep hearing about the magical look from the lens. Anyone have some great examples?

[IkarusJohn]

LFI 2/2011 has an article on the Noctilux-M, with a detailed comparison between the f/1 and f/0.95 versions. I found it most helpful when I was considering the two.

 

My view is that you get lenses you gel wil, and those you don't. There's no substitute for trying them.

 

Cheers

John

[algrove]

Rent one or go to a Leica Akademie to try one.

[erl]

I have the f1 and have had it for maybe 15years or more. I find it to be very expressive. It has a personality that I believe the 0.95 does not, but I have never seen a 0.95. I believe it is very 'clinical' in its rendition but I am quoting others. The 1.0 is softer @ f1 but it draws beautifully IMO. The colour rendition is 'painterly'.

 

Certainly the f1.0, and I suspect the f0.95, needs a fair bit of practice to learn to use, both to 'hit focus' exactly and also to understand how the DOF affects your desire for the image. I treat it as a an 'Olympic sport' in that I constantly practice both my accuracy and speed with the lens. Real time need never allows practice. That must be behind you when the need arises.

[StephenPatterson]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Seems overpriced from what I can tell.

Thanks

 

What does "overpriced" mean? Several members here have purchased this lens, shot with it for months or years, and sold it for very close to what they paid. Try and do that with any other lens.

 

I don't like the f/1 Nocti., as one man's "magical" is another man's "soft".

 

Leica actually has listened to customers who express the same opinion as you concerning lenses being overpriced. Their solution is called Summarit. Perhaps you should check them out.

[Paul J]

It's unique and when used suitably, an exceptionally useful and creative lens. Wether you have a use for it is another thing entirely. Over priced? I don't think so. To me, mine is worth every penny. As for poor results well you'll find that with every piece of equipment somewhere on the net.

[dant]

What does "overpriced" mean? Several members here have purchased this lens, shot with it for months or years, and sold it for very close to what they paid. Try and do that with any other lens.

 

I don't like the f/1 Nocti., as one man's "magical" is another man's "soft".

 

Leica actually has listened to customers who express the same opinion as you concerning lenses being overpriced. Their solution is called Summarit. Perhaps you should check them out.

 

Overpriced = not happy with the bang for the buck.

 

I'd be looking at it for wide open, low light use. Not so much for the 'magical 'qualities.

 

When you owners shoot wide open are you happy with the results?

[IkarusJohn]

Wide open, it's a tricky beast.

 

The real issue is to choose the aperture for depth of field. Wide open then becomes one of a number of options - at least, that's what I'm trying to do.

[ldhrads]

I use my Noctilux 0.95 wide open 95% of the time, that's what it's great for. It's also great closed down, but if one uses it at F2 most of the time, then by your definition you will find it overpriced. The images are crisp and clean but as several have pointed out, it takes some work to get used to focusing. Once you've got it down it's amazing, and yes, it can be an "Olympic sport" to practice for. Used in the daylight with a ND filter the images I have made are some of my best. Used in the near dark it produces better than anything else, but remember that focusing in the dark becomes more and more of a problem. I've used it at night and been very happy with the results. I had a Canon 0.95 before before I bought the Noctilux so I had already stepped into the 0.95 arena but there is no competition, the Canon went and the Noctilux stayed (part of the bargain with the Missus). But I don't miss the Canon. If you understand that this lens will take some practice to master than take the plunge. If you don't like it, you can get out of it without much if any loss. The 0.95 lens is, if I remember correctly, 4x faster than the human eye.

 

Here are two examples

This one taken in full daylight with ND filter

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!

 

This one taken as the sun was setting, it looks much brighter than it actually was out.

[MarkP]

it looks much brighter than it actually was out.

 

The Noctilux's really suck in the light.

[ldhrads]

Yeah they really do:rolleyes:

[Dirk Mandeville]

I have to agree with the O.P. to a certain extent. In most of the Noctilux images, I fail to see the "magic" that is ascribed to this lens. To me, I get the same effect/bokeh from my pre-asph Summilux. And for a whole lot less money. Now I understand that this version of the lux is not as tack sharp as the modern version or the .095 Nocti in the in-focus areas, but I think it has a more pleasant bokeh overall. And honestly, most of the shots that are touted to show off the magic of the Nocti are portraits, where a slightly softer rendition often provides a more pleasing look than the sharpness and microcontrast of the newer Nocti.

 

I am not trying to bash the Nocti here. I have never used one. I am just saying that from all the examples I have seen online (and there are certainly tons to choose from), I haven't seen any particular "magic" that couldn't be as easily achieved with the older or newer version Summilux and for a heck of a lot less money and size/weight. With the Nocti, you get a stop or so more light-gathering ability, and a thinner slice of depth of field, but I don't see anything else that would denote the "magical" labels that it always gets by those who use it.

 

That is why I haven't had any desire to upgrade to the Nocti from the pre-asph Summilux. If anything, I think I would get the modern Summilux if I wanted greater sharpness with more microcontrast. I don't shoot a lot of night shots, so the extra light-gathering ability doesn't mean that much. It really does come down to a small bang for a big buck. At least as I perceive it from looking at examples and not having actually used it. I fully acknowledge that if I used one for a few months, I might have a different opinion.

[wattsy]

I've owned this lens and was able to scratch the Noctilux itch at a time (2011) when it was possible to sell the lens on at a profit. On the whole, I liked it very much (including the handling) and found it quite easy to focus. I found that the sweet spot for me, look-wise, was around F2. I didn't like the f0.95 'look' at all (apart from in night scenes where a narrow DOF looks more natural) so I ended up selling it, something I mildly regret (I don't care about losing the ability to shoot F0.95 but I do miss the 'seriousness' of the lens for portrait type stuff).

 

Father & daughter

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

I've decided to get one with my new M.............I hope it lives up to its reputation

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

I use my Noctilux 0.95 wide open 95% of the time, that's what it's great for. It's also great closed down, but if one uses it at F2 most of the time, then by your definition you will find it overpriced. The images are crisp and clean but as several have pointed out, it takes some work to get used to focusing. Once you've got it down it's amazing, and yes, it can be an "Olympic sport" to practice for. Used in the daylight with a ND filter the images I have made are some of my best. Used in the near dark it produces better than anything else, but remember that focusing in the dark becomes more and more of a problem. I've used it at night and been very happy with the results. I had a Canon 0.95 before before I bought the Noctilux so I had already stepped into the 0.95 arena but there is no competition, the Canon went and the Noctilux stayed (part of the bargain with the Missus). But I don't miss the Canon. If you understand that this lens will take some practice to master than take the plunge. If you don't like it, you can get out of it without much if any loss. The 0.95 lens is, if I remember correctly, 4x faster than the human eye.

 

Here are two examples

This one taken in full daylight with ND filter

[ATTACH]371101[/ATTACH]

 

This one taken as the sun was setting, it looks much brighter than it actually was out.

[ATTACH]371102[/ATTACH]

Sir,

What ND filter are you using (Name, brand size etc and where you can buy)

[Paul J]

I've decided to get one with my new M.............I hope it lives up to its reputation

 

It will. It takes a while to get to know the lens for you really get the most of out of it so stick with it this time. That's not to say you wan't get good results straight away. Just the more you use it the more you learn how to milk it.

 

Use it out stopped down as well. It's incredible.

[algrove]

I've decided to get one with my new M.............I hope it lives up to its reputation

 

Neil-

 

They are fun and can be frustrating sometimes too. ND- I use obviously 60mm, B+W ND filters. The one I tend to use mostly is the 0.9 "B+W 60 103 ND 0.9 -3 BL 8x MRC". This drops you three stops. I also have deeper one, but seldom use it. B&H sells them in NYC. Most Leica dealers carry B+W from what I've seen.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Prosophos]

A few samples @ f/0.95:

 

http://prosophos.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/soccer-girl.jpg

http://prosophos.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/free-as-a-bird.jpg

http://prosophos.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/cats-eyes.jpg

http://prosophos.files.wordpress.com/2012/12/true-portrait.jpg

http://prosophos.files.wordpress.com/2012/11/halloween-2.jpg

http://prosophos.files.wordpress.com/2013/05/27.jpg

http://prosophos.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/38.jpg

 

Peter.

P r o s o p h o s | Images