jow Posted May 23, 2013 Share #1 Posted May 23, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) A question for Nocti f/1.0 users. I recently picked up a Nocti f/1.0 Version 4 which had a recent CLA by DAG. I chose the f/1.0 for same reasons as others, for the rendering of this lens at f/1.0. I understand that it is not sharp wide open. My question is how soft should it be at f/1.0? From my test shot at 1:1 below, does the sharpness seem normal or could there be an issue with this copy wide open? Stopped down to f/1.4 or higher, resolution and contrast improves. It is only af f/1.0 which seems somewhat soft to me and wanted some feedback from others who have this lens. Thanks, Joe @ f/1.0 1m distance 1:1 crop from LR4 Sample shots at f/1.0, f/1.4 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted May 23, 2013 Posted May 23, 2013 Hi jow, Take a look here Question on Noctilux 50 f/1.0. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Ecar Posted May 23, 2013 Share #2 Posted May 23, 2013 Looks about right to me. This lens is never going to be clinically sharp wide open at 1m. The 50/0.95 is better in this respect. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jow Posted May 23, 2013 Author Share #3 Posted May 23, 2013 Thanks Ecar Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
farnz Posted May 23, 2013 Share #4 Posted May 23, 2013 I agree with Ecar, it looks about the same as my v4 wide open. It's not as bitingly sharp as my 50 Summilux asph but it I'm using it for other qualities wide open. Pete. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jow Posted May 24, 2013 Author Share #5 Posted May 24, 2013 Thanks Pete. Looks like I'll keep the lens and use it. Another friend who has a V4 also chimed in and said it looks about right for wide open. Joe Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted May 24, 2013 Share #6 Posted May 24, 2013 (edited) Agreed, I have the v3 and this looks about right. Also remember that this is a relatively low contrast lens, especially wide open. Repeat the test with the lens stopped down to f2.8-4and see how the contrast & sharpness improves Mark Edited May 24, 2013 by MarkP Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jow Posted May 24, 2013 Author Share #7 Posted May 24, 2013 Advertisement (gone after registration) Agreed,Repeat the test with the lens stopped down to f2.8-4and see how the contrast & sharpness improves Mark Thanks Mark, and yes, agreed past f/2 contrast and sharpness improves. Even at f/1.4 I find the signature changes. What is quite remarkable to me is that although there is some mild focus shift from f/2.8 to f/5.6 when shot on a test chart, I really can't tell at all in real shooting situations. Quite an optical marvel for a 1970s design? Am definitely keeping this lens. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted May 24, 2013 Share #8 Posted May 24, 2013 Nicely demonstrated. Yes it is much better even by f1.4 and as I rarely shoot wide open I don't have the problem you've demonstrated at f1.0. I love the overall rendering of this lens at all f-stops but don't like the zero-depth-of field-look or the very strong vignetting seen at 1.0 look so I tend to shoot at ≤f1.4. Enjoy the lens. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FPB Posted May 24, 2013 Share #9 Posted May 24, 2013 Maybe this is of interest: Tim Ashley Photography | Leica M240 with the 50mm F1 Noctilux - Some Observations Bill 3 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jager Posted May 25, 2013 Share #10 Posted May 25, 2013 As others have mentioned, your copy looks fine. Welcome to the world of the Noctilux! It is a special lens, one that truly brings a different look, a unique palette. The softness you observe at f1 is rather compensated for by an ethereal glow. Own the Night A couple years ago I mounted mine to my M9 in January and didn't remove it until June. It remains one of my favorite pieces of glass. Congratulations! 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted May 25, 2013 Share #11 Posted May 25, 2013 Yes, your lens looks fine. I really like the creamy presentation at f1 and focussing is now a breeze on the M Typ 240 if you use Live View. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bill W Posted May 25, 2013 Share #12 Posted May 25, 2013 I owned the same version but sold it several years ago. Yours is a lot sharper than mine was using the same test chart. Nice twin lens by the way. 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted May 25, 2013 Share #13 Posted May 25, 2013 Maybe this is of interest: Tim Ashley Photography | Leica M240 with the 50mm F1 Noctilux - Some Observations Bill Nice review Tim. I very much agree with most of what you wrote (especially about it's use at smaller apertures) but depending on the subject, distortion can be more than a minor issue. These three images have NOT been corrected here. I don't have the corrected ones here to post but required more sophisticated local correction in Photoshop: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/architecture/207121-ngv-lounge-chair-melbourne.html I agree that the 1.0/50 Noctilux is very underrated by many as a more general purpose lens. There are those only use it at f1.0 but I rarely use it at 1.0. This thread is quite useful (see my post - #8) http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-lenses/252840-50mm-noctilux-f1-0-a.html (Post #8) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
MarkP Posted May 25, 2013 Share #14 Posted May 25, 2013 Thanks Bill. I very much agree with most of what Tim wrote (especially about it's use at smaller apertures), but depending on the subject, distortion can be more than a minor issue. These three images have NOT been corrected for distortion. I don't have the corrected ones at hand to post but they required much more sophisticated local correction in Photoshop than could be achieved by the global distortion sliders in LR: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/architecture/207121-ngv-lounge-chair-melbourne.html I agree that the 1.0/50 Noctilux is very underrated by many as a more general purpose lens. There are those only use it at f1.0, but I rarely use it above 1.4. I love the Bokeh but not the razor thin DOF. Even in the dark I try not to go above 1.4 unless I have to. This thread is quite useful (incl my post - #8) http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-lenses/252840-50mm-noctilux-f1-0-a.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FPB Posted May 26, 2013 Share #15 Posted May 26, 2013 ......I agree that the 1.0/50 Noctilux is very underrated by many as a more general purpose lens. There are those only use it at f1.0, but I rarely use it above 1.4. I love the Bokeh but not the razor thin DOF. Even in the dark I try not to go above 1.4 unless I have to. This thread is quite useful (incl my post - #8) http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/leica-m-lenses/252840-50mm-noctilux-f1-0-a.html Mark, stunning pictures in that post of yours ! I do not own or even thought about that 1/50 Noctilux. Just had visited Tim's site the day before and remembered his work, so put up this hint. Now I keep the Noctilux in the back of my head, really seems to be worth a thought... My wallet already tries to hide in the depth of the coat.... Thanks for posting. Bill 1 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Geschlecht Posted June 4, 2013 Share #16 Posted June 4, 2013 Hello Joe, Welcome to the Forum. Nice test set up. What kind of tripod did you use? Did you use a lens hood? Best Regards, Michael Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
jow Posted June 4, 2013 Author Share #17 Posted June 4, 2013 Thanks Michael. I have a cheapish Feisol traveler tripod and a PhotoClam ball head.. I believe I pulled out the built in hood on those shots, no UV filter attached. I find this lens quite flare resistant as others have mentioned elsewhere. Joe Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
IWC Doppel Posted June 4, 2013 Share #18 Posted June 4, 2013 It's taken me a while to bond with on my M9-P but I have. It is a wonderful lens with unique properties in terms of rendering Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
iedei Posted June 5, 2013 Share #19 Posted June 5, 2013 Nicely demonstrated. Yes it is much better even by f1.4 and as I rarely shoot wide open I don't have the problem you've demonstrated at f1.0. mark: why would you buy the Noctilux if you don't shoot at F1? Wouldn't a Summilux be a better choice then? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
algrove Posted June 5, 2013 Share #20 Posted June 5, 2013 (edited) Good question, but since I own both I cannot get the same feel of lux 1.4 photos versus the 1.0. Love the 1.0 on the Mono. It must be Mandler. Edited June 5, 2013 by algrove 2 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now