50mm Noctilux review

[cirke]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It is interesting that, having moved to the new old factory, Leica have not introduced any new M lenses.  The 28mm f1.4, in which they must have invested considerable design time, assuming that they did not just mix / match a 24mm Summilux with a 50mm, remains a limited edition.

Peter Karbe said recently that he is working on new lenses

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[sblutter]

I'm very happy Victoria loves her Nocti - must be a strong shouldered lady with a particular shooting style.

 

I've been very happy w/ Summi 50 vr 4 for ages - its just so 'Leica' to me, a 40+ yrs M shooter.

 

If I'm just running out, I go with the 50 2.8 collapsible Elmar - very true to the form factor design intent - still plenty of Bokah wide open, very sharp.  Mounted, camera can even fit in a big pocket (useful in dodgy environs.)

 

I'd love a FF M the size of a IIIf

 

Elmar vs Nocti:

72% lighter in weight

92% lighter in price (used)

 

PS:  Resold a new 'lux after a week due to weight.  I go out for hours

PSS: At a profit

[jrp]

The Summilix is a superb lend: because it does not vignette as much wide open, there is less difference in shutter speed between the two lenses than there should be. It also focuses closer and it is lighter, as well as resolving better at f1.4 and perhaps even f 2.

 

For night shooting, despite the name, the APO Summicron 50mm does a better job, because it has less aberration. And, for cityscapes, you are likely to be on a tripod, so f/2 is not a limitation.

 

Once you get to f/2.8 and beyond, the lenses start to converge in performance.

 

So we're really down to rendering differences, bokeh, etc, when trying to identify the Noctilux' strengths. Tough, when the Summilux and APO Summmicron set such a high standard in that department too.

[VictoriaC]

I use long Artist & Artisan camera straps on all my Leicas and I always wear the camera across my body.  I always take a camera with me every day (sometimes I carry a second body in my bag too - it really depends on where I'm going, how long for and which bag I'm using!) but generally I only use one lens.  I tend to prefer the 50mm over the 35 but sometimes I change my mind.  Since I'm using the 50 so much I'm sometimes taking the 28 in my bag but I rarely seem to swap over.  The real reason I guess I bought the Noctilux is to increase my film use - saying that, a Summilux on an M7 with Tri-X (I normally set my ISO at 320 but I do also shoot 800 ISO films) will allow for a broad range of lighting conditions - even better if I can use a variable ND filter (for the bright daylight) and have the option of 0.95 for indoors or when I head towards night - it always really bugs me when it's too dark to take a picture. The fact that I can alter the ISO on the M240 is probably the main reason I use the M240 rather than the M6/M7 these days.  If film had allowed me a flexible ISO I don't think I would have ever switched to digital.

[FlashGordonPhotography]

I just bought a Noctulux 50/0.95 on Thursday after a lot of deliberation (I have to admit that it was reading Thorsten Overgaard's webpage that tipped me into buying it). My knee-jerk response to it was OMG, what a beast! I've come to it having been using a Summilux-M 50/1.4 ASPH and a Summilux-M 35/1.4 ASPH FLE as my daily lenses for the past 6 months AND really being especially in love with the 50/1.4's output but having had the 0.95 on the camera all day yesterday (and having taken about a dozen shots whilst out with friends in London) I am actually blown away by the ZINGY POP and contrast the 0.95's photos have. Like wow!

 

You know, I don't need a Noctilux, quite frankly didn't even need a Summilux 50 or 35 though I love them both but the Noctilux, in spite of its size and weight IS actually amazing, I'm glad I did buy it and look forward to taking more photographs with it.

 

I bought mine on a whim (over a 1000 off RRP) two months ago. I also have a 50mm 'lux as well as a couple of CV 50's. I'd also given the CV 50mm 1.1 a good go a year or so ago. So I also definitely didn't "need" it. My first few outings were a bit of a struggle to be honest. You read how it's completely different to the 'lux and then how from 1.4 it's the same a minute later on another blog. Of course I tried to shoot everything wide open, looked at everything at 1:1 and obsessed over my RF calibration. The purple fringing annoyed me.

 

But I have found, for me, that it's a lens that has grown on me in the last month. In the first few weeks I just wanted to leave it at home and pack the 1.4 but lately I have preferred to pack the 0.95. It's a lens that needs to be learned. Well, it's a lens I needed to learn and I'm still getting to know how to make it sing. But when it does.....

 

Gordon

[Joshua Lowe]

In my opinion Diglloyd  has the best reviews one can find  but he doesn't Leica's price-philosophy vs value  ans on many points I agree totally, for his own he seems to prefer new Zeiss lenses on Sony E or Nikon body

 

 

I  get a Noctilux in 10 days therefore I participe maybe too much in Noctilux threads :-)

 

I have a Digilloyd sub... it's okay... his reviews are super clinical and dry.  And I don't like his test shots, generally speaking.  But he has what seems to be the most comprehensive collection of M mount lens reviews.

[james.liam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

 

I have a Digilloyd sub... it's okay... his reviews are super clinical and dry.  And I don't like his test shots, generally speaking.  But he has what seems to be the most comprehensive collection of M mount lens reviews.

They're not so much clinical/dry as they are oriented toward his type of shooting. Landscape, nature work is the bulk of what he seems to do, usually tripod-bound so his analysis reflects this. He is not the guy to photograph strolling lovers on the Pizza di San Marco at midnight, a regal white stallion at rest in the pitch darkness of the Arabian desert or intimate friends chatting at a candle lit table--what I fancy a Leica M + Noctilux were actually conceived for and what Thorsten von Overgaard, Sean Reid excel in. Lloyd "gets" what a Leica M was intended for, but that's clearly not his thing; SLRs, compact fixed lens cameras with perfectly matched optics--Ricoh, Sigma--appear to be his preference.

 

 

In my opinion Diglloyd  has the best reviews one can find  but he doesn't Leica's price-philosophy vs value  ans on many points I agree totally, for his own he seems to prefer new Zeiss lenses on Sony E or Nikon body

 

 

He's not coy about a predilection for Zeiss but his comments on the Leica WA SEMs are no less gushing. As far as the pricing philosophy, we share his frustrations. I own an MM (bought second hand), but what is essentially a 2010 M9P body and modified but quite dated CCD sensor a value at the $7-8k price point? Or a $5k 35 Summilux FLE when a Zeiss at less than 1/2 the price out-performs it? Other reasons intervene for buying these things.

 

With the Noctilux (that he's presently selling ), he does a splendidly exhaustive job illustrating its unique 'drawing' qualities (dream-like bokeh, painterly subject isolation) and limitations (hulking mass that is at odds without the compact Leica ethos, challenges hitting consistent focus with an OVF, need for perfect calibration with the body, toy-like EVF option in the M240, particularly limited in low-light--where its actually needed).

Conclusions not at all at odds with Markus, BTW. 

Edited April 14, 2015 by james.liam

[IkarusJohn]

To be honest, I find all reviews of limited use once I'm past a certain point.  Even the vegetable man is only so useful (he reviews cameras I am interested in with lenses I have no interest in ...)

 

In relation to the Noctilux, I read some reviews, but I found comment here and sample pictures most useful.  Once I have a camera or a lens, I then tend to ignore the reviews and enjoy what I have.  If I then have problems with it, I get the best information here, including how to make the most of what I have.  I'm rather surprised anyone really needs to read a review of the Noctilux at this stage.  So much has been written about this lens, and there are so many sample images here, I wouldn't have thought there is anything left to say.

 

Personally, my kit is complete.  More than complete - the only limitation is how I use it and time and inspiration to get out and use it.  While some Leica lenses have different strengths, particularly in the digital age, they all seem to perform pretty well to me.  I get great pleasure out of my 1948 coated Summitar 50/2.  It doesn't perform anything like the 50 Summilux or Noctilux, and each gives its own pleasure.

 

Reviews, whether Digilloyd, Rockwell, Reid, Huff, Overgaard, Puts or latterly Tim Ashley can be informative to a point, but they are ultimately of limited use - particularly once you've bought the kit ...

[cirke]

Reviews, whether Digilloyd, Rockwell, Reid, Huff, Overgaard, Puts or latterly Tim Ashley can be informative to a point, but they are ultimately of limited use - particularly once you've bought the kit ...

Generally you read a review before (and for)  to buy a lens 

Edited April 15, 2015 by erick

[jdlaing]

I don't . The reviewer doesn't do my shooting for me. I handle it, test it and if necessary rely on people and trust for experiences.

[Gibbo]

It's interesting and of some value to read other people's opinions, which is what reviews are.

You're at liberty to accept, agree or totally ignore those opinions. If reviews are of no value

whatsoever, why bother with forums which are a collection of reviews and opinions.

[Mornnb]

It's interesting and of some value to read other people's opinions, which is what reviews are.

 

 

I generally prefer to read technical data, like MTF. And look at sample photos. Give me the data, I can form my own opinion. Which is the type of reviewer Diglloyd is, no nonsense gets straight to the facts and gives the reader what they need to make up their own opinion.

Edited April 16, 2015 by Mornnb

[jrp]

Diglloyd's review are helpful as a baseline (although he does seem to be more than usually unlucky in getting faulty equipment, not particularly Leica).  His primary focus is, however, on sharpness.  You would not read him to get a deep insight into the relative merits of rangefinder v DSLR for example, or the use cases of the Noctilux v Summilux, say.

[CheshireCat]

You would not read him [Lloyd] to get a deep insight into the relative merits of rangefinder v DSLR for example, or the use cases of the Noctilux v Summilux, say.

 

I have to disagree. I remember reading his comments about RF vs DSLR, which make a lot of sense to me (but not much appreciated on this forum ). He also had a nice Noctilux 50/0.95 vs Summilux 50/1.4 ASPH comparison.

[CheshireCat]

I don't . The reviewer doesn't do my shooting for me. I handle it, test it and if necessary rely on people and trust for experiences.

 

Which is what reviewers are.

Not many can handle, test, and compare different expensive Leica lenses before purchase.

 

That said, many Internet reviews are very low quality and sometimes misleading. Carefully filter.

Edited April 17, 2015 by CheshireCat

[Guest NEIL-D-WILLIAMS]

Its the best Leica lens that Leica make and I am glad to own one..............just love screwing this thing onto either my MM or M240 and soon to have Sony a7ii the pictures it churns out are amazing.

I do find that the Lee filter holder and GND creates a large amount of vingetting so I just add the GND in post processing when using the Noctilux to shoot landscape/sunsets etc

[jrp]

In the end, I think that there are four or five categories of Leica lens:

• the modern, as good as it gets Elmarits (24, 21 and, more or less, the 18, as well as the 50 Summilux and, beyond that, the  50mm APO
• telephotos, which are also more or less as good as the Elmarits, although hey perform less well at night, or into the light
• the fast lenses (21, 24, 50) which are weightier and the images from which show some inevitable signs of stress, shall we say, as they are also built for compactness, but they produce photos with a pleasing signature
• Older (eg, Mandler) lenses, that are more Instagram-like in their rendering
• transitional lenses such as the 28mm ASPH Summicron, which has lower contrast than the Elmarits but is sharper, more abberation-free than the Mandlers. 

[cirke]

I don't . The reviewer doesn't do my shooting for me. I handle it, test it and if necessary rely on people and trust for experiences.

good if you can find each lens you would like to test and keep them at least one week before buying them

I have not so much time to spend :  I read very good reviews , I know my needs , I buy

 

and someone used to test deeply lenses will be always better than you for tests, I am too lazy to spend useless hours for that

Edited April 19, 2015 by erick

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[lecycliste]

I’ve long treasured but not always followed these words from early mentor and commercial photographer Kirk Tuck:

 

“ Don’t be an equipment junky. You can shoot salable pictures with a $99 [Yashica] MAT124.”