Summilux or Noctilux

[KAD]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I own both, and can perhaps give some advice (since you have asked).

 

1. You should not buy the Noctilux. As you say it is an "insanely expensive lens", and deciding to purchase one simply because you have recently come into some money is not a wise decision. If you are having "buyer's remorse" now, before even receiving the lens, you will surely feel that again when all those thousands of Euros leave your bank account.

 

2. Today the Leica market is not the same as just a few years ago, and if you decide to sell you will loose money, perhaps several thousand.

 

3. The 50 Summilux ASPH is a marvelous lens and has a rendering style very similar to the latest version of the Noctilux. There are many threads comparing images from the two, which I suggest would be good to examine.

 

4. The Noctilux is a large, heavy lens and lacks the focus tab of the Summilux. It also uses E60 filters, not the most common size.

 

I don't know you, and I don't know anything about your financial security. If you can afford the Noctilux then sure, go for it. If it is a financial stretch then I would humbly suggest continuing to enjoy your 50 Summilux ASPH and leave the money in your account for six months. If after six months you have not spent the money and still want the lens then you probably be able to get an even better deal, as prices continue to fall and availability continues to increase.

 

Cheers, and good luck.

 

Some very good points! From my writing it might seem that it just landed some money in my box that I need to spend, but it is not totally so I have wanted the Nocti for some time, and was very close to buy one some months ago (used). At this point I have a very good price for a brand new one, but I do not know when it will arrive, and I am not very partitioned when I first have decided on something

 

I do not think (if I am honest with myself) that the Nocti will take my photography to a new level, but there is something about having tried the best (read most expensive) lens that Leica has to offer.

 

Thanks again for sharing your experience, I am not sure it has made the decision easier, but very much more interesting!

[Peter H]

................

I do not think (if I am honest with myself) that the Nocti will take my photography to a new level, but there is something about having tried the best (read most expensive) lens that Leica has to offer..........

 

......................

 

This has been said often before, but it would be a mistake to confuse "most expensive" with "best".

 

There are many people for whom high quality is a prerequisite, and for them small size is a paramount consideration marking Leicas apart from other competing photographic equipment. By this standard, the current Noctilux might be judged the worst of all Leica M lenses, but that view would be as subjective as supposing it to be the best.

 

But I'm sure we all know what you are going through, and you certainly have my sympathy!

[Paul J]

I do not think (if I am honest with myself) that the Nocti will take my photography to a new level, but there is something about having tried the best (read most expensive) lens that Leica has to offer.

 

That's a very humble thing to say and while I agree that no piece of equipment will ever take your work to a new level buy purchase alone, that it comes from many, many, years of pushing and experimenting and learning and playing, developing techniques and skills and new ways seeing, I will always argue, to an extent, that a part of that journey is in trying new gear. New gear can be exciting, it can lead on to new techniques and aesthetics, sometimes it just gives you the inspiration to get out and try something new. It can help you look at things with a new perspective and it can challenge and help you discover other things.

 

If you really do want one and have the money I say go for it.

[KAD]

That's a very humble thing to say and while I agree that no piece of equipment will ever take your work to a new level buy purchase alone, that it comes from many, many, years of pushing and experimenting and learning and playing, developing techniques and skills and new ways seeing, I will always argue, to an extent, that a part of that journey is in trying new gear. New gear can be exciting, it can lead on to new techniques and aesthetics, sometimes it just gives you the inspiration to get out and try something new. It can help you look at things with a new perspective and it can challenge and help you discover other things.

 

If you really do want one and have the money I say go for it.

 

Well said! Moving to Leica has indeed inspired and lifted (I think so myself at least) to a better

photographer (amateur off course), by giving me inspiration, reducing size of equipment (not staying home when I am out), and technical quality.

[fotografr]

Me, for example. I found that the Summilux gave me everything I wanted from my Noctilux, the extra stop notwithstanding, but with the the additional benefit of being so much smaller and therefore, for my style, more versatile and usable. It somehow feels more organically attached, whereas the Noctilux felt a little detached somehow, a little more of a technical feat perhaps, but more intrusive on my photography. Maybe I should have given it more time, but it imposed itself on me in a way I didn't feel comfortable with. Hard to fully explain.

 

The Noctilux is the only recent Leica lens (i.e. in the last 15-20 years) that I have sold, and I can honestly say I've never missed it because the Summilux is so stunningly capable.

 

So I agree with Paul. The only way to find out how fitting the Noctilux is to your photography is to see how you get on with it. If it doesn't work out, at least the divorce won't cost you that much: in a year's time you may well get back as much as you pay for it now.

 

+1

[Hookeye]

KAD, if you live in Oslo you can borrow a Noctilux from me and try it out before you decide to buy one. I have sent you a PM.

[IWC Doppel]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I am lucky enough to have four Leica 50's. one being the f1 Nocti its sublime, even if I hadn't got on with it I wouldn't have regretted going through the experience

[tobey bilek]

Noct is big & heavy and not an everyday lens. The whole point of Leica is portability.

 

`Lux is a great lens.

 

Suggest Lens Rentals and try one out.

[sswee38823]

I have hardly used my Summilux since I got my Noctilux almost two years ago. If you like selective focus, it is the best. The Noctilux is a little tricker to focus that my other lenses, but worth the effort. For my money the Noctilux captures the atmosphere and color beautifully at all f stops. I regretted not getting it sooner.

[otto.f]

Go for a good copy of the Summilux 75 which gives much more close-up and selective focus there. From what I've seen the Noctilux has a very nice character, especially in color it seems quite unique, but I just can't get over that 1m as the closest distance to subject. Especially not for that price.

[Adrian Lord]

I have hardly used my Summilux since I got my Noctilux almost two years ago. If you like selective focus, it is the best. The Noctilux is a little tricker to focus that my other lenses, but worth the effort. For my money the Noctilux captures the atmosphere and color beautifully at all f stops. I regretted not getting it sooner.

 

 

I'm already going the same way. It's the combination of narrow dof plus the rendering and colours that's so unique and ephemeral.

[KAD]

KAD, if you live in Oslo you can borrow a Noctilux from me and try it out before you decide to buy one. I have sent you a PM.

 

Luckily I am living close to Oslo, so I did not hesitate to long to borrow a Noctilux from Hookeye! It was a F1 version in mint condition, and even though not exactly what I am buying (have the f0.95 in order), it still gives me some valuable experience!

 

The weather here in Norway do not match outdoor shooting these days, but when comparing Noctilux and Summilux, I guess indoor low light should be possible. So far som canidi shoot of the kids, but do already see why the Nocti is such a "troublesome" lens.... When it comes to size and general use, it is "everything" a Leica "should not be. It is BIG and heavy, and the focus is a challenge. Compared to the 50 Lux, the usability is not even close. BUT... when you see the pictures it provides, it does have something else, that I think for many will be the reason why you put up with all its "flaws".

 

Attached a couple of photos. I guess you will easily see who is from the Nocti. The hit rate for the Lux is a bit better, so there is more from that...

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!

[Guest Gilgamesh]

It's obvious.

 

1x 50mm f1.4

1x 35mm f1.4 or f2. This is one focal length where the Zeiss is as good-as.

 

Look around here and you will discover, absolutely that a f1 is a horrendous error.

 

Just look at the images! Most every one out of focus. Awful, and a complete joke within any photography community, especially the Leica community. Do Not buy.

 

Sorry - but the 50mm Noct is a complete "joke".

The 50mm f1.4 is the iconic Leica look. Likewise the 35mm.

 

The "entire" point is that the M system is small, discreet, etc.

Have you put the 50mm f1 on your Leica? I suspect not!

Buy the 35mm and the 50mm. That's all Jerome Sessini ever uses. Likewise most other Magnum photographers, as an example.

 

Read between the lines: the f1 is not a photographer's lens, it's for people who own a serious sports car / bike but never venture onto the track, granted that's an analogy, and pretty much holds true.

 

Avoid like the proverbial plague.

[Paul J]

It's obvious.

 

1x 50mm f1.4

1x 35mm f1.4 or f2. This is one focal length where the Zeiss is as good-as.

 

Look around here and you will discover, absolutely that a f1 is a horrendous error.

 

Just look at the images! Most every one out of focus. Awful, and a complete joke within any photography community, especially the Leica community. Do Not buy.

 

Sorry - but the 50mm Noct is a complete "joke".

The 50mm f1.4 is the iconic Leica look. Likewise the 35mm.

 

The "entire" point is that the M system is small, discreet, etc.

Have you put the 50mm f1 on your Leica? I suspect not!

Buy the 35mm and the 50mm. That's all Jerome Sessini ever uses. Likewise most other Magnum photographers, as an example.

 

Read between the lines: the f1 is not a photographer's lens, it's for people who own a serious sports car / bike but never venture onto the track, granted that's an analogy, and pretty much holds true.

 

Avoid like the proverbial plague.

 

Lol - you just have everything and everyone worked out don't you giggles?

[Guest Ansel_Adams]

I would say get the Noctilux if you want to shoot at f0.95 all the time. If not then you don't need it. There is no other reason to buy a Noctilux.

 

A friend of mine has the f1.2 Noctilux. Very nice wide open but really limits what you can shoot, and the thin bokeh effect is just "perfume" as Cartier Bresson called it. It will not improve your images. These things are massive also. Its a very specialist lens for sure, and most images just look out of focus with it. Why not just buy a Holga and shoot MF?

 

Also, if you really really want one why not buy second hand? That way you can move it on for what you paid for it if you are not happy. As soon as you buy new the lens will depreciate, a lot.

[Paul J]

I would say get the Noctilux if you want to shoot at f0.95 all the time. If not then you don't need it. There is no other reason to buy a Noctilux.

 

See, I really disagree with this. I shoot mine stopped down and it's incredibly, incredibly sharp, as I understand at times sharper than the Summilux. The contrast and the colour rendered from this glass is also, in my opinion just out of this world.

 

I shoot it often at 0.95 but I certainly don't want to shoot it at that all the time. It's so good at other apertures that I think you are mad not to shoot it with everything in mind.

 

The point is, and the fact remains, you CAN shoot it 0.95 and when it suits the image, it really is amazing and it's not something you can't get that look from anything else. It's a Summilux and then some, a "friend with benefits" Also as a practical matter, the extra speed available is really useful.

[MarkP]

Gilgamesh, we never need to read between your lines as you are about as subtle as a fart in the bath.

 

I have had a 1.0/50 Noctilux on 'permanant' loan to me for the past two and a half years. The focus shift is a pain and the lens is probably overdue for servicing and adjustment. I also have the 1.4/50 Summilux ASPH which still gets far more use as it is a wonderful general purpose lens for all of the reasons we well know. I rarely shoot wide open with either lens because I don't like zero DOF, but the speed comes in handy at times. There also seems to be this myth that the Noctilux might as well come without an aperture ring as it should only be used wide open - I use mine at all apertures.

 

Nevertheless, the 1.0/50 (despite it's problems with it's weight, focus shift, barrel distortion, and vignetting) it is is still an amazing lens that produces breathtaking images with beautifully gentle rendering and subtle colouring . The friend who loaned it to me is an experienced professional photographer who is now one of the world's top advertising cinematographers and when he gave it to me he commented that it was a most extraordinary lens.

 

Gilgamesh, you really should stop being so dogmatic ('black and white') - never say never and never say always.

Life is full of those glorious subtle mid-tones with all of their imperfections. Learn to revel in them!

[Guest Ansel_Adams]

The contrast and the colour rendered from this glass is also, in my opinion just out of this world..

 

You should try medium format - its a completely different universe! An 80mm Planar for Rolleiflex or Hasselblad will put it to shame.

[Guest Gilgamesh]

It is.

I shoot a Mamiya 7 too, a manual 'Blad with a standard lens … lovely.

 

"As far as resolution goes, the lens – my sample at least – exceeds the 35/2 ASPH at every aperture, and seems to have a slightly crisper rendition with improved microcontrast. All in all, an impressive performance. Color rendition is neutral, and takes cinematic color shifts in processing well. Corner performance is almost as good as center performance, with only very slight softness and lateral chromatic aberration visible on high contrast edges when shot wide open; both markedly improve at f2 and match the center at f2.8. Overall, it seems to match the rendition of other Peter-Karbe era lenses very well; I’d say its character is closest to the 50/1.4 ASPH in rendition, splitting scenes into clean, pleasingly cinematic planes regardless of aperture. Subjects stand out with a very three-dimensional rendition thanks to the excellent microcontrast and low presence of CA, though overall contrast seems to be slightly lower than the 50/1.4 ASPH and 35/2 ASPH – not necessarily a bad thing to aid retention of dynamic range on digital. There’s also very little field curvature that I can see."

 

If you want the true Leica look, then you need to be "focussing" on the 50 and 35 f1.4 lenses.

The f1 lenses are well known to be favoured by Kermit and his dozy affluent pals, "never say never and never say always".

 

http://blog.mingthein.com/2013/02/28/leica-351-4-summilux-m-asph-fle-review/

 

I rest my case.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[Paul J]

You should try medium format - its a completely different universe! An 80mm Planar for Rolleiflex or Hasselblad will put it to shame.

 

I wouldn't say it puts it to shame at all. Infact, I think the Leica lenses I own are sharper than my Blad Zeiss lenses. I would say the colour and tonality is better with a larger image area, the more subtle, smoother, rounder focal transitions, for sure, and the resolution from a high megapixel back, without a doubt, but I stopped using the older Zeiss lenses with the higher res backs in favour of the newer H lenses and they do perform better.

 

Then there's large format - Oh hang on, you're Ansel Adams!