your favoured focal length for low light?

[Ecaton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In my lens line up for the M8, a truly fast lens is missing and I was planning to add a Summilux 35mm asph once the used market calms done somewhat and more reasonably priced offers for sale are available. To bridge the wait, I thought of buying a CV 50mm Nokton, which received an excellent review from Sean Reid and is quite inexpensive (I understand ther is a fast CV 35mm available, but it is bulky and reviews are mixed).

However, I'm not sure how usefull a 67mm (considering the M8's crop factor) lens would be for low light situations.

Generally, I would think standard focal lengths is what is needed for the majority of low light situations. But then, a 50mm might be a tad to long and indoors using your zoom (feet) to move a few steps back is no always possible.

 

Appreciate any input.

 

Cheers

[erl]

Martin,

 

I think you have to separate 'low light' criteria from focal length. Focal length will give you a certain 'field of view', but no extra light.

 

Maybe, if indeed 'low light' is your main interest, you should be looking at maximum apertures. At which point, the only real solution is "buy the biggest" f stop you can afford. You may also need to repeat the exercise for all focal lengths. Yes! You need to Wander in the World of the Wealthy. Good luck.

 

Personally, I use the Noctilux. A supert lens within limits. But it only delivers a focal length of 50mm. Rather 65 (or whatever) on the M8. Frankly, I don't give a ..... about the focal "number". I know what the lens covers, so what it is called is immaterial.

[bradreiman]

im with erl i like f1, happens to be 50mm. i also have a 35 nokton and i really like it. inexpensive as well.....b

[Ecaton]

Martin,

 

I think you have to separate 'low light' criteria from focal length. Focal length will give you a certain 'field of view', but no extra light.

 

Erl,

 

Thanks for your input. I understand the difference between the two, but my question was probably not phrased precisely enough. It is rather the "most often needed" or "most usefull" than the favoured focal length which I meant. Based on my short RF experience (since 10/2006), most of the low light situations I took pictures in were either street or indoors. Therefore the question about the usefullness of the 50mm, may be to those who mostly use a 50mm in low light situations. Since I'm not a pro, the Nocti is definitely not an option, since IRS would not help smoothen the pain of the very steep price. I think to buy the Summilux, which is pretty fast on the one hand and an excellent allround lens on the other hand, makes most sense.

 

Cheers,

Martin

[bsmith]

35 Lux for sure,

[Guest Olof]

Summilux ASPH 50mm

[jayproth]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Personally, I use the Noctilux. A supert lens within limits. But it only delivers a focal length of 50mm. Rather 65 (or whatever) on the M8. Frankly, I don't give a ..... about the focal "number". I know what the lens covers, so what it is called is immaterial.

 

Hi, does anyone know a place where the Noctilux is available right now?

 

Is $5,500 really the street price?

[Peter Branch]

Although you state that the need is primarily indoors, (hence the low light?), there remains a difference between what might be called group or scene shots and pictures intended to highlight detail, particularly people. The Noctilux is very good at the people/detail type pictures under these circumstances but quite restricting with almost everything else. It is now extremely expensive so has, in my opinion, become very much a niche lens. Indoor people shots are probably the only justification for this lens on an M8. The 50mm f/1.4 ASPH is almost as fast, will do the same job of highlighting detail and is a lot less expensive - it is also a much better lens for general use. For the group/scene type shots I currently tend to favour the 28mm f/2 ASPH.

 

There really is no single lens, in my experience, that can deal with typical indoor shooting situations; a combination of the 28mm and 50mm works very well.

[tashley]

I have used for low light:

 

24 2.8 elmarit

28 cron

35 lux

35 cron

50 lux.

 

The 50 lux wins! It's FOV might seem too narrow but in my local pub, where I'm doing an ongoing series, it lets me shoot head and shoulders on people up close but also allows me to reach across the room (10 feet) and catch intimately what's going on. It is sharp, focusses accurately, has lovely bokeh, and is a joy to use. My second favourite is the 24 2.8 which gives enough light in some incandescent ambient, especially if you're shooting B&W, and I just like the look of its files.

 

Tim

['Cron]

For really low light, using 160 to 640 ISO, the f/1.4 35 mm Summilux-M ASPH produces great images, and handles easier for most users than the f/1.0 50 mm Nocti (and is far cheaper as a pre-owned lens and is more readily available). Just step forward and you have the 50 mm focus look. Yes, the bokeh outside of the main subject is different between the Nocti and the 'Lux, but is that all you want in an image? Doubtful.

 

However, the f/2 50 mm Summicron-M (any version but the DR on the M8, but the fourth version has a focus tab or lever -- #11819) is a champion on the M8, given the ability to change the ISO on the fly to 2500. To change the focus look just step back, and you have a 35 mm (approximately 45 mm on the M8).

 

The f/2 50 mm Summicron-M is very reasonable pre-owned and is the standard that other 50 mm lenses are compared to, including the f/1.0 Nocti. On the M8, along with the f/2 28 mm Summicron-M ASPH, the 50 mm Summicron-M makes a great low light kit at a very reasonable cost.

 

Just My Humble Opinion,

 

Bill

Clearwater, Florida

[wparsonsgisnet]

Martin, you get my nod for the 35 'lux asph -- do NOT get the pre-asph version of this lens as it is v-e-r-y flare-prone.

 

I have the 35, 50, and 75 'lux's. I owned and used the 'nocti for 8 or 10 years. As you can see from the postings here, it renders an image in a particular way. You can get a similar rendering, and one more pleasing to me, from the 75 'lux.

 

I grew to dislike images from the 'nocti and got rid of it. I favor the 50 'lux asph.

 

But the 35 will be close to a 50 on your M8. Also, it's a fabulous lens.

 

I use the 24 and the 35 'lux asph most of the time on the M8.

[wlaidlaw]

Martin,

 

Don't worry about 67mm EFOV from a 50mm lens. I bought a new 50mm Elmar, thinking I would use maybe two or three times a month, being mainly a wide angle user. I have come to love the focal length and it is perfect for people. I may now be saving up for a second hand Noctilux for low light use just like you are seeking.

 

Wilson

[woodda]

How about the 21 Asp. I find this great as I do not need to focus really and 2 with 1250 + in does a great job. If you really are very critical you can always go B&W. I do not bother with a finder and just guess and know it is going to cover the max of the view finder which is 24mm so preaty close

 

Regards

[johnll]

With an RF camera, I do not carry a tripod. Low light therefore mandates fast film and fast lenses. I have two fast lenses for RF: a CV 35/1.2 Nokton which I use with my M7, and an old Canon 50/0.95 on a Canon 7s. These are both useful focal lengths for the sort of low light work I do. If I could find a fast 75 it would also be useful. On an M8 the 35 is more or less equivalent to a 50, and the 50 is more or less equivalent to 70. Another fast 50 is the Noctilux but it's very expensive. It would probably not vignette on an M8, however, like it does on full-frame. The Canon 50/0.95 does not vignette, but it is very "dreamy" wide open, and soft off centre, which can be good or bad. It has a non-standard mount, but can be converted to M mount.The old Canon 50/1.2 LTM is also a good lens, but you would need an adapter to use it on M mount.

[topoxforddoc]

I like the 75 lux. Sometimes it's diificult to get really close with a 35 in low light and this is where I like my 75 lux.

 

Chralie

[bsmith]

The 35 lux is outstanding indoors and out, it's my favorite lens, even at f4 !!! Don't be scared off by reading that nonsense about most copies being soft at f4. Leica disagrees and so do I. Make sure your rangefinder is adjusted correctly on your M8 and this will be your favorite lens !

[innerimager]

I would add that there is a direct relation between FL and low light shooting, that being that the shorter FL allows slower shutter speeds to be used hand held. If the subjects are moving, being able to shoot a 24mm or 28mm lens at 1/10 easily is a plus. Also the increased DOF can help shooting wide open, (or hinder if subject isolation is called for). best....Peter

[jonoslack]

The 35 lux is outstanding indoors and out, it's my favorite lens, even at f4 !!! Don't be scared off by reading that nonsense about most copies being soft at f4. Leica disagrees and so do I. Make sure your rangefinder is adjusted correctly on your M8 and this will be your favorite lens !

Hmm William - there are over 400 posts in that thread - there are a number of people who have new 35mm lenses with serious issues - calling it nonsense seems to me to be a little, shall we say, gung ho.

 

I should say that my only experience is a two year old 35mm 'cron which behaves very well, but I have no doubt that a number of newer lenses don't (for whatever reason). Added to which, Leica don't disagree, there is no doubt that focus shift does occur. Just because your lens works well (as does mine) . . . . .

[bsmith]

Hmm William - there are over 400 posts in that thread - there are a number of people who have new 35mm lenses with serious issues - calling it nonsense seems to me to be a little, shall we say, gung ho.

 

I should say that my only experience is a two year old 35mm 'cron which behaves very well, but I have no doubt that a number of newer lenses don't (for whatever reason). Added to which, Leica don't disagree, there is no doubt that focus shift does occur. Just because your lens works well (as does mine) . . . . .

 

The 400 post are from the same 5 or 6 people... lol lol lol

The lens design is fine, there is a very, very minor back focus which is only a real world factor for people annoying themselves shooting rulers from 3 feet away instead of actually making images . The real issue is that almost every M8 has a rangefinder adjustment problem. Some of the same folks complaining about a faulty 35 lux design are the "home handymen" self adjusting their rangefinders. I'm sure Leica must just shake their heads ! The other issue is "post 6 bit coding", Leica had initially just switched mounts with 6 bit machined ones. On certain lenses they found out that they had to recalibrate the lens as opposed to just swapping mounts. The 35 lux is one of those lenses, so a lot of new lenses were just not focusing correctly. Many dealers , "early on" sent their stock in for coding before Leica realized their error.

The 35 lux is a brillant design that has been around and tested over time. It continues to be one of the world's best optics. It's really a shame that people are getting "scared off" of purchasing this excellent lens. You and I (and many, many many, many) others don't have a "magic" lens. I just have a normal 35mm f 1.4 asph summilux period. I tried 2 others (my friends) and they also tack sharp at f4 (unless you're a foot away). I can only imagine the amusement Leica engineers must be enjoying with some of those "post" !

 

Remember, you can also find a lot of people who STILL don't believe we (US) walked on the moon in 1969 !! (it was actually set up on a sound stage and filmed in the desert) Is Elvis alive ?, (I saw him yesterday)

It's by far my favorite lens, (and believe me I have too many!) If you find a new one now, it's probably coded and calibrated. So believe who you want to, I spend my time making pictures, not trying to outsmart Leica. I think their M record stands for itself.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[Morten Grathe]

I only have the 35mm Summilux Asph., and I am very pleased with it. Love this lens!