wlaidlaw Posted October 16, 2015 Share #21 Posted October 16, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) The Lux out performs the Noctilux from f1.4. Therefore the only reason to get the Noctilux is for 0.95. Not according to Erwin Puts, who says that the Noctilux 0.95 is at least as good as the 50/1.4 ASPH Summilux, which is not too shabby. Wilson Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted October 16, 2015 Posted October 16, 2015 Hi wlaidlaw, Take a look here To 0.95 Or Not. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
thighslapper Posted October 16, 2015 Share #22 Posted October 16, 2015 The only reason to get a Nocti 0.95 is to use it at 0.95 ........ and you have to be very selective in usage or you will have a whole portfolio of very odd looking shots ...... for some it works very well, but for most it is just a distraction. 'Noctilux' is a bit of a misnomer as night-time is the last time you want to use it due to the aberrations around street lights etc. which are very intrusive. I have a Nocti 0.95, 50/1.4, 50/2 apo and a selection of other 50's ....... and the one that goes on the camera is always the 50/2 apo. Faultless at all apertures and still gives a narrow enough DOF at f2 to give you the look you usually are after. The Noctilux is really a novelty lens to use for a day out with 'extreme dof' as the main intention. As a routine lens where you are probably going to use sub f2 a handful of times in a day it is a lot of metal and glass to lug around ...... If money is no object ..... get one ..... but don't be surprised if it is mostly gathering dust after the initial enthusiasm has passed ........ Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
FlashGordonPhotography Posted October 16, 2015 Share #23 Posted October 16, 2015 Not according to Erwin Puts, who says that the Noctilux 0.95 is at least as good as the 50/1.4 ASPH Summilux, which is not too shabby. Wilson I've learned a lot from Erwin Puts excellent articles. But I have to disagree with him on this one. Having both I find the Summilux to be noticeably better between 1.4 and f4. I was hoping to be able to sell my 1.4 after purchasing a Noctilux. The weight doesn't bother me personally. But I still have the 'lux. Gordon Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted October 17, 2015 Share #24 Posted October 17, 2015 I've owned the F1.0 model for some years and tend to use it perhaps 8-10 times annually. You all know it's a quircky beast by nature. Flaring and blue-fringing around any bright areas in a wide-open frame can be a challenge. So have you seen any differences in the F0.95 version along these or other lines? Totally different lenses. The f/1 has blue fringing; the f/0.95 has a more annoying purple fringing. The f/1 has huge focus shift; the f/0.95 is ok. The f/1 is compact and light; the f/0.95 is not. The f/1 is sharp enough with proper postprocessing; the f/0.95 is sharp enough without. The f/1 always surprises me for its rendering character and dreamy look; the f/0.95 maximizes technical rather than artistic qualities. Oh, and no one buys a Noctilux for low-light in 2015. You buy a Noctilux for the character. If you buy a Noctilux for the character, you buy the f/1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted October 17, 2015 Share #25 Posted October 17, 2015 Jeff - what I mean is that you actually can use the 0.95 as a "standard lens" - it's sharp f/8. But the reason you buy is to use it wide open. When I had the F/1, I found it too soft to use, honestly, at anything above f/2.8. Yes, soft at f/1, but gorgeous. Does this help clarify my bad writing? Cheers, JB Interesting comment - I have not had that issue with my f/1.0 Noctilux. With my copy, individual hairs on a subject's head are sharp at f/1.0 when coupled with my M-P 240 and monopod. I ave not experienced focus shift either and the f/1.0 is notorious for focus shift on digital M bodies. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted October 17, 2015 Share #26 Posted October 17, 2015 I love my f1, but I definitely agree that it is not very sharp wide open. I have a 50lux and now a 50Apo and "sharp" is used for what these lenses can do. In a more direct comparison, the .95 is quite a bit sharper than the f1. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted October 17, 2015 Share #27 Posted October 17, 2015 Advertisement (gone after registration) I love my f1, but I definitely agree that it is not very sharp wide open. I have a 50lux and now a 50Apo and "sharp" is used for what these lenses can do. In a more direct comparison, the .95 is quite a bit sharper than the f1. The f/1 just needs some postprocessing. This is a 1:1 crop, wide open, note that blue-fringing can also be easily removed but I didn't do it in this test: Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Berlinman Posted October 17, 2015 Share #28 Posted October 17, 2015 Very impressive! What did You do - only sharpening ?? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
CheshireCat Posted October 17, 2015 Share #29 Posted October 17, 2015 Very impressive! What did You do - only sharpening ?? It is described in this post: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/243817-noctilux-f1-with-back-focus-calibrate-or-not/?do=findComment&comment=2800788 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted October 19, 2015 Share #30 Posted October 19, 2015 The f/1 just needs some postprocessing. This is a 1:1 crop, wide open, note that blue-fringing can also be easily removed but I didn't do it in this test: Exactly. If the images a person is getting at f/1 are not sharp and camera movement is not the cause, it is more likely a processing issue than it is a problem with the lens, at least in my experience. There's two kinds of processing: Ham-fisted processing, and discerning processing; the f/1 Noctilux requires a delicate touch to bring out its best in postprocessing. All that is required is a little experimentation and perseverance. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
helged Posted October 19, 2015 Share #31 Posted October 19, 2015 But isnt the beauty with Noct (and other lenses) their inherent characteristics? If sharpness or techical perfection is the target, 50APO is the tool. If dreaminess is the target, leave the lens properties as is. Overly sharpened Noct is not at top of my liking, but that is only me... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
colonel Posted October 20, 2015 Share #32 Posted October 20, 2015 When comparing the MTA curves of the Noctilux and the Summilux it seems that the Noctilux never achieves the Summilux's corner performance, especially under f8 I also saw a review where the MTA curves were separately tested and it showed the same, I will try and dig it up Anyhow the Noctilux is a superb lens for all uses, particularly its USP which is f1.2, f1 and f0.95. Its just if you want the best technical corner to corner performance for buildings and landscapes its pipped by the Summilux. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
indergaard Posted October 21, 2015 Share #33 Posted October 21, 2015 When comparing the MTA curves of the Noctilux and the Summilux it seems that the Noctilux never achieves the Summilux's corner performance, especially under f8 I also saw a review where the MTA curves were separately tested and it showed the same, I will try and dig it up Anyhow the Noctilux is a superb lens for all uses, particularly its USP which is f1.2, f1 and f0.95. Its just if you want the best technical corner to corner performance for buildings and landscapes its pipped by the Summilux. I can verify that. The Noct 0.95 has noticeably softer corners than the Lux 50 ASPH at any aperture. The Lux 50 ASPH is also noticeably sharper in the center at f/1.4 and f/2. The Noct 0.95 has noticeably less vignetting at f/1.4 and f/2 compared to the Lux 50 ASPH, which is the only advantage it has over the Lux besides the extra stop. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
thighslapper Posted October 21, 2015 Share #34 Posted October 21, 2015 As I cannot recall ever placing the subject of any of my photos in any of the corners I find this sort of nit-picking amusing and perplexing. No doubt the habitual brick wall photographer may have cause for concern ( I suspect there is a breed out there who only take test pictures of brick walls and never use their cameras for anything else) .... but not me. Like Thorsten Overgaard says/does..... if you buy a 0.95 aperture lens you do so to use it at 0.95.... otherwise you are daft to spend money on it ...... and then who cares what it does at f8 compared to the 50/1.4. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Herr Barnack Posted October 21, 2015 Share #35 Posted October 21, 2015 But isnt the beauty with Noct (and other lenses) their inherent characteristics? If sharpness or techical perfection is the target, 50APO is the tool. If dreaminess is the target, leave the lens properties as is. Overly sharpened Noct is not at top of my liking, but that is only me... That's exactly why I am keeping my f/1 Noctilux instead of replacing it with either a 50/1.4 ASPH, 50/0.95 ASPH or the 50/2 APO. The f/1 Noctilux is about the fingerprint of the lens as a whole, not about sharpness that causes your eyes to bleed. With the right processing, the f/1 Nocti is sharp over much if not most of the lens' field of view, even at f/1; not in the corners, but that is not where I put my primary subject matter to begin with. If I need more sharpness than f/1 offers, it's there for the asking at f/4, f/5.6 or f/8. The f/1 Nocti is not for everyone, but it is a truly wonderful lens with adequate sharpness for most applications in my view. Some people are hooked on hyper-sharpness - that is their thing. Some like bokeh. As the redoubtable Henri Cartier-Bresson always used to say, "horses for courses." Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jan1985 Posted October 21, 2015 Share #36 Posted October 21, 2015 I just have the Noctilux 0.95 since April this year. Most of the time I shot it with the M9 and since some weeks with the M Monochrom. I used the Noctilux on a lot of wedding trough the summer. Most of the time i only used this one lens and shot it also mostly @0.95 (except group shots with more people or when the situation afford a bigger DOF!). The results were always stunning. Sure you do not always hit the focus. But these are not the pictures you will present your clients ;-) What i also loved is capturing moments with the Nocitlux and the Monochrom. It gives such a special feeling to a situation, especially for moments on weddings. So all in all i can say, the Noctilux can be used as an daily life lens in a lot of situations. BUT you must be fascinated by this lens and have the passion to shoot it. It is not about sharpness or something like that. For this the Noctilux was never desgined and everyone expecting a lens in technical way misunderstood the concept and intention of this design. To Hit Focus is only practice with the 0.95 and can be easier with a viewfinder magnifier. Since some weeks i have also the 50mm APO Summicron. This lens is amazing. I was excited which one i will use more. Sure at first time i only sticked the APO on my Monochrom or M9.... During the time it is very balanced. At commercial portrait shootings i use the Noctilux on the M9 and the APO on the MM. The APO is also very good on the M9 and delivers the best colors i have ever seen. But the APO is made for the Monochrom and creates medium format like look. Unbeatable combo. So everyone who has fascination for the noctilux, buy it. But if wide open shooting and thin DOF are not your case then better buy the Lux or 50 APO... To get a bit more knowledge and fascination i can recommend thorsten overgaards article about the Noctilux: http://www.overgaard.dk/leica-50mm-Noctilux-M-ASPH-f-095.html Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
BerndReini Posted October 22, 2015 Share #37 Posted October 22, 2015 I own the Noctilux f1 and I use it, and yes I do sharpen the images in post because it is soft wide open. I am not saying that this cannot be managed in post-production, but removing purple fringing in post and sharpening an image from a lens that isn't sharp will never achieve the same results as using a better corrected lens. Fact: the .95 is a lens that is better corrected. I still choose the f1 over it for its character. However, the f1 will never give you the same results as a summilux aspherical let alone a 50Apo, so I am pointing out the shortcomings to give the OP a good idea what to expect. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
leitztozeiss Posted November 1, 2015 Share #38 Posted November 1, 2015 Totally different lenses. The f/1 has blue fringing; the f/0.95 has a more annoying purple fringing. The f/1 has huge focus shift; the f/0.95 is ok. The f/1 is compact and light; the f/0.95 is not. The f/1 is sharp enough with proper postprocessing; the f/0.95 is sharp enough without. The f/1 always surprises me for its rendering character and dreamy look; the f/0.95 maximizes technical rather than artistic qualities. Oh, and no one buys a Noctilux for low-light in 2015. You buy a Noctilux for the character. If you buy a Noctilux for the character, you buy the f/1. This helps - thank you Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.