A few thoughts on the f0.95 Noctilux

[mdg1371]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I finally caved in and bought a mint in the box Noctilux f0.95 back in October. I've owned 2 of the f1 versions over the years, and  still also have a 75mm Summilux- but I really wanted to try the new version, as I was never all that happy with the f1 versions.

 

After a couple months of use, it is my considered opinion that the f0.95 version functions as at least 3 distinct lenses, in much the same way a lot of the Mandler designs seem to function in 2 different ways depending on the aperture selected.

 

At f0.95, the Noctilux produces a completely unique signature. I had read that it is just as "sharp" as the 50mm Summilux ASPH in the center, and this absolutely does not hold true. It has a higher degree of resolution than I expected, certainly higher than the previous version, and higher than the 75mm Summilux, but there is still pronounced "glow", which affects small detail as well as the edges of large objects. Still, this contributes, along with the substantial vignetting, to the signature of the lens wide open. Wide open, the signature is so unique, it is impossible (at my level of skill) to create the look with another lens, and post processing-- you can get close, but you just cannot duplicate it. Conversely, shots made with the Noctilux wide open also cannot be post processed to the point it would have the acutance  or edge contrast you would see with another lens-- the "glow" is impossible to remove in post.

 

At f1.2, there is a substantial change in the image-- detail cleans up considerably, the "glow" is greatly reduced, and the lens functions as the best super speed lens I have ever used. The vignetting is also reduced. Interestingly, there is a very visible change in the out of focus rendering-- not in the signature, but the degree of blur-- normally stopping down 1/2 stop doesn't cause all that much change in the degree of background blur, but from 0.95 to 1.2, it seems to jump more than expected.

 

At f1.4, the Noctilux starts to render contrast, etc like the 50mm Summilux ASPH, and from f1.4 or f2 (depending on your scrutiny), it functions as an excellent 50mm.

 

Additionally, for me, the most unique wide open rendering from this lens comes at middle distance shots-- images display a subject/background separation that is unlike any other lens, including other super speed 50s.

 

After using the lens for a couple months, and getting over the initial dissatisfaction with the acutance at f0.95-- my expectations were the untempered results of reading too many online reviews-- I am loving the lens as a 50mm f1.2 super speed lens, which additionally has a f0.95 setting for a totally different look.

 

I have also found that, properly calibrated, my focus success rate is just about the same whether using the EVF or the rangefinders in my M240 and M246, which has been a bit of a surprise.

 

Attached is a snapshot (with no artistic value) and a couple crops to illustrate the glow wide open and a shot at f1.2

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!

Edited December 30, 2015 by mdg1371

[otto.f]

Thank you very much for this extensive and credible report

[Advertisement]

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

[Sam]

Enjoyed your review and agree with much of what you say. I shoot mine wide open nearly all of the time, and stopped down it's pretty much like my 50 ASPH.

One thing I've noticed is when posting on Facebook, I've gotten a lot of comments on casual portrait and travel photos with people asking me how I get such unique effects and 3D quality. Photographers figure it out, but people who aren't photographers have been fascinated with my Noctilux photos. So the lens' signature is noticed by non-photographers, which is pretty cool.

If you're a pixel peeping sharpness geek like I've been guilty of, this lens could ruin your day. The Noctilux is more about art and less about perfection. Once I got in the zone with it and learn to embrace its unique character, it quickly became one of my favorite (if not THE favorite) piece of photo gear I own. The thing is just bloody fun to shoot!

I've used mine with the EVF but will do some tests with the rangefinder to see how I do. The EVF is horribly slow, but I know my focus is dead-on with it.

[mdg1371]

I've used mine with the EVF but will do some tests with the rangefinder to see how I do. The EVF is horribly slow, but I know my focus is dead-on with it.

 

Its the shutter lag, and extended blackout with the EVF that makes me cringe. I was surprised at how accurate a well calibrated RF can be at 0.95, and I almost never use the EVF with the Noct. anymore.

 

That said, Im hoping for a much better EVF with the next M, hopefully later this year.

[Jan1985]

I finally caved in and bought a mint in the box Noctilux f0.95 back in October. I've owned 2 of the f1 versions over the years, and  still also have a 75mm Summilux- but I really wanted to try the new version, as I was never all that happy with the f1 versions.

 

After a couple months of use, it is my considered opinion that the f0.95 version functions as at least 3 distinct lenses, in much the same way a lot of the Mandler designs seem to function in 2 different ways depending on the aperture selected.

 

At f0.95, the Noctilux produces a completely unique signature. I had read that it is just as "sharp" as the 50mm Summilux ASPH in the center, and this absolutely does not hold true. It has a higher degree of resolution than I expected, certainly higher than the previous version, and higher than the 75mm Summilux, but there is still pronounced "glow", which affects small detail as well as the edges of large objects. Still, this contributes, along with the substantial vignetting, to the signature of the lens wide open. Wide open, the signature is so unique, it is impossible (at my level of skill) to create the look with another lens, and post processing-- you can get close, but you just cannot duplicate it. Conversely, shots made with the Noctilux wide open also cannot be post processed to the point it would have the acutance  or edge contrast you would see with another lens-- the "glow" is impossible to remove in post.

 

At f1.2, there is a substantial change in the image-- detail cleans up considerably, the "glow" is greatly reduced, and the lens functions as the best super speed lens I have ever used. The vignetting is also reduced. Interestingly, there is a very visible change in the out of focus rendering-- not in the signature, but the degree of blur-- normally stopping down 1/2 stop doesn't cause all that much change in the degree of background blur, but from 0.95 to 1.2, it seems to jump more than expected.

 

At f1.4, the Noctilux starts to render contrast, etc like the 50mm Summilux ASPH, and from f1.4 or f2 (depending on your scrutiny), it functions as an excellent 50mm.

 

Additionally, for me, the most unique wide open rendering from this lens comes at middle distance shots-- images display a subject/background separation that is unlike any other lens, including other super speed 50s.

 

After using the lens for a couple months, and getting over the initial dissatisfaction with the acutance at f0.95-- my expectations were the untempered results of reading too many online reviews-- I am loving the lens as a 50mm f1.2 super speed lens, which additionally has a f0.95 setting for a totally different look.

 

I have also found that, properly calibrated, my focus success rate is just about the same whether using the EVF or the rangefinders in my M240 and M246, which has been a bit of a surprise.

 

Attached is a snapshot (with no artistic value) and a couple crops to illustrate the glow wide open and a shot at f1.2

 

Very nice written. I am also one of that who loves the Noctilux and intensively uses it for just nearly everything. I shoot weddings, commercial portrait work and also fashion shootings. it is very unique. some say that you hide some missing skills with such a lens and always use the "effect". but for me it is more the characteristic of it and to know how to use it and in which situations. thank you for your viewpoint.

 

 

Enjoyed your review and agree with much of what you say. I shoot mine wide open nearly all of the time, and stopped down it's pretty much like my 50 ASPH.

 

One thing I've noticed is when posting on Facebook, I've gotten a lot of comments on casual portrait and travel photos with people asking me how I get such unique effects and 3D quality. Photographers figure it out, but people who aren't photographers have been fascinated with my Noctilux photos. So the lens' signature is noticed by non-photographers, which is pretty cool.

 

If you're a pixel peeping sharpness geek like I've been guilty of, this lens could ruin your day. The Noctilux is more about art and less about perfection. Once I got in the zone with it and learn to embrace its unique character, it quickly became one of my favorite (if not THE favorite) piece of photo gear I own. The thing is just bloody fun to shoot!

 

I've used mine with the EVF but will do some tests with the rangefinder to see how I do. The EVF is horribly slow, but I know my focus is dead-on with it.

 

How is your feeling when you get asked how you make this look? Does it make you proud that you created something unique or do you feel a bit strange? I ask because i sometimes think that the Noctilux does more than i can formyself. Even i love the Noctilux. And that is sometimes reason for critics that it is too much "effect"... but i love it and will strictly use it in the future.

[Sam]

Very nice written. I am also one of that who loves the Noctilux and intensively uses it for just nearly everything. I shoot weddings, commercial portrait work and also fashion shootings. it is very unique. some say that you hide some missing skills with such a lens and always use the "effect". but for me it is more the characteristic of it and to know how to use it and in which situations. thank you for your viewpoint.

 

 

 

How is your feeling when you get asked how you make this look? Does it make you proud that you created something unique or do you feel a bit strange? I ask because i sometimes think that the Noctilux does more than i can formyself. Even i love the Noctilux. And that is sometimes reason for critics that it is too much "effect"... but i love it and will strictly use it in the future.

 

I have no special feelings other than I'm happy someone likes a photo. As for critics, I'm not upset if someone doesn't like a particular style or look to a photo. To each his own.

[jev]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I shoot extensively with Noctilux

I think it's a bit incorrect photo to compare how sharp is Noctilux wide open, usually you want to either isolate subject (portrait, etc) or shoot wide open at night, dusk, etc. I also used previous version 1.0 and 1.2 those "glow" extensively wide open, f 0.95 version is very sharp if you nail focus correctly. 

[Jan1985]

I shoot extensively with Noctilux

I think it's a bit incorrect photo to compare how sharp is Noctilux wide open, usually you want to either isolate subject (portrait, etc) or shoot wide open at night, dusk, etc. I also used previous version 1.0 and 1.2 those "glow" extensively wide open, f 0.95 version is very sharp if you nail focus correctly. 

 

Yes it is sharp when you hit the focus. I think it is not only the art to nail the focus with this lens... i shot it a whole wedding season... important is to know what you want to do and how to set this noctilux look in the right situation... everybody who only see sharpness and resolution as one thing didnt get the idea of the noctilux... best is to read the noctilux article of Thorsten Overgaard... he gives the right view on this piece of glass. 

 

http://www.overgaard.dk/leica-50mm-Noctilux-M-ASPH-f-095.html

[Jon Pop]

Really good post and analysis - goes into whats relevant to actual photography vs. a lot of technical aspects which, while entertaining for endless debate, doesn't often contribute much when people argue for/against the Noctilux.  It's also nice to hear someone talk about the Noctilux's other characteristics. While obviously one buys this lens for its capacity at 0.95, I do find that shooting ONLY those classic Noctilux shots starts to make all photos look the same (unique rendering aside)...as in, I start noticing ONLY rendering and bokeh vs. composition and content, to a distraction.  So I appreciate the discussion of these other qualities too.  

 

For me, I've been tempted on several occasions but the weight even of my Summilux Asph with the 240 gets me down (my own bias); the weight and cost of the Nocti 0.95 has kept me away....but once in a while I still get tempted.....!! I find particularly at the exact right distance from the subject combined with a good composition/forms, the Noct signature makes for a 'pop' and quality unlike any other. 

[Berlinman]

I'm looking for a Nocti for s long time. It would by an addition to my 50Apo. The OP sounds brings the 0.95 back on my list, where I had the 1.0. The guys, who have used both: What would be the bedt partner for the Apo if you want the Nocti-Rendering ? I will use it 75% b&w with my M240 and M6. What is the difference of the glow ?

[Herr Barnack]

@mdg1371, thank you for this detailed post about the 0.95 Noctilux - you share some valuable insights and answer some questions that I have had about this lens.

 

I shoot with the last version of the f/1.0 Noctilux and have come to love this lens.  There are immaculate copies of the f/1.0 on the used market for half the cost of a new 0.95, if the asking price of the new Noctilux is a bridge too far.  I would encourage those who want a Noctilux to consider the older f/1.0 version if the 0.95 is out of reach money-wise.

 

Of course, the best scenario would be to have one of each; perhaps some year down the road, I will pursue that goal but for now I am extremely pleased with my f/1.0 Noctilux.  In terms of performance and rendering, it is worth its weight in gold. 

[mdg1371]

@mdg1371, thank you for this detailed post about the 0.95 Noctilux - you share some valuable insights and answer some questions that I have had about this lens.

 

I shoot with the last version of the f/1.0 Noctilux and have come to love this lens.  There are immaculate copies of the f/1.0 on the used market for half the cost of a new 0.95, if the asking price of the new Noctilux is a bridge too far.  I would encourage those who want a Noctilux to consider the older f/1.0 version if the 0.95 is out of reach money-wise.

 

Of course, the best scenario would be to have one of each; perhaps some year down the road, I will pursue that goal but for now I am extremely pleased with my f/1.0 Noctilux.  In terms of performance and rendering, it is worth its weight in gold. 

Thank you.

 

I've had two of the f1 version, and ultimately sold them because of the focus shift, the longer focus throw (which drove me crazy), and because they never quite provided enough bite at the plane of focus.

[mdg1371]

I'm looking for a Nocti for s long time. It would by an addition to my 50Apo. The OP sounds brings the 0.95 back on my list, where I had the 1.0. The guys, who have used both: What would be the bedt partner for the Apo if you want the Nocti-Rendering ? I will use it 75% b&w with my M240 and M6. What is the difference of the glow ?

 

I have the APO, the 50mm lux ASPH, and the Noct f0.95.

 

Ive found that around town I tend to carry either the APO or the Noct, and the ASPH tends to sit in the cabinet.

 

The Noct provides what I described above, the APO is just gorgeous in the way it picks up micro contrast, tiny detail, and is essentially even edge to edge. Additionally, it has nice bokeh, and the focus/contrast  falloff produces more subject/background separation than you would expect at f2.

 

BUT, I can't bring myself to sell the Lux ASPH, because it is such a perfect compromise between the other two-- So for travel, I can take the ASPH, 21mm SEM, and the 90mm Macro in a pretty small, light bag.

[Hayek]

In the hands of a Noctilux master like Messr. von Overgaard, the Noctilux sings like a finely-tuned Guarneri. But I possess neither the Zen nor the skill. It is also an unwieldy thing for an M body too. And maybe a € "bridge too far".

 

The APO does beckon but renders with a touch too much contrast for the Monochrome (it can be dialed back). The Summilux hits a sweet spot in between. Sumptuous, dreamy bokeh at 1.4 with a ND filter and dizzying resolution stopped down. It remains unclear to me whether the difference in resolving power between the two merits the prodigious cost differential.

 

Roger Cicala of lensrentals.com had the most succinct and brilliant observation on this quandary. "If the Noctilux is the girl you dream about, the Summilux is the girl you actually marry. More practical, and better at 1.4."

[pico]

One thing I keep in mind that some subjects are more susceptible to evincing sharpness (acutance) than others. When you nail a side view of a woman's face at 0.95 and can see peach fuzz, you have focused properly and acutance will be apparent. I've never seen that on this site. Frankly, I have seen no great focus at F 0.95 here. Perhaps it is our lousy screen resolution.

[Jan1985]

Anne-Katrin. by Jan Hartmann, auf Flickr

 

The Hidden Beauty. by Jan Hartmann, auf Flickr

 

Two examples out of my work with the Noctilux 0.95. I love this lens...

[Sam]

Here's a Noctilux 0.95 shot from me.

Guitar player in Florence.

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!

[Sam]

Florence, Italy by Sam Alfano, on Flickr

Another photographer was working with this couple but I couldn't resist stealing a shot.

[james.liam]

One thing I keep in mind that some subjects are more susceptible to evincing sharpness (acutance) than others. When you nail a side view of a woman's face at 0.95 and can see peach fuzz, you have focused properly and acutance will be apparent. I've never seen that on this site. Frankly, I have seen no great focus at F 0.95 here. Perhaps it is our lousy screen resolution.

 

 

I've rarely seen it in Thorsten's evocative images either, as artful as they and the lovely images above, are. The DOF can't be but a few millimetres in these portrait shots, and my eye is often drawn to seeking out the point of focus (?avocational hazard) and often finding none. Doubt the screen is to blame.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[mdg1371]

I've rarely seen it in Thorsten's evocative images either, as artful as they and the lovely images above, are. The DOF can't be but a few millimetres in these portrait shots, and my eye is often drawn to seeking out the point of focus (?avocational hazard) and often finding none. Doubt the screen is to blame.

 

Exactly why I shoot at f1.2 more often than f0.95.

The added contrast makes the point of focus jump out more.

Edited January 1, 2016 by mdg1371