I took the Noctilux 0.95 plunge

[Belle123]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

After experimenting with a lot of 50's I decided to slim down to one, a late pre ASPH Summilux. Then I looked at a few old shots from my f1 Noctilux and quickly went back to the shop who was selling it for me and took it back

I've loved it even more ever since, it's fat and heavy but not too long and I use it mostly indoors and at night (usually indoors) so not a problem really

I have the F1 as well. Love it! It is a bit hefty in weight. But not a problem with a good strap to spread the weight and wearing cross ways. I find no problem on a good long hike. The bokeh is worth it .

[Advertisement]

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

[Theodor Heinrichsohn]

I have lusted after the personality of the Noctilux for a long time, so I decided to put all of my overtime checks in one place, and just took deliver of the 0.95 from my local store. I LOVE it. I will keep this on my 240 and put the 50mm 1.4 on my mm. I seldom shoot with other focal lengths. I will also use my two oufro rings with it for "macro". I know there are many of you who think it is an unnecessary luxury, that it is heavy, bulky, but I know it is the lens for me. By the way, I am only 5'1", size 6 hands, and it nestles quite nicely in my hands. At one time I backpacked with my Hasselblad 500cm and two lenses and all of that film, so this is much nicer.

 

I only have a couple of test shots, my knitting, and my dog, haven't been "out" with it, still working lots of OT. These are crops, straight from the camera, and attached via my iPad only.

 

Oh, yes, my husband was the one who suggested I buy the lens with my OT checks! My daughter commented she would rather inherit my camera system over jewelry any day!

Kaethe

 

Congratulations! I have all 3 versions of the Noctilux and each one of them is special and not easy to use.

When you are skillful enough or even merely lucky, some of the images are magic. I particularly recall the

results of some shots with the 1.2 in Tibet in dark temples, with only butter lamps lighting the interior.

At that time I used Kodachrome 25 and 64. Some pictures were magic, others were just pictures.

 

the 0.95 seems to be a different beast. Since I am using a M240 and an SL, it is probably impossible to

make a valid comparison with Kodachromes. Nevertheless, the 0.95 has similar "taste" wide open but is

more like a modern Summilux 1.4 asph than the older Noctiluxes.

 

I have had the best results in low light with rich colors. For me it unfortunately more hit and miss to get

the special look rather than a definite system and a plan. Digital is advantageous, because you can afford to

take any amount of pictures inn a particular situation and pick the ones that are to you taste.

 

In all cases I am talking about results at full opening focusing on the important part, regardless of whether

it is closer or further away.

 

Teddy