Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

What I really like about the Summilux stopped down is that whilst its very good indeed it never loses the 'smoothness' of a Mandler design - the fine detail is recorded very well but there is a subtlety about abrupt tonal transitions which is less brusque than say the 75mm Summicron and less severely 'clinical' - mind you we are talking subtleties here ;) . My guess is that the Noctilux will be more in line with the Summicron given that this is also a modern design from Karbe.

 

I do wish that people would stop associating the word 'clinical' with the 75 summicron - such a great lens (it's been my favourite for years). It has lovely gentle bokeh and soft roll off into it (unlike so many lenses). Sharp but gentle is what I'd say! I think it's got into the mindset of the Leica online people so much that it can't be got out!

 

Still, I guess that if 'artistic' means 'flawed - with respect to the 75 summilux - which I also love

Then 'Clinical' means 'not flawed!

 

All the  best

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Jono

 

I have both. The Summilux has a different look stopped down. Its certainly 'clinical' in comparison to the Summilux ;). Perhaps though we should describe it as a very 'precise' lens if you would prefer :) as it certainly produces exceptionally detailed files with all high contrast edges very distinct indeed (even in micro details). I like the description of 'smooth' for the Summilux because high contrast edges in micro detail are defined with the most marginal of softness which just smooths them pleasantly. Both have their place and I sometimes think its daft having two 75s but I don't want to part with either!

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Imo the Apo 75 Summicron combines 50% of the transparency of the 50ApoCron and 50% of the smoothness of the 50Lux in one lens.

Beautiful colors, smooth transition from sharp to oof areas.

 

So Jono, what more does the 75 Noctilux offer that you seriously consider buying it?

Do you think you have taken many pleasing photos with the 75 Noctilux wide open that would have resulted in a less pleasing way had you taken them with the Apo Summicron wide open?

Edited by anickpick
Link to post
Share on other sites

For most buying a current Porsche the 911 GT3 RS is too expensive, too specialized and frankly they wouldn't get out of the car what is available. The new Porsche 911 Carrera T at about 2/3 the price will be just fine.

Leica follows this path to some extent. Of currently available 75mm lenses the Summicron is 30% of the price and 40% of the weight of the Noctilux. As with the GT3, I appreciate that's it's available but I'll take the "T" or Summicron as it may be.

I hope that those who do buy the 75mm Noctilux will make interesting use of it. I'd like to see the lens pushed into situations where "only" it might make the picture.  I'm not sure what that would be. Photojournalism comes to mind but I find it unlikely any photojournalist on the planet is going to spring for this lens. Back in the day Eli Reed, Magnum and Larry Clark were both users of the 50mm Noctilux. 

Anyway, best of luck to those few who obtain this lens. It will be interesting.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I do wish that people would stop associating the word 'clinical' with the 75 summicron - such a great lens (it's been my favourite for years). It has lovely gentle bokeh and soft roll off into it (unlike so many lenses). Sharp but gentle is what I'd say! I think it's got into the mindset of the Leica online people so much that it can't be got out!

 

Still, I guess that if 'artistic' means 'flawed - with respect to the 75 summilux - which I also love

Then 'Clinical' means 'not flawed!

 

All the  best

 

As someone who has actually taken "clinical" photographs - visual documentation of medical subjects, in the O.R. or the studio (I was a hospital photographer in my youth) -

 

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Maja_Sukalo/publication/311320199/figure/fig28/AS:434858926317587@1480689855749/Figure-315-ACC-of-the-scalp-and-TTLD-of-the-hands-Clinical-photographs-of-three.jpg

 

- I'm always amused by the use of "clinical" to define the character of lenses. I first ran across it in Erwin Puts' review of the 24mm Elmarit-M ASPH. To me, in the original, truly clinical setting, it means "Just the facts, Ma'am," a maximum of information and a minimum of emotion, through simplified background and stark "revealing" lighting. Far more a characteristic of technique and intent than of the lens used.

 

I guess, with lenses, it is meant to suggest a similar starkness of rendition. But really, that again depends on the technique and vision of the photographer, not just the lens. Cartier-Bresson could do "stark" as well as anybody, even with Mandler (or pre-Mandler) lenses:

 

http://images.artnet.com/artwork_images_424158012_456647_henri-cartier-bresson.jpg

http://www.photography-now.com/images/Hauptbilder/gross/T82661.jpg

https://i.pinimg.com/736x/6c/ce/82/6cce82724aca7baab5d344bb70068174--henri-cartier-bresson-peking.jpg

 

The opposite of "stark" might be "pictorial" - in Leica terms, contrasting the 75 Summicron with the 90mm Thambar. "Pictorial photography" was all the rage 100-120 years ago,

 

http://monovisions.com/anne-brigman-pictorial-biography-landscape-nude-photographer/

 

- until Adams, Weston and the rest of the f/64 group rebelled, scraped down their "pictorial" glass negatives for reuse, and chose clarity and a "photographic" view of the world over trying to look like 19th-century paintings. The pictorialists believed photography could only be an art if it looked like "art" - after Group f/64, it was accepted that photography was its own art form, not dependent on the styles of the past. And indeed, even painting became more hard-edged and stark, post-WW2.

 

One can say that the modern ASPH Leica lenses tend to be more stark and revealing in their rendering, due to better coatings and corrections and more precise computer design. They "cut" a little harder. It takes a bit more work to get to "pictorial" using them. But this is the 21st century - who the heck wants to "look like" the 19th century? And what value is there in a "look" that anyone can buy and "paste onto" a subject? I prefer a stark rendering of a subject that itself actually contains emotional power, over an artificial "emotionality" applied with a dreamy lens or a Photoshop filter.

 

https://junebugweddings.com/img/photobug/june2010/best-of-2010-wedding-emotions-heather-elizabeth-photography-3.jpg

 

That being said, with the limited tonal range of slide film or prior digital sensors, I preferred the "intermediate starkness" of Mandler's c. 1980 designs. On those materials, the ASPHs were sometimes a bit harsh. I still find the Mandler lenses to be nice compromises. But I am also happily using the more modern lenses - now - with the improved DR of the CMOS Leicas.

  • Like 16
Link to post
Share on other sites

Imo the Apo 75 Summicron combines 50% of the transparency of the 50ApoCron and 50% of the smoothness of the 50Lux in one lens.

Beautiful colors, smooth transition from sharp to oof areas.

 

So Jono, what more does the 75 Noctilux offer that you seriously consider buying it?

Do you think you have taken many pleasing photos with the 75 Noctilux wide open that would have resulted in a less pleasing way had you taken them with the Apo Summicron wide open?

 

HI there

REALITY CHECK - you are quite right - and I have a loan of the 75 summilux as well. I should grow up!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like a really nice lens for the SL.

 

The shallow dof comments surely only apply to images in the 2 metre range. Images at 10 metres or so, shot wide open have a pleasing result with the 50 Noctilux, in my view. Like any interesting lens, it isn’t a one trick pony ...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I do wish that people would stop associating the word 'clinical' with the 75 summicron - such a great lens (it's been my favourite for years). It has lovely gentle bokeh and soft roll off into it (unlike so many lenses). Sharp but gentle is what I'd say! I think it's got into the mindset of the Leica online people so much that it can't be got out!

 

Still, I guess that if 'artistic' means 'flawed - with respect to the 75 summilux - which I also love

Then 'Clinical' means 'not flawed!

 

All the  best

 

 

 

I agree with your point about the 75mm Summicron. "Clinical" is in my opinion a fairly silly description for any lens, but if I understand what people mean by it, it's especially inappropriate for this one.

 

But by the same token, "artistic" doesn't mean "flawed".

 

Lenses can be flawed of course, and they all are one way or another since none is 100% perfect, but they can't be artistic. You can't point a lens at a subject and hope that the lens turns your photo into art.  It won't.

Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no standard nomenclature for describing the way a lens produces images so any terms applied have to be interpreted. Clinical, precise, flawed, soft, harsh and suchlike are not really terribly good terms but they do give impressions of the way a lens can render. If someone can come up with a defined set of alternatives then we can use them, but until that happens we are stuck with what we already use. 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Sterile -> without flaw, Clinical -> exact and unforgiving, would have been traits I have seen in the 75 APO Summicron.

I had it many years ago and at the time did not fully appreciate it, due to the crop factor on the M8.

 

However after deciding to jump back in with a M10, it was top of my list for a 21, 35 & 75 lens trio. 

Perhaps a little bit of an extravagant decision given the well regarded Summarit 75 2.4.

None the less the 75 Cron is a superb lens, pocketable & portable and does not leave me feeling I am missing anything.

Which in its self, as far as the Noctilux is concerned a blessing :D  

 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

There is no standard nomenclature for describing the way a lens produces images so any terms applied have to be interpreted. Clinical, precise, flawed, soft, harsh and suchlike are not really terribly good terms but they do give impressions of the way a lens can render. [...]

 

Other than resolution, image contrast, MTF which might be interesting to reconnaissance mavens and perfectionists  we have impressionism. That's everything to me.

Edited by pico
  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites

Two guys show up to a lifestyle-fashion shoot. One with the 75mm 1.25 on an SL and the other with a 105mm 1.4E Nikkor on a D850. Guess who is walking away with not only the most usable amount of shots but the best composed and focused shots?

 

I am also willing to bet that the 70 gram lighter 105mm 1.4E gives the 75 Nocti-bux a serious run for it's money in terms of optics, it is one of the best lenses I have used in any format by any maker. 

 

And in comparisson with the 7price 5 Noctilux, you'll get the body "for free"...

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

HI there

REALITY CHECK - you are quite right - and I have a loan of the 75 summilux as well. I should grow up!

 

 

Hmm, I cannot be right as it wasn't a rhetorical question...

 

And why the heck would you want to change your story?

Growing up seems like a very bad idea.

You are loved by the ones around you because of the way you are.

 

So please buy that lens and give us one of your fantastic reports  ;)

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I do wish that people would stop associating the word 'clinical' with the 75 summicron - such a great lens (it's been my favourite for years). It has lovely gentle bokeh and soft roll off into it (unlike so many lenses). Sharp but gentle is what I'd say! I think it's got into the mindset of the Leica online people so much that it can't be got out!

 

Still, I guess that if 'artistic' means 'flawed - with respect to the 75 summilux - which I also love

Then 'Clinical' means 'not flawed!

 

All the  best

 

Jono, I really would know if you think if the Noctilux at 2,0 is better, as in boké and sharpness,  than the summicron 75 at 2,0?

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...