Noctilux decisions!

[SMAL]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hey guys, I am a happy owner of a 50/1 Noctilux v3. I bought for a pretty good price, cause it has some wear but the optics are perfect.

 

My „problem“. I am eyeing on the 50/0.95! The reasons are the following. My 50/1 has a little stiffer focus between 1.20m - 1.50m. I am pretty sure a CLA will help, but it’s roughly 1000€ as far as I could find out.

 

The 50/0.95 has a little shorter focus throw which I would appreciate, but from all the examples I have seen so far it lacks the character I love from my F1. For me the F1 is plenty sharp, when one nails the focus.

 

I’ve read all threads regarding this topic in here.

 

I definitely don’t want to own both. That’s overkill in my opinion.

 

Has anyone in here both and could show some comparisons?

 

Any insights from your own experience would be greatly appreciated!

 

Thank you!

[Peter Kilmister]

Noctilux 0.95 has its fans. Their desire is mainly to use it wide open.

Please remember that Depth of Field is non-existent at 0.95.

If that is what you want, and you are happy to carry a lens that weighs more than the camera body and blocks the viewfinder, then spend your money on one.

 

I tried one, hated it, and sold it.

 

Everything in life has an upside and a downside. For me the downside was discovering how awful the much-rated Noctilux was to use. The upside was that I sold the Noctilux 0.95 and bought the APO Summicron which is a serious lens. It is small, light, and perfect.

 

Each to their own.

[farnz]

You might already have read what I've written about the two Noctiluxes (f/1 and f/0.95).  I've had the 50/1 for a few years and love its pastel colours, characteristic vignetting when used wide open, and its rendering of out of focus areas.  I managed to acquire a 50/0.95 at a reasonable price so I had both for about six months with the intention of comparing and keeping one.  

 

Ultimately the decision was easy for me.  The f/0.95 is an exceptional lens with excellent optics and very smooth to focus but its pictures lack the 'soul' of the f/1; to be clear, the f/0.95's pictures are superb but resemble those from my 50/1.4 Summilux asph.  I kept the f/1 and released the f/0.95 back into the wild and I've never missed it.  Of course YMMV.

 

Pete.

[IkarusJohn]

What are you using your f/1 on?

 

I use mine on a v1 Monochrom and SL. On a colour M digital, purple fringing can be an issue (particularly if you shoot wide open on a sunny day).

 

I tend to follow Peter Karbe’s advice to select aperture for depth of field. You will hear people say it has wafer thin depth of field. This is more than somewhat misleading - the 0.95 has very similar depth of field wide open to your f/1, and a greater depth of field than the 75 Summilux and the AA Summicron 90. I have never had a problem focussing the Noct or the 75 Summilux wide open, and the viewfinder obstruction isn’t really a problem if you move the camera (duh).

 

In terms of rending, wide open the 0.95 is soft, but the out of focus treatment is smooth, and not swirly like the f/1. It was the swirly bokeh and the focus shift that put me off the f/1.

 

Hope this helps.

[Adrian Lord]

If you have a good example of the f1 I’d strongly advise not to sell it. I love it for the qualities farnz says. Anal pixel peepers need not apply of course...

[SMAL]

Thank you guys. A lot of helpful advise. To answer a few questions.

 

I of course plan to use it wide open. Otherwise I could buy an Apo or Summilux.

 

I shoot mostly couples and portraits.

 

The focus shift isn’t a problem for me, cause I use it at F1 or F8 and mostly never in between. I enjoy the swirl and the sharpness is fine for me. I think people that say it’s soft barely nail focus. At the moment I am only annoyed by the sometimes slight stiff focus between 1,2-1,5m, cause it seems like a distance I use fairly often.

 

Farnz, have you maybe done some side by side comparisons with both lenses? This could maybe be really helpful. If not I feel like, I will need to do that by myself to get inner peace!

 

Adrian Lord, what would you consider a good copy?

Mine has great sign of use, but the optics are perfect. No fungus, no oil on the aperture blades, but the focus has a slight stiff point between 1,2-1,5m.

[farnz]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi, SMAL, 

 

I'm afraid not - despite being a professional Engineer I've never been drawn to comparing lenses side by side under 'controlled' conditions but prefer to do so subjectively.  To my mind there would be too many variables and microvariables* irrespective of how controlled the comparison, ultimately the person doing the comparison would inevitably apply a subjective judgement, and different people would draw different subjective judgements so I've never been persuaded to look for brick walls or other static subjects.

 

Pete.

*a new word that I felt needed inventing for this context.

[a.noctilux]

Thank you guys. A lot of helpful advise. To answer a few questions.

 

I of course plan to use it wide open. Otherwise I could buy an Apo or Summilux.

 

I shoot mostly couples and portraits.

 

The focus shift isn’t a problem for me, cause I use it at F1 or F8 and mostly never in between. I enjoy the swirl and the sharpness is fine for me. I think people that say it’s soft barely nail focus. At the moment I am only annoyed by the sometimes slight stiff focus between 1,2-1,5m, cause it seems like a distance I use fairly often.

 

Farnz, have you maybe done some side by side comparisons with both lenses? This could maybe be really helpful. If not I feel like, I will need to do that by myself to get inner peace!

 

Adrian Lord, what would you consider a good copy?

Mine has great sign of use, but the optics are perfect. No fungus, no oil on the aperture blades, but the focus has a slight stiff point between 1,2-1,5m.

 

SMAL

 

Answer only blue text.

 

Noctilux used at f/1 must be mechanical "perfect" to drive those heavy glasses, so not to have optical flaws/aberrations/decentring ?

If your copy is stiff, may it be that time for a "replacement" with a better shape copy or have it repaired.

 

Then after that ("better shape" or repaired f/1) , you may search for a f/0.95 to use it a while mainly to have peace of mind.

If you never use the f/0.95 (as other lenses ...), you can not say it suits your practice or not.

[evikne]

I also made a choice between the 0.95 and the 1.0. I ended up with the 1.0. The 0.95 is of course sharper and better controlled wide open. And I could very well like a more modern design and feel. But my f/1 is smaller and lighter, and the focus ring moves silky smooth, and that’s the most important thing. And I almost never use the aperture ring anyway. 

 

But the main thing is that I have actually never seen a single interesting picture that I remember and really loved which was taken with the 0.95. But I have seen tons of such pictures taken with the 1.0! So there is definitely "something" with that lens, even though I can’t really put my finger on it.

[Fedro]

I have the 0.95 and love it - rendering is similar to the 1.4, but only up to a point

 

Stepped down it has great sharpness and gorgeous colours

 

Weight does not bother me that much but doubt it will bother you either if you already have the F1 ..

[Herr Barnack]

I also made a choice between the 0.95 and the 1.0. I ended up with the 1.0. The 0.95 is of course sharper and better controlled wide open. And I could very well like a more modern design and feel. But my f/1 is smaller and lighter, and the focus ring moves silky smooth, and that’s the most important thing. And I almost never use the aperture ring anyway. 

 

But the main thing is that I have actually never seen a single interesting picture that I remember and really loved which was taken with the 0.95. But I have seen tons of such pictures taken with the 1.0! So there is definitely "something" with that lens, even though I can’t really put my finger on it.

 

@SMAL,

 

I would lean toward agreeing with the above sentiment. 

 

I have seen interesting images made with the 0.95 Noctilux - but to my eye, the rendering of the f/1.0 Noctilux is far better in terms of artistic qualities.  The out of focus (bokeh) areas of the f/1.0 are silky smooth where the out of focus areas of the 0.95 are visually harsh or jarring.  Again, that is based on my way of seeing, which may be just my personal visual and preferences.

 

 

 

 

 

...At the moment I am only annoyed by the sometimes slight stiff focus between 1,2-1,5m, cause it seems like a distance I use fairly often...

 

I acquired my F/1.0 Noctilux new in the box in August of 2008.  The focus was stiff then and it is still stiff. 

 

This is the way the Noctilux lens is intended to be.  Personally, I would not invest 1000€ in a CLA on the lens based solely on stiff focusing; this prevents focus ring creep and lessens or eliminates inadvertent de-focusing if your hand inadvertently brushes the focus ring while shooting.  As for the long focus throw, that feature was designed in to the lens to give the photographer the ability to focus more precisely.  Both are features that you want in a lens with very thin depth of focus at f/1.0. 

 

Why did Leica change these attributes in the 0.95?  Because some f/1.0 owners complained and Leica listened.  Whether this was an improvement is a matter of viewpoint. 

 

If it were me, I would keep the f/1.0 Noctilux; there is no other 50mm lens like it.  I would augment it with a 50/1.4 Summilux ASPH, which has a similar rendering to the 0.95 at f/1.4 and is several pounds lighter.  You will have more flexibility and more options at 50mm and you will save $7300 USD/6281€ in the process.

 

YMMV.

Edited September 29, 2018 by Herr Barnack

[SMAL]

@SMAL,

 

I would lean toward agreeing with the above sentiment.

 

I have seen interesting images made with the 0.95 Noctilux - but to my eye, the rendering of the f/1.0 Noctilux is far better in terms of artistic qualities. The out of focus (bokeh) areas of the f/1.0 are silky smooth where the out of focus areas of the 0.95 are visually harsh or jarring. Again, that is based on my way of seeing, which may be just my personal visual and preferences.

 

 

 

 

 

I acquired my F/1.0 Noctilux new in the box in August of 2008. The focus was stiff then and it is still stiff.

 

This is the way the Noctilux lens is intended to be. Personally, I would not invest 1000€ in a CLA on the lens based solely on stiff focusing; this prevents focus ring creep and lessens or eliminates inadvertent de-focusing if your hand inadvertently brushes the focus ring while shooting. As for the long focus throw, that feature was designed in to the lens to give the photographer the ability to focus more precisely. Both are features that you want in a lens with very thin depth of focus at f/1.0.

 

Why did Leica change these attributes in the 0.95? Because some f/1.0 owners complained and Leica listened. Whether this was an improvement is a matter of viewpoint.

 

If it were me, I would keep the f/1.0 Noctilux; there is no other 50mm lens like it. I would augment it with a 50/1.4 Summilux ASPH, which has a similar rendering to the 0.95 at f/1.4 and is several pounds lighter. You will have more flexibility and more options at 50mm and you will save $7300 USD/6281€ in the process.

 

YMMV.

Honestly, I owned a lot of old manual lenses in my 10 years of photography and I know what a long focus throw is designed for. There is no issue with that, but I will disagree with a stiff focus that is only stiff on a certain distance. Cause this does exactly the opposite of what it should do. Once I pass the focus point and try to micro adjust the focus back it is so stiff that I need too much force to be precise. That’s an issue and few years back, when my business wasn’t running so good a friend inherited a 50/1 V4 in perfect condition and it was buttery smooth. I sold it for him. If I had the funds back then I would have bought it.

[Adrian Lord]

@SMAL

 

Good copy = one with good optics and sharpness even at f1. They do vary,  I have had 2 copies  - the first was always soft no matter what and I sold it. The second, the one I have now, is easily as sharp as I could expect at f1, and in fact often surprises me in that regard. As for the barrel condition and cosmetics, I am not really bothered by that, because I am no collector, although it is also fine in that department too. 

[SMAL]

Ok, then I definitely have a good copy with slightly stiff focus. I will be in Porto on Monday and will hit the local Leica Store. I’ll test out the f0.95. Two weeks later I will be in Lisbon and guess what. I found a local gem. There is a really old workshop that is specialized in maintaining old photo gear especially german brands.

 

It’s called http://www.jacoelhodasilva.com

 

I wrote them an email and will see how they respond.

Edited September 29, 2018 by SMAL

[pico]

Regarding stiff focus I ask, what makes it stiff? If it is a lubricant issue it is likely to be worse in the very cold.  An associate has made a lot of photographs, indeed books, at both poles; specialized lubricants helped a lot. So what is Leica using; can it be replaced?

Edited September 29, 2018 by pico

[farnz]

... I will be in Porto on Monday and will hit the local Leica Store. ...

Paulo Silveira will take good care of you I feel sure.  Please give him my regards.  If you don't walk out with more than you expected to when you walked in I'll be surprised.

 

Pete. 

[Jeff S]

Regarding stiff focus I ask, what makes it stiff? If it is a lubricant issue it is likely to be worse in the very cold. An associate has made a lot of photographs, indeed books, at both poles; specialized lubricants helped a lot. So what is Leica using; can it be replaced?

Yes, grease can be replaced. But DAG uses a far more effective type than Leica NJ (can’t speak for Wetzlar). Don keeps a supply of the old Leitz grease, and perfectly fixed the stiff focus on my 50 Summilux ASPH, after Leica tried but said it couldn’t be improved. Took under a week and cost $90, including shipping.

 

Jeff

[pico]

Yes, grease can be replaced. But DAG uses a far more effective type than Leica NJ (can’t speak for Wetzlar). Don keeps a supply of the old Leitz grease, and perfectly fixed the stiff focus on my 50 Summilux ASPH, after Leica tried but said it couldn’t be improved. Took under a week and cost $90, including shipping.

 

Jeff

 

I wonder if he has 'old Leitz grease' or something better, perhaps rare such as Blackfish oil.

[Jeff S]

I wonder if he has 'old Leitz grease' or something better, perhaps rare such as Blackfish oil.

He told me directly, and says he stored a lot of it. I have no reason to believe otherwise; he’s an extremely candid guy.

 

Jeff

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[pico]

He told me directly, and says he stored a lot of it. I have no reason to believe otherwise; he’s an extremely candid guy.

 

Jeff

 

We do not not know what the lubricant is regardless of name brand. It could be Blackfish oil, a whale product.

Edited September 30, 2018 by pico