Jump to content

Show us your Noctilux wide open shots


budjames

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Technical question for the group.  I have used the F1 and 0.95.  I loved them both, but found they were very big to carry around (so settled on my 50APO).  I am intrigued by the 1.2.  However, I have heard a lot of people say it is too soft and even softer than the F1.  When I look at the MTF of the 1.2 and 1, the 1.2 seems to outperform, and yet that is not coming through in the experiences of people posting on the forum that say the opposite.

Does anyone have any insight into this?  Are the two lenses appreciably different in sharpness in the focal plane wide open?

I loved the F1, but the 1.2 seems like a more useable lens (smaller, no appreciable focus shift, 16 blades).

Any help would be.... well... helpful.

Link to post
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, Drmat said:

Any help would be.... well... helpful.

I used the f1 v4 with M10M, M240 & M7 but in the end I found weight and size compromised my enjoyment of the lens.  After quite a period of cogitation I took the plunge and part-ex'd it against a new f1.2 and have absolutely no regrets.  Using it on the M10M, M240 (and latterly M11) I have found the handling to be such that I have used it as a walk-about lens for a broad range of subjects, unlike the f1 where I tended to limit use to specific subjects.  Sharpness? Resolution?  Am not a pixel-peeper but the results speak for themselves (for me anyway!).  If it is of any use, numerous examples are here in an album on my Flickr page.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

The 50 APO and f1.2 are a great combination. Those are the 50's I have at the moment (although I'm seriously contemplating adding the 0.95 if I can find a nice one secondhand at a good price).

I love my f1.2, but there are several reasons why I wouldn't want it to be my only 50. First, it is soft wide open. Second, there is a lot of vignetting. This will be especially apparent if you're shooting a bright scene.

The photo below, which I shot wide open, is a good example of both. Click through for hi-res and zoom in a bit. Vignetting speaks for itself. Re sharpness, look at the third tier from the top of the pyramid. This is where I was focusing. Move from the center of the frame towards the sides. See how quickly the sharpness drops off. In the middle of the frame, the image is pretty sharp really. That quickly becomes not the case. This will by necessity change the way you compose, or you'll learn to be ok with a soft subject when not centered in the frame. Of course if you're only viewing your images in lower resolution or on a smaller screen the softness will not be as apparent. 

I love mine, but the lens has such a pronounced character that it would be a bit boring to shoot with all the time. That character does impact the lens I grab when I'm only bringing my camera and a single lens out for the day/night. Unless I plan to stop down (which I'm not opposed to doing but I shoot in low light a lot), do I want all my shots from that day to look like an acid trip? If I'm just going for a walk and hoping to catch some candids then sure, but if I'm actually doing something interesting--ehhh then I think twice. 

 

Edited by Jeremy Bunting
  • Like 5
Link to post
Share on other sites

or this with the 0.95 of the M10M

 

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!

  • Like 18
Link to post
Share on other sites

Noctilux 1.2

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!

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

The 50 1.2 is part of the vintage lens set. wide open there is a little circle in the middle of the frame a little in focus and rapidly going out of focus on the sides.

It get quite good when you are at 2.8, but it is not why you buy this lens for.

Alternative size would Voigtlander 50 1.0, almost the same size. the response is more like the 0.95. But I did have issue focusing at minimal distance, I don't think the rangefinder was not matching up at 1m. The Noctilux 0.95 at 1m works fine

Link to post
Share on other sites

vor 13 Stunden schrieb a5m:

Not wide open right? If so that's impressive.

Is at open aperture 1.2, on the M11, JPEG, sharpness +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!

  • Like 8
Link to post
Share on other sites

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!

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

75 Nocti, SL2

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!

  • Like 17
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Am 15.2.2023 um 12:42 schrieb Drmat:

Technical question for the group.  I have used the F1 and 0.95.  I loved them both, but found they were very big to carry around (so settled on my 50APO).  I am intrigued by the 1.2.  However, I have heard a lot of people say it is too soft and even softer than the F1.  When I look at the MTF of the 1.2 and 1, the 1.2 seems to outperform, and yet that is not coming through in the experiences of people posting on the forum that say the opposite.

Does anyone have any insight into this?  Are the two lenses appreciably different in sharpness in the focal plane wide open?

I loved the F1, but the 1.2 seems like a more useable lens (smaller, no appreciable focus shift, 16 blades).

Any help would be.... well... helpful.

I’ve rented both right now, since I sold my f1 last year and regretted it. 
 

The f1.2 copy I have here is definitely sharper than the f1, has also better colors and less CA. They are pretty much the same in terms of flares. 
 

I still can’t decide which one to buy, since my love for the f1 is huge. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Noctilux 0.95 w Hasselblad X1D II

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!

  • Like 7
Link to post
Share on other sites

Am 1.6.2019 um 00:24 schrieb Peter Kilmister:

@Chaemono Please don't take my comments as a personal criticism.

Charlie Waite is one of the best landscape photographers and uses lenses with closed aperture rather than wide open. The human eye operates in a similar way. When light is good enough one's eye pupils close to expand the depth of field and allow us to see much more in focus. The Noctilux has such a tiny depth of field when used wide open that it contradicts that natural reaction. I tried using a Noctilux for landscape work and sold it. It was a waste of time. Also carrying 700 grams plus the weight of the camera and trudging around fields was tiresome. It was my least favourite lens. My favourite is the 50mm APO Summicron. My wife agrees so it must be true! 😉

I can see the point of using a heavyweight lens with narrow DOF in a studio for portraiture. There is probably no better tool when mounted on a tripod.

Everyone is welcome to their opinion and to try out things for themselves. I just expressed my personal opinion. You could probably have taken that shot with any lens for it to be more natural. Please don't let me stop your creativity.

Slightly off topic, I was told by a Leica fan about an amazing pair of Nocti binoculars. I asked what was the point. He said enthusiastically that I could see birds clearer in the dark. I replied that birds roost as soon as the sun goes down. Maybe he lives where there are street lights? We don't have those unsustainable things in this beautiful area. Each to their own.

Sophisticated argumentation, Mr. Kilmister.

I think, there is also the other side of the medal:

By using lenses like the Noctiluxes the photographer has the possibility to expand the seeing in a non physiological way, which gives him the opportunity to give pictures a somekind "metaphysic experience"

The optical characteristics of these lenses, intentional computed for "seeing in the dark" is abused to evocate a certain mood in the picture.

The use of those lenses  even in lansdcape photography can give the viewer an abstract impression- like a painted picture of an impressionistic motivated artist:)

I understand the love for the Noctilux lenses- giving us a multifaceted picture of the world around us...

Regards,

Philip

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

Please click for higher-res version.

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!

50mm Noctilux f1.2 Re-Issue, M11

Edited by Keith (M)
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Who said, you can’t shoot landscapes @ f/1.2 😉

50mm f/1.2 Noctilux Re-issue

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!

Link to post
Share on other sites

On 2/16/2023 at 1:51 AM, Jeremy Bunting said:

The 50 APO and f1.2 are a great combination. Those are the 50's I have at the moment (although I'm seriously contemplating adding the 0.95 if I can find a nice one secondhand at a good price).

I love my f1.2, but there are several reasons why I wouldn't want it to be my only 50. First, it is soft wide open. Second, there is a lot of vignetting. This will be especially apparent if you're shooting a bright scene.

The photo below, which I shot wide open, is a good example of both. Click through for hi-res and zoom in a bit. Vignetting speaks for itself. Re sharpness, look at the third tier from the top of the pyramid. This is where I was focusing. Move from the center of the frame towards the sides. See how quickly the sharpness drops off. In the middle of the frame, the image is pretty sharp really. That quickly becomes not the case. This will by necessity change the way you compose, or you'll learn to be ok with a soft subject when not centered in the frame. Of course if you're only viewing your images in lower resolution or on a smaller screen the softness will not be as apparent. 

I love mine, but the lens has such a pronounced character that it would be a bit boring to shoot with all the time. That character does impact the lens I grab when I'm only bringing my camera and a single lens out for the day/night. Unless I plan to stop down (which I'm not opposed to doing but I shoot in low light a lot), do I want all my shots from that day to look like an acid trip? If I'm just going for a walk and hoping to catch some candids then sure, but if I'm actually doing something interesting--ehhh then I think twice. 

 

And sometimes the distortion can be frustrating when shooting on films.. that’s my take, other than that was a wonderful noctilux lens for travel lights

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...