Noctilux 50/1 v3 and v4

[Schittra]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

The local store has Noctilux 50/1 version 3 and 4. Cosmetically, the version 4 looks better so they price $1000 more expensive than v3, 20% more. Glass-wise, they look nearly the same. No fungus, some dust inside (very minimal). I tend to go for v4 because it’s newer, might have less problem on oil/grease on blade. Are there any optical or IQ different between v3 and v4? Thanks a lot. 

[chasdfg]

I believe they are the same. Coatings change over time though, if you compare them e.g. front elements, you may see some differences, unless that is a late v3 and an early v4 then maybe not. Some people claim the v4 has different colour rendering. You could shoot them side by side if the shop permits. 

The v1 (e58) and v4 seem to be pricier due to collectors. I have a v4 but to be honest I just wanted a noctilux f1 and on hindsight if any other version was on sale when I got mine I'd have/i should have picked up the other lens. I'm not meticulous enough to discern the differences. I agree cosmetically the v4 looks better than the v3, which looks like a hoodless v4 (if the v3 does not have a hood, that will cost a couple hundred and reduce the price difference). The v4 hood is not very useful though and doesn't lock into place. This said it is rather flare resistant.

[Advertisement]

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

[Schittra]

32 minutes ago, chasdfg said:

I believe they are the same. Coatings change over time though, if you compare them e.g. front elements, you may see some differences, unless that is a late v3 and an early v4 then maybe not. Some people claim the v4 has different colour rendering. You could shoot them side by side if the shop permits. 

The v1 (e58) and v4 seem to be pricier due to collectors. I have a v4 but to be honest I just wanted a noctilux f1 and on hindsight if any other version was on sale when I got mine I'd have/i should have picked up the other lens. I'm not meticulous enough to discern the differences. I agree cosmetically the v4 looks better than the v3, which looks like a hoodless v4 (if the v3 does not have a hood, that will cost a couple hundred and reduce the price difference). The v4 hood is not very useful though and doesn't lock into place. This said it is rather flare resistant.

Thanks. The hood of v4 look strange but it’s convenient to slip on and off. I have the clip on hood for 35 lux but with rectangle cover, it’s ok. Sorry for miscommunication. The cosmetic condition of v4 is better, less scratch.

[a5m]

The F1 is generally considered 'soft' wide open, so based on my experience I'd suggest you go with the one that's sharper wide open, which is where the magic lies. If it's where you intend to shoot it mostly, that'd take highest priority for me. The hood convenience of the v4 is a plus, but not enough to choose it over a sharper copy. I'd deal with slight inconvenience of attaching and detaching a hood, and personally I prefer the look of the previous versions.

 

If there's no difference I'd lean towards the v4 for the reasons stated above, plus it may be more desirable and/or collectible in the future.

[Schittra]

1 hour ago, a5m said:

The F1 is generally considered 'soft' wide open, so based on my experience I'd suggest you go with the one that's sharper wide open, which is where the magic lies. If it's where you intend to shoot it mostly, that'd take highest priority for me. The hood convenience of the v4 is a plus, but not enough to choose it over a sharper copy. I'd deal with slight inconvenience of attaching and detaching a hood, and personally I prefer the look of the previous versions.

 

If there's no difference I'd lean towards the v4 for the reasons stated above, plus it may be more desirable and/or collectible in the future.

Thanks for the input. That will be the testing tomorrow at wide open then, in addition to look at oil on blades, mechanical (focusing ring, aperture ring) and cosmetics. 

[a.noctilux]

Schittra, just take which one you feel better with.

In my view the first Noctilux 1.0 'version I' is the best in this same optical cell talking about mechanical/practical wise.

Very fewer or marginal finder blockage (less than the other but more than my LTM Canon 1.2/50) if used without hood (flare control is among the best in Noctilux), a bit less weight.

 

All in all, using it a while, if we are biting by Noctilux bug, the best in f1.0 M mount is definitely the E58 (' first f/1.0) that I use for decades.

Edited May 10, 2020 by a.noctilux

[Schittra]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

51 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Schittra, just take which one you feel better with.

In my view the first Noctilux 1.0 'version I' is the best in this same optical cell talking about mechanical/practical wise.

Very fewer or marginal finder blockage (less than the other but more than my LTM Canon 1.2/50) if used without hood (flare control is among the best in Noctilux), a bit less weight.

 

All in all, using it a while, if we are biting by Noctilux bug, the best in f1.0 M mount is definitely the E58 (' first f/1.0) that I use for decades.

Thanks! The cosmetic condition of v3 is not so bad. But the serial number shows the lens was made back in 1980. That 40 years old lens. 

[a.noctilux]

If the glasses are clean and well maintained (I hope), nothing to bother, it will be fine for some decades to come (if not more ! ).

I use some Leitz lenses made in 1930's so some decades older and those 5cm Summars give nice results as "new" 😉.

Those Summars have fragile soft glass reputations by "user/collectors", but in use I've not seen this "reputation".

 

I own two, this Summar 5cm was coated later after some decades of use "non-coated" I presume ...

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!

[Schittra]

I finally got the Noctilux! I went to the shop and spent nearly 2 hours (so difficult with the mask on). It's an appointment so it's only me there. The shop has 4 Noctilux 50/1.0 to choose from. Here are the details.

1. 50/1.0 version 2 (32x-xxxx, Yr 1981) - physical is not good. rear glass has slightly scratch. smooth focus ring and crystal clear.  15% cheaper than version 4. 
2. 50/1.0 version 3 (38x,xxx, Yr 1991) - best physical, clear marking number, no original hood but come with Leica hood and Leica 67mm lens cap. clear glass, only dust. Same price as version 2, which is 15% cheaper than version 4.
3. 50/1.0 version 4 (38x,xxxx, 1997) - 2nd best physical, tight hood, clear glass, no scratch, few dust.
4. 50/1.0 version 4 (39x,xxxx - 2002) - 3rd best physical, marking number has some fade, slightly lose hood, clear glass, no scratch, no dust (version 4 has similar price and 15% more expensive than version 2 and 3). If I would go for version 4, I will go for this one.

All lenses have nearly physical appearance. Version 2 has some scratches at the barrel, which is understandable for 40 years old lens. It's noticeable vignette comparing to version 3. I barely see vignette between version 3 and 4. Obviously, Version 4 is more consistency at different lighting from inside the shop, in front of the shop, car park, underground carpark. Vignette between version 3 and 4 are more visible outdoor and when taking silhouette. 

I like version 3 a lot. The hood is too big. But I can remove and get the lens cap 60mm instead - no problem. While I played around with v.3 and see no problem at all... until....Until I try close focus around 1.0-1.5 meters. The focusing ring is stiff as normal Noctilux but the barrel part next to the camera is slightly moving. Not visible but you can feel it. It happens across the focus range. The shop person tightens the 2 screws under barrel. Then the focusing ring couldn't move. He needed to loose it a little bit and it works. The loosing barrel still there but very minor. I moved the focusing ring around and found frictions at 1.2-1.5 meters. There must be something really wrong. The rattle focusing ring doesn't bother much and won't impact on IQ. But it will annoy me all the time. The friction/stiff between 1.2-1.5 meters will always be there 50% of my usage - since I like head+shoulder shot. 

After a couple of hour, I walked out with 50/1.0 v.4. Mechanically, it's the best among 4. Appearance is not the best - not even the 2nd best. The marking numbers start fading. The glass are free of fungus, free or scratch. I thought the dust in the lens but blow it off and cannot really tell where the dust is. While I am not a big fan of sliding hood (with no lock), I see it's quite unique of the Noctilux - and only in v.4.

Last but not least, 2002 is the year when I got married Easy to remember how many years I have been married by remembering the age of this Noctilux (but I should tell my wife another way around).

Thank you for all friendly response. The quest for Noctilux was started back in 2007. I couldn't believe it took me 13 years to accomplish the mission (and with the version that I always remember it's the Noctilux).

[a.noctilux]

Thanks for this detailed "choices" of Noctiluxes 1.0 👌.

- my comment is you had "lost" or "gained" 13 years 😁

- now you don't have excuses not to use it

 

...

- maybe after using it a while, the honeymoon would fade away ( I don't hope so ),

in that case you would say you "have had" Noctilux 1.0

- maybe you would look after the version "E58" , who knows 

 

[Schittra]

41 minutes ago, a.noctilux said:

Thanks for this detailed "choices" of Noctiluxes 1.0 👌.

- my comment is you had "lost" or "gained" 13 years 😁

- now you don't have excuses not to use it

 

...

- maybe after using it a while, the honeymoon would fade away ( I don't hope so ),

in that case you would say you "have had" Noctilux 1.0

- maybe you would look after the version "E58" , who knows 

 

Thanks! Some lenses have characters. Most lenses don't.  I have had tried over 100 lenses in my last 30 years. I always remember the Zeiss Planar 50/1.4 on Contax RX and Summilux 50/1.4 on M. Interesting though, I got the Planar 50/1.4 autofocus with A7 - but I don't recall the character I had before. Starting from last year, I had 35/1.4 FLE and start to get along well with it. I don't like 35mm focal length but Lux35 FLE gives me many good memory shots. 

Looking forward to try Noct 50/1.0 with my SL or M10 this weekend - still lock down though.

[ardbeg]

On 5/9/2020 at 11:07 PM, chasdfg said:

The v1 (e58) and v4 seem to be pricier due to collectors. I have a v4 but to be honest I just wanted a noctilux f1 and on hindsight if any other version was on sale when I got mine I'd have/i should have picked up the other lens. I'm not meticulous enough to discern the differences. I agree cosmetically the v4 looks better than the v3, which looks like a hoodless v4 (if the v3 does not have a hood, that will cost a couple hundred and reduce the price difference). The v4 hood is not very useful though and doesn't lock into place. This said it is rather flare resistant.

Out of curiosity, while I understand the collectibility of the v1 e58, what about the v4 makes that model more desirable to collectors compared to the v2 and v3?

[setuporg]

Great overview of the options for Noct 1.0!  I like Overgaard's page about all the M 50mm Noctiluxes, since he's probably the most famous for shooting them wide open:

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

What struck me, @a.noctilux, is that the 58mm seems to have impacted corners with filters, hence all the subsequent ones were 60mm.  Thus I'd personally stay away from 58mm, not covet it if true!  Overgaard recommends the 1980s 60mm bayonet shade version, I'm assuming that's the II as the III had a clip-on shade...  I wonder what advantages the v4 has because of being the last one, the newest, though.  The example of older ones going out of alignment for focusing (tight/rattle focus ring) is informative.

What's also really interesting to me is that Overgaard argues that the 0.95 supersedes the 1.0 in all respects, and the 1.0 has no special look different from 0.95, the 0.95 has the same but does it better.  OTOH, the M10M livestream from the Red Dot Forum guys mentioned that the 1.0 was not adjusted for blue light, targeting B+W, and seems to do have a unique look on a Monochrom.  Hence my new interest in the 1.0.  I already have the 0.95 for a few years and love it.  So I wonder if it makes any sense to try the 1.0 on a Monochrom...

Edited May 13, 2020 by setuporg

[farnz]

15 minutes ago, setuporg said:

... Overgaard also argues that the 0.95 supersedes the 1.0 in all respects, and the 1.0 has no special look different from 0.95, the 0.95 has the same but does it better. ...

Thorsten is fully entitled to his opinion no matter how wrong it might be. 😊

I've been fortunate to own both at the same time and they're just different animals.  I kept the f/1.0 (v4).

Pete.

Edited May 13, 2020 by farnz

[setuporg]

Just now, farnz said:

Thorsten is fully entitled to his opinion no matter how wrong it might be.  

I've been fortunate to own both at the same time and they're just different animals.  I kept the f/1.0 (v4).

Thank you Pete, your answer is exactly why I'm here!  Now to find that great 1.0...:)

[Schittra]

10 hours ago, ardbeg said:

Out of curiosity, while I understand the collectibility of the v1 e58, what about the v4 makes that model more desirable to collectors compared to the v2 and v3?

Good question. I don't know though. I bought it for use. I want to collect lens and camera too. But I have limited knowledge. We can hear from expert here. I am interested to know too.

[chasdfg]

10 hours ago, ardbeg said:

Out of curiosity, while I understand the collectibility of the v1 e58, what about the v4 makes that model more desirable to collectors compared to the v2 and v3?

My thinking is E58 is the first f1 version and the only M lens that I know of with a 58mm filter thread (or at least the only Noctilux). Likewise the v4 is the last version (maybe most updated coatings?) and unique in that it has a built-in squareish hood. This said, I recall reading threads on how some then-new owners of the v4 hated the hood so much they removed them. For the last run of v4s, Leica sold them in a wooden box with a built-in dehumidifier. I suppose this adds to the whole "last Noctilux f1" charm and over time a cult was built, as what happens with many Leica lenses. I don't think it's solely on production numbers as I believe the v2 E60  was produced over the shortest span of time and in the smallest numbers.

@setuporg As for the differences between the 0.95 and f1, I think comparing photos on the web will tell you they are rather different. I'd put it as the 0.95 having similar DNA as the f1, but it is a lot more controlled...too controlled for me. I buy a Noctilux because I want it to scream Noctilux from the rooftops and the f1 is quite distinct in this respect. Most of the time I can tell an f1 picture (which f1 version, I have no clue) but with the 0.95, the 50mm Summilux ASPH gets really close (literally too, because it focuses closer), more so than the 50mm Summilux pre-ASPH to the f1. I suspect Thorsten favours more modern lenses and at the time of writing, the 0.95 gave him enough of the f1 but with a modern touch, so there's no point owning both. Also, the 0.95 is (was?) his workhorse lens, so the added sharpness may be a benefit. 

Thorsten and Red Dot Forum/Leica Store Miami have provided great Leica resources on the web for us, but I don't doubt part of the reason the former does it to promote his workshops and other Leica related gear he sells, and the latter to promote their store (they have a used f1 Noctilux for sale now btw). I've learnt a lot from them, they certainly didn't need to take that much time to produce such resources for the community and I would definitely point people to RDF's videos as a first port of call to learn about their cameras/the system. I have always learnt something new from their Red Dot Camera Talks. I digress. Nevertheless for myself, whether because I'm a cynic or otherwise, I bring along a tablespoon of salt before embarking on Thorsten'/RDF's articles or watching one of their videos.

[Schittra]

4 hours ago, setuporg said:

Great overview of the options for Noct 1.0!  I like Overgaard's page about all the M 50mm Noctiluxes, since he's probably the most famous for shooting them wide open:

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

What struck me, @a.noctilux, is that the 58mm seems to have impacted corners with filters, hence all the subsequent ones were 60mm.  Thus I'd personally stay away from 58mm, not covet it if true!  Overgaard recommends the 1980s 60mm bayonet shade version, I'm assuming that's the II as the III had a clip-on shade...  I wonder what advantages the v4 has because of being the last one, the newest, though.  The example of older ones going out of alignment for focusing (tight/rattle focus ring) is informative.

What's also really interesting to me is that Overgaard argues that the 0.95 supersedes the 1.0 in all respects, and the 1.0 has no special look different from 0.95, the 0.95 has the same but does it better.  OTOH, the M10M livestream from the Red Dot Forum guys mentioned that the 1.0 was not adjusted for blue light, targeting B+W, and seems to do have a unique look on a Monochrom.  Hence my new interest in the 1.0.  I already have the 0.95 for a few years and love it.  So I wonder if it makes any sense to try the 1.0 on a Monochrom...

I have been interested in Noctilux since 2007. It was 13 years before I get the real one. In my opinion, I agree f/0.95 and f/1.0 are completely different lenses. I cannot say which one is better than another. I see only 4 commonalities, i.e., Leica brand, Noctilux name, 50mm focal length, and pricey  

Many people said f/1.0 has vignette (very true, look at photo below), not super-sharp at center (true, comparing to my lux50 ASPH even give sharper). Some people said it's no point to look at bokeh of f/1.0 while we should look at the performance at f/5.6. I respect all opinions. I bought this lens because I like how it looks as overall. The photo below was just took this morning, shot wide open. I see the vignette, not super-sharp I like how 3D look difference. 

I tried Noct/1.0 and Noct/0.95. I like how Noct/1.0 renders more than Noct/0.95. I thought something wrong with my eye or the lens can be defective. I post my question here too, a couple of month ago. I end up bought Summilux back home. I can save some grands with lighter weight and more compact. If I need more light, I push ISO 1 or 2 stops.  Last week the shop has 4 Noctilux/1.0. Then, I went to try and finally bought v.4 back home. 

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!

[Schittra]

1 hour ago, chasdfg said:

My thinking is E58 is the first f1 version and the only M lens that I know of with a 58mm filter thread (or at least the only Noctilux). Likewise the v4 is the last version (maybe most updated coatings?) and unique in that it has a built-in squareish hood. This said, I recall reading threads on how some then-new owners of the v4 hated the hood so much they removed them. For the last run of v4s, Leica sold them in a wooden box with a built-in dehumidifier. I suppose this adds to the whole "last Noctilux f1" charm and over time a cult was built, as what happens with many Leica lenses. I don't think it's solely on production numbers as I believe the v2 E60  was produced over the shortest span of time and in the smallest numbers.

@setuporg As for the differences between the 0.95 and f1, I think comparing photos on the web will tell you they are rather different. I'd put it as the 0.95 having similar DNA as the f1, but it is a lot more controlled...too controlled for me. I buy a Noctilux because I want it to scream Noctilux from the rooftops and the f1 is quite distinct in this respect. Most of the time I can tell an f1 picture (which f1 version, I have no clue) but with the 0.95, the 50mm Summilux ASPH gets really close (literally too, because it focuses closer), more so than the 50mm Summilux pre-ASPH to the f1. I suspect Thorsten favours more modern lenses and at the time of writing, the 0.95 gave him enough of the f1 but with a modern touch, so there's no point owning both. Also, the 0.95 is (was?) his workhorse lens, so the added sharpness may be a benefit. 

Thorsten and Red Dot Forum/Leica Store Miami have provided great Leica resources on the web for us, but I don't doubt part of the reason the former does it to promote his workshops and other Leica related gear he sells, and the latter to promote their store (they have a used f1 Noctilux for sale now btw). I've learnt a lot from them, they certainly didn't need to take that much time to produce such resources for the community and I would definitely point people to RDF's videos as a first port of call to learn about their cameras/the system. I have always learnt something new from their Red Dot Camera Talks. I digress. Nevertheless for myself, whether because I'm a cynic or otherwise, I bring along a tablespoon of salt before embarking on Thorsten'/RDF's articles or watching one of their videos.

I read this message twice. Finally, I am not the only one...

Most of the time I can tell an f1 picture (which f1 version, I have no clue) but with the 0.95, the 50mm Summilux ASPH gets really close (literally too, because it focuses closer), more so than the 50mm Summilux pre-ASPH to the f1.

If I can have only 1 50mm focal length, I would go for Noct/0.95. It gives me some smell of Noctilux photo I have seen in the past and also give me the sharpness of Summilux or Summicron. I tried the Summicron 50 APO. I even like the rendering and sharpness of Summicron 50 APO more than the Noctilux/0.95 - with the same f/stop. It's the personal preference. I completely agree with you. I need to read or ask the photo from photographer what lens he or she used (Summilux, Summicron APO or Noctilux/0.95). But I can tell f/1.0 easily. Some people said because the lens is not perfect, i.e., vignette, not so sharp at center. Again, if I want super-sharp lens, I would go for Zeiss I look at the flower photo I took. The background is just like a painting, not circle, not onion. The layer of each flower gives dimension look. If I zzom at 3-400%, that will be disappointed. But I look photo at the whole. I like it because that's how it should be looked at. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[a.noctilux]

Schittra, now we can talk about Noctilux as a whole lens to produce image that you like  ...as a whole image, not only sharpness/bokeh or what else.

Those details may be important for some people but those are not my Noctilux love/use .

This specialist lens (even more so with the 0.95) is there for use/users who know/learn to know how to use it at best not only for "spectacular images" that deserve it

in some way.

When an image is spectacular, in some way the image is not so good (for me).

 

I do remember that at f/5.6, Noctilux can be "hard to differenciate" from other 50mm "lesser lenses" (in weight/size/portability), but when looking well, the differences 😉 are always there,

while at f/1 no other (Lux, Cron, etc.) can do.

 

Now just use it with your mind and have fun.

Edited May 14, 2020 by a.noctilux