Review: Leica Noctilux 50mm f1.2

[Peter Branch]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dear Jono,

An interesting review of the new lens.  The text makes reference to the early Canon f/1.2 which was actually a nominal 50mm not 58mm.

I had one of these Canon lenses for some years.  Measurements in the Kodak Research Lab. showed that, like most contemporary Leica "50mm" lenses, it was actually 51.6mm.  The measurements also showed that like many Canon lenses of that period centring of the elements was not a Canon strong point.  Leica were much better with significantly less sample to sample variation as a consequence.

I did have an opportunity to try out an original Leica 50mm f/1.2 Noctilux at a gymnastics competition on my Canon VI T, which incidentally had near perfect lens / film registration unlike many of the Leica cameras at that time.  My conclusion, totally unscientific, was that the Canon was actually in the same league and had similar characteristics. 

 

[Advertisement]

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

[bilbrown]

I love these classic revisitations! The Summaron 28 stays on one of my Ms at all times, as does a screw mount Summaron 35. I was always interested in the f1.2 Noctilux, but of course impossible to find. Now we have it in black as an "affordable" option! 

 

I wonder about the focus pull, its is long or short? are the clicks hard clicks or soft? It would be amazing to work with it in video I think, such a classic look!

[mdg1371]

10 hours ago, Peter Branch said:

Dear Jono,

An interesting review of the new lens.  The text makes reference to the early Canon f/1.2 which was actually a nominal 50mm not 58mm.

I had one of these Canon lenses for some years.  Measurements in the Kodak Research Lab. showed that, like most contemporary Leica "50mm" lenses, it was actually 51.6mm.  The measurements also showed that like many Canon lenses of that period centring of the elements was not a Canon strong point.  Leica were much better with significantly less sample to sample variation as a consequence.

I did have an opportunity to try out an original Leica 50mm f/1.2 Noctilux at a gymnastics competition on my Canon VI T, which incidentally had near perfect lens / film registration unlike many of the Leica cameras at that time.  My conclusion, totally unscientific, was that the Canon was actually in the same league and had similar characteristics. 

 

How did you try an original Noctilux f1.2 ( M mount) on a Canon VI-T ( LTM mount)?

 

[PhotoEd]

Thank you so much Jono for this nice write up. Looks like a very nice character lens to me.

Like one of the previous repliers I wonder if there is any focus shift when closing the aperture. One other classice design I used to have (Zeiss Sonnar 50) had enormous focus shift and made it quite challenging to use. 

I also wonder about the hood. Can you use it with a filter attached to the lens? Last month I bought the Black Chrome Summilux-ASPH and there is no way to mount the hood with a filter attached to the lens. A major error for such nice design, if you ask me. And is it possible to mount the hood reversed on the Noctilux for storing in a bag. On all the pictures of the new lens so far I don't see any plastic protection cap that can be put on the back side of the hood. 

I'm afraid I have to sell my brand new Summilux-ASPH black chrome edition again to step up to this newest classic...

[wattsy]

3 hours ago, PhotoEd said:

I'm afraid I have to sell my brand new Summilux-ASPH black chrome edition again to step up to this newest classic...

There's no obligation to buy the "newest classic". People will still be using the 50 Summilux-M ASPH long after the retro Noctilux is consigned to the cabinet.

[jonoslack]

21 hours ago, Peter Branch said:

Dear Jono,

An interesting review of the new lens.  The text makes reference to the early Canon f/1.2 which was actually a nominal 50mm not 58mm.

I had one of these Canon lenses for some years.  Measurements in the Kodak Research Lab. showed that, like most contemporary Leica "50mm" lenses, it was actually 51.6mm.  The measurements also showed that like many Canon lenses of that period centring of the elements was not a Canon strong point.  Leica were much better with significantly less sample to sample variation as a consequence.

I did have an opportunity to try out an original Leica 50mm f/1.2 Noctilux at a gymnastics competition on my Canon VI T, which incidentally had near perfect lens / film registration unlike many of the Leica cameras at that time.  My conclusion, totally unscientific, was that the Canon was actually in the same league and had similar characteristics. 

 

Thank you Peter - I'd already figured this out and corrected my website (www.slack.co.uk)

I'll ask Andreas to change it here (not sure where I got that information from, but it was quite detailed - and quite wrong!)

All the best

Jono

[jonoslack]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

4 hours ago, PhotoEd said:

Thank you so much Jono for this nice write up. Looks like a very nice character lens to me.

Like one of the previous repliers I wonder if there is any focus shift when closing the aperture. One other classice design I used to have (Zeiss Sonnar 50) had enormous focus shift and made it quite challenging to use. 

I also wonder about the hood. Can you use it with a filter attached to the lens? Last month I bought the Black Chrome Summilux-ASPH and there is no way to mount the hood with a filter attached to the lens. A major error for such nice design, if you ask me. And is it possible to mount the hood reversed on the Noctilux for storing in a bag. On all the pictures of the new lens so far I don't see any plastic protection cap that can be put on the back side of the hood. 

I'm afraid I have to sell my brand new Summilux-ASPH black chrome edition again to step up to this newest classic...

Hi There

You can use a filter with the lens hood attached - no problem.

I'm going to do some focus shift tests when I get a minute. I haven't noticed it as a problem, but I would have thought that it was inevitable without a floating element.

Best

Jono

[pedaes]

10 minutes ago, jonoslack said:

I would have thought that it was inevitable

If it is a true copy of the original it would be more concerning if it didn't show some focus shift!

[wattsy]

26 minutes ago, pedaes said:

If it is a true copy of the original it would be more concerning if it didn't show some focus shift!

I think with lenses like the 50 F1.2, worrying about focus shift rather misses the point.  The user is probably best advised to let go of the idea of getting perfect focus and roll with a softer aesthetic. Photographers like Deborah Turbeville spring to mind.

[NigelG]

I wonder what will happen to prices of the original once this reissued version is available?Meister Camera have one at the moment....

https://www.meister-camera.com/en/second-hand/9696/leitz-noctilux-m-11250mm

[wattsy]

7 minutes ago, NigelG said:

I wonder what will happen to prices of the original once this reissued version is available?Meister Camera have one at the moment....

https://www.meister-camera.com/en/second-hand/9696/leitz-noctilux-m-11250mm

I don't think many people buy the original as a user (though they may use it) and there are still the same number of originals in existence. The new copy may increase interest in the original but I can't imagine it reducing demand. It's a bit like Gibson making as many historically accurate R9s as they like – a '59 "Burst" will still be worth in excess of $250k.

Edited February 1, 2021 by wattsy

[pedaes]

3 minutes ago, NigelG said:

I wonder what will happen to prices

I would suggest nothing. The original must be a wealthy collectors only item at those prices, so different markets.

[NigelG]

I guess my question was prompted by the previous re-issues where one could decide whether to buy the new lens or to seek out a used original (at a generally lower price). With the Noctilux 1.2 the price disparity makes this unfeasible - I’d rather have the new silver one at half the advertised price of the black original version but then I’m not a collector.

Edited February 1, 2021 by NigelG

[T25UFO]

1 hour ago, NigelG said:

I guess my question was prompted by the previous re-issues where one could decide whether to buy the new lens or to seek out a used original (at a generally lower price). With the Noctilux 1.2 the price disparity makes this unfeasible - I’d rather have the new silver one at half the advertised price of the black original version but then I’m not a collector.

Agree 100%.  I can't afford the new silver one, even at the new reduced price, but a black one will take the same photos.  I'll go with that.

People will always find things to invest in - it has nothing do to with photography.  I have a friend who invests in wine and never drinks it.  He won't even break out one bottle from a case because it affects the value of his investment.  The scenarios are similar - buy a lens, never take a photo - buy wine, never drink it.  Welcome to the world of the investor!

Edited February 1, 2021 by T25UFO

[farnz]

2 hours ago, NigelG said:

I wonder what will happen to prices of the original once this reissued version is available?Meister Camera have one at the moment....

https://www.meister-camera.com/en/second-hand/9696/leitz-noctilux-m-11250mm

Judging by the price of S$118,888 (£64,000) asked for the new 1.2 Noctilux on this site, the original 1.2 Noctilux market might become the bargain market. 

Pete.

[PhotoEd]

6 hours ago, jonoslack said:

Hi There

You can use a filter with the lens hood attached - no problem.

I'm going to do some focus shift tests when I get a minute. I haven't noticed it as a problem, but I would have thought that it was inevitable without a floating element.

Best

Jono

Thanks a lot, I'm interested to hear about your focus shift findings. I always believed this had nothing to do with floating elements, but with blocking the light rays (with a different focuspoint) from the sides of the lens by closing the aperture. By this, the 'hotspot' of focus is shifting. And I can imagine the aspherical lens elements are used to counteract this unwanted effect by focusing the side-rays to the same focus point as the center rays. But I'm not a optical expert, so I may be wrong here.

Anyway, I love the classic rendering and just had me put on the waiting list. Anyone interested in a brand new Summilux-M 50 ASPH Black Chrome Edition...? 🙂

[adan]

7 hours ago, jonoslack said:

I'm going to do some focus shift tests when I get a minute. I haven't noticed it as a problem, but I would have thought that it was inevitable without a floating element.

Jono, Jono, Jono! You know better than that!

A floating element is for correcting close-up performance (at any aperture) - it compensates for the differing mathematics of parallel (near effective infinity) and diverging (close-up) light rays. It has nothing to do with correcting focus shift.

Focus shift is caused by different bundles of light rays predominating as one stops down to different apertures and eliminates the outer ones. Has nothing to do with a floating element.

Although a myth to that effect has grown up around the 35 Summilux FLE - but it is just a fan-boy myth. What Leica actually says is:

Quote

In comparison with its predecessor, the new LEICA SUMMILUX-M 35 mm f/1.4 ASPH. now incorporates a floating element: the lenses behind the aperture blades are constructed as a floating group that changes its position relative to the front lens group during focusing to ensure that the LEICA SUMMILUX-M 1:1.4/35 mm ASPH. achieves equally outstanding imaging performance at closer focusing distances.

Page one, paragraph one: http://www.summilux.net/m_system/images/Summilux35Asph-2010.pdf

No mention of focus shift whatsoever.

What fixes focus shift is taming spherical aberration by way of different glass or different curvatures (see: C/V Nokton 35mm f/1.4 version II. A new non-floating glass element, but not a floating element in sight ).

Edited February 1, 2021 by adan

[astrostl]

It helps me to remember that focus shift is a spherical aberration and that aspherical elements try to address them.

That isn't to say all aspherical lenses are fully devoid of focus shift, but the situation is usually improved.

Edited February 1, 2021 by astrostl

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[UliWer]

vor 59 Minuten schrieb astrostl:

That isn't to say all aspherical lenses are fully devoid of focus shift, but the situation is usually improved.

I don't think you can generalize this. Aspherical elements are not always helpful for all sorts of optical flaws. The 35mm Summilux asph (pre FLE) had rather modern aspherical elements - but more focus shift than the non-aspherical Summilux.

You can take it as a rule of thumbs that you'll see focus shift  if the optical design aims at high resolution at large opening and hasn't got (or doesn't use) the means to correct the spherical flaws of the optical elements appropriately. The early version of the 1.5/5cm Zeiss Sonnar for the old Contax had - for it's age - tremendous resolution fully opened, but also massive focus shift. They reccomputed it some years later with a slight loss of resolution but the focus shift was tamed. 

Edited February 1, 2021 by UliWer

[adan]

Correct - an ASPH surface is just a tool, that can do various things depending on where it is in the lens. And sometimes a combination of various things - it is just up to the lens designer to fiddle with the power, the glass and the position to solve a particular problem.

Sometimes all it does is reduce the number of required elements (less flare, less weight, less cost - similar performance otherwise). It's been said that one ASPH element can replace two spherical elements, thusly:

Two cemented elements with slightly different indices of refraction. First glass A and then glass B. At the edges the group is mostly glass B, while at the center the group is mostly glass A. The summed power of the lens changes from the edge to the center. (Sometimes called a Merté surface, in microscopy).

()(

Now, a single element with one ASPH surface, which also changes the power of the lens from the edge to the center.

(}