Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have owned a bunch of different Leica glass but never the Nocti. I absolutely love the SL2 can I have the 35 and 75 SL glass - I don’t currently have a 50 and it has always been my preferred focal length. I know it will be much easier to get focus wide open on the SL2 - The siren song of the Noctilux keeps calling me, although wide-open on the 75 the backgrounds are so blown out and the color is so fantastic I’m wondering why I’d need to spend the cash on the Nocti. Of course in situations like these logic does not always rule! I can’t really see you shooting with the lens stopped down at all… I am a little bit concerned about the long throw focus as I absolutely love the focus tab on the 50 Lux M (I just really love it on all manual lenses).

I’m curious if there is anyone who has used the Nocti extensively on the SL body cameras and can speak to the experience and the uniqueness of the images - I know I could go rent one theoretically but it’s like $500 and I would rather just try to get a used copy if I need to scratch the itch. Anybody who has real experience with this combination, if you could share your thoughts I would greatly appreciate it. Thank you!

Link to post
Share on other sites

I borrowed a 50/0.95 and shot it in a park for 45 mins.

As nice as it was, I currently have the SL 50 1.4 which is still extraordinarily shallow DoF wise, and it's quite a bit sharper and has AF.

On the other hand, the 75 Nocti definitely has my curiosity :)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Trickness,   I used the 50 Nocti .95 on the SL body for about a year when the camera first came on scene.  It rendered nicely and of course focus was easier with the SL.  But I found the 50 Noctilux albeit unique in rendering, it lent itself more to utility with M cameras.  At nearly the same period, the 50 Summilux-SL arrived on scene.  I bought one for my business at that time and found it far more useful to me.  The 50 Summilux-SL renders a cross between the 50 Noctilux and 50 Apo-Summicron.  Although the lens is bulky, both my clients and myself liked the rendering better than the 50 Noctilux .95.  Also the 50 Summilux M renders superbly on the SL.  All said, this will get down to your personal choice and tastes for rendering of your photographs.  Like so many Leica photographers, we have many great choices for lenses and cameras.  A lot of forum members will give you advice, me included, but until you buy/rent/borrow the lens(es), it will be difficult to give you advice that you are seeking.  You might look at some photographs on Flickr, LFI or even forum photograph lens threads here so you can decide what is best for you.  r/ Mark 

Edited by LeicaR10
Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

From a hobbyist's perspective . . . . As Mark says, this is about personal taste.  

While the SL 50 summilux is outstanding and is more unique when compared to the other SL lenses, still,  I find there is just something about the noctilux rendering that is captivating. The SL might be a more practical option, but it is still not that 'noctilux look'.

That itch is not going to go away. 

 

 

Edited by ropo54
Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

12 minutes ago, SiggiGun said:

Noctilux095 works fine on SL and SL2 with Noctilux rendering very different from the SL lenses. 

Today I use the Noctilux095 exclusively on SL2. 

I previously had an M 50 1.4 Lux and I agree the rendering was very different, especially in the out of focus areas. I do believe that the SL Summicron lenses are quite superior to M glass in terms of color rendition, and I am always amazed how 3-D the photos are vs. M lenses. In my personal experience I feel that the SL Summicron glass delivers that “Leica look” even more so than M lenses. But I do enjoy the lighter weight and manual focusing of the M glass.

do you have a link to a photo gallery of images you’ve taken with the SL2/Nocti?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Guys you cannot be serious.  Nobody pixel-peeps comparing the mighty Noctilux 0.95 to anything.  You just enjoy it.  Nothing compares to it.  Nothing replaces it.  You either have it or you don't.  As simple is that.  I had mine on an M10 at an AI conference a few years ago, when a very polite Finnish startup founder came up to me and asked, with a lovely Finnish accent, "can I poke you with a knife and take this from you"?

On a slightly more serious note, one of the first things I've done upon receiving my first SL, the SL2 right after it came out, was to mount the Noctilux on it and be amazed how easy and effective it is.  It really balanced better on the SL2 than on the M and the EVF focusing was superb.  I still prefer the OVF but SL2 is amazing (with the native adapter).  There was a strong sentiment that the 75 "Noctilux" and 90mm "Summilux"  were meant for SL2 as well as they are huge an rather unwieldy on an M and hard to focus.

Edited by setuporg
Link to post
Share on other sites
vor 44 Minuten schrieb trickness:

I previously had an M 50 1.4 Lux and I agree the rendering was very different, especially in the out of focus areas. I do believe that the SL Summicron lenses are quite superior to M glass in terms of color rendition, and I am always amazed how 3-D the photos are vs. M lenses. In my personal experience I feel that the SL Summicron glass delivers that “Leica look” even more so than M lenses. But I do enjoy the lighter weight and manual focusing of the M glass.

do you have a link to a photo gallery of images you’ve taken with the SL2/Nocti?

I have not yet put SL2 Noctilux on Flickr. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, setuporg said:

Guys you cannot be serious.  Nobody pixel-peeps comparing the mighty Noctilux 0.95 to anything.  You just enjoy it.  Nothing compares to it.  Nothing replaces it.  You either have it or you don't.  As simple is that.  I had mine on an M10 at an AI conference a few years ago, when a very polite Finnish startup founder came up to me and asked, with a lovely Finnish accent, "can I poke you with a knife and take this from you"?

On a slightly more serious note, one of the first things I've done upon receiving my first SL, the SL2 right after it came out, was to mount the Noctilux on it and be amazed how easy and effective it is.  It really balanced better on the SL2 than on the M and the EVF focusing was superb.  I still prefer the OVF but SL2 is amazing (with the native adapter).  There was a strong sentiment that the 75 "Noctilux" and 90mm "Summilux"  were meant for SL2 as well as they are huge an rather unwieldy on an M and hard to focus.

Yes the uniqueness of the lens is my primary reason for being interested in it, that and the fact that it seems much more usable on the SL than on an M body. I’ve definitely considered the SL 50 Lux, but it’s a bit like a cannon and I just can’t see walking around with it. Pride of ownership doesn’t really mean anything to me, it’s all about usability in the pursuit of taking pictures.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 0.95 makes the look unique and not even a Summilux compares I guess.  The whole oeuvre of Thorsten @Overgaard is indicative of its character.  Interestingly Thorsten's latest work is with the M 50 Summilux (he's firmly a 50 person, not a 35 one).

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, setuporg said:

The 0.95 makes the look unique and not even a Summilux compares I guess.  The whole oeuvre of Thorsten @Overgaard is indicative of its character.  Interestingly Thorsten's latest work is with the M 50 Summilux (he's firmly a 50 person, not a 35 one).

Without getting into personalities, I think a better example of an artist that produces exceptional work with the Nocti exclusively is Mark Depaola http://www.depaolapictures.com/

Link to post
Share on other sites

there are many perfect lenses out there, when you done using them you look for something dreamy, less then perfect, lots of character.

Many film person look for vintage glass to get the glow. I got the SL2 to use the Noctilux 0.95. 

Some people don't want represent reality, and the Noctilux does that. wide open there is lots of CA, the beauty of the SL2 is the amazing EVF preview, to minimize CA in some situations I will close the F stop 1/2 or a full stop. Even at 2.8 it renders with a little character, different then Summilux M at the same F-stop.

After testing all the 50's I have, the Noctilux is still the most special.

I get some movie productions as clients because the look for that look

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, setuporg said:

Guys you cannot be serious.  Nobody pixel-peeps comparing the mighty Noctilux 0.95 to anything.  You just enjoy it. 

Well if you look at RedDotCameras second hand page for M lenses clearly they have always huge stock of unwanted Nocts there lol 😅

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Photoworks said:

there are many perfect lenses out there, when you done using them you look for something dreamy, less then perfect, lots of character.

Many film person look for vintage glass to get the glow. I got the SL2 to use the Noctilux 0.95. 

Some people don't want represent reality, and the Noctilux does that. wide open there is lots of CA, the beauty of the SL2 is the amazing EVF preview, to minimize CA in some situations I will close the F stop 1/2 or a full stop. Even at 2.8 it renders with a little character, different then Summilux M at the same F-stop.

After testing all the 50's I have, the Noctilux is still the most special.

I get some movie productions as clients because the look for that look

 

A fellow New Yorker it looks like?

Very nice captures! But truth be told, I think I could get a similar look to all of these photographs with the 75SL, with the exception of the image with the flower and the lantern. Perhaps that’s the only one that you shot with the lens wide open?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Grab your pitchforks.....

I had the Noctilux (0.95) for about 5 years. Lusted after it. Bought it new. Used it extensively on the M and SL (601) and much preferred it on the SL. Got some lovely files from it.

Honestly I should have kept the CV 50mm 1.1 Nokton. I think that lens had a better background wide open. And it was sharper across the frame.

Now I have the CV 50mm 1.2 and it's probably my favourite M mount 50mm lens ever. A beautifully balanced lens. Better than both the Noctilux and Summilux.

Sold it for about what I paid for it so it was worth the experiment. But I sold it with no regrets, which is the first and only time for a Leica lens.

That being said sometimes an itch needs to be scratched..... Only by using one for a while can you tell if it's for you or not. A difficult lens to quantify.

Gordon

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, FlashGordonPhotography said:

Grab your pitchforks.....

I had the Noctilux (0.95) for about 5 years. Lusted after it. Bought it new. Used it extensively on the M and SL (601) and much preferred it on the SL. Got some lovely files from it.

Honestly I should have kept the CV 50mm 1.1 Nokton. I think that lens had a better background wide open. And it was sharper across the frame.

Now I have the CV 50mm 1.2 and it's probably my favourite M mount 50mm lens ever. A beautifully balanced lens. Better than both the Noctilux and Summilux.

Sold it for about what I paid for it so it was worth the experiment. But I sold it with no regrets, which is the first and only time for a Leica lens.

That being said sometimes an itch needs to be scratched..... Only by using one for a while can you tell if it's for you or not. A difficult lens to quantify.

Gordon

 

I’ve heard good things about the CV 1.2 - you certainly save a fair bit of coin buying that lens. Question is, wide-open does it blow out the background and turn everything into an instant impressionist painting like the Nocti?

Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
46 minutes ago, geddon_jt said:

As for the 75 Noct, it is our favorite lens. I am convinced it was actually designed for the SL, just happens to have an M mount. 

I want that 75 so bad. I'm going to take the leap one day. 

trickness, I agree the SL 50 is comically big - it's a shame as the optics inside it are absolutely mint. I've used a lot of 50's in my time and size aside, it's my fave by a long way.

oh btw, this mitakon 50/0.95 just came out and might help scratch the itch.

Mitakon Speedmaster 50mm f/0.95 III | Mitakon - ZY Optics

I used it in my old days on Sony and it's surprisingly decent.

 

Edited by Gavin Cato
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.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...