Noctilux

[egibaud]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

is the box like this?

My box is silver like all new Leica lenses. I bought in July 2007 from Nicolas Muro's official Leica shop in France.

 

He told me Noctilux is still made in Canada. and it DOES say Made in Canada on the box.

 

Eric

[luigi bertolotti]

This is false; the original Noctilux was a 50/1.2 (not 1.0) lens with two aspheric elements; the first aspherics in a production 35mm lens. The 50/1.0 followed, with no aspherics and a different formula. There have been several different versions of the 50/1.0 with the same optical formula but different hoods and exterior cosmetics.

 

OK, Bob, I'didn't intend to offend YOUR historical Noctilux 1,2 (I took note of your fine portraits with it) ! Of course I was speaking of the "modern" 1,0 version...

[fotografr]

Pelikan, this is not mentioned in Leica's technical specifications for this lens (cf. Leica Camera AG - Photography - LEICA NOCTILUX-M 50 mm f/1). Your statement is a subjective claim, not an objective factual description.

 

Actually, Leica acknowledged and explained focus shift in a recent LFI article. Just a few days ago I discussed the same thing with Don Goldberg (DAG Repair) because I am having him optimize mine for f/1.0 to f/2.0 shooting. He has done numerous bench tests and knows, with certainty, that the focus does shift when stopping down--more on the Noctilux than on any other Leica lens.

[gwelland]

Has anyone got experience of the wait times for new Noctilux orders? i'm planning my finances for the year and I'm very interested in picking up a new lens and it would be helpful to know if I ordered one that it might arrive 3, 6, 9 months from now ...

 

Any recent experiences from main stream retail - i.e. not the discounted lens offers which seem to have been on Leica's go slow list. (If my retail WATE purchase experience is anything to compare to).

[voightL]

i am planning to buy this killer lens for its crazy DOF.

 

where are they made now, germany?

i found a NEW 1986 Noctilux at a local shop, this one is Made in Canada, comes in a long box with red and blue colors.

 

on the web, i saw some Noctilux which comes in a white square box with grey wordings, are these newer model, also look shorter than older model?

 

thanks for any input.

 

Buy it! Heard Leica will soon announce that they will stop production of Noctilux:(

[Eoin]

Actually, Leica acknowledged and explained focus shift in a recent LFI article. Just a few days ago I discussed the same thing with Don Goldberg (DAG Repair) because I am having him optimize mine for f/1.0 to f/2.0 shooting. He has done numerous bench tests and knows, with certainty, that the focus does shift when stopping down--more on the Noctilux than on any other Leica lens.

 

IIRC that article in LFI referred to the 35 Summilux Asph in particular, however my 35 never showed any focus shift. Some do, some don't, a bit of sample variation would suggest it can be compensated for if they understood what's causing the problem.

That being said, I've had my Noctilux back to solms twice for this exact reason, the shift in focus between f:/1.4 and f:/5.6. Twice I was told it needed to be adjusted along with the M8 and I'm still not happy with the results. Never have Leica stated that it is a problem inherent in the optical design in any communication. Other than to say it has been adjusted and they have taken test pictures.

If they said to me, "we're sorry, but due to the sensor flatness and depth the Noctilux will show a degree of back focus with changing aperture and this is normal with the M8 & Noctilux combination" that would be fine, I wouldn't have bought it in the first place. But still I read form members here some Noctiluxes back focus can be measured in millimeters while others need to be measured in inches and a few don't seem to back focus at all.

 

I am none the wiser after 2 trips to solms, other than to notice the focus cam has been filed. Performance has improved at f:/1.0 without a doubt but backfocus is very evident to me until f:/8.0 in the 2 - 3 meter range.

 

It will be very interesting to hear and read what others who ordered the Noctilux as part of the 30% offer find over the next few weeks as these lenses start to filter through to them.

[marknorton]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I have to believe Leica regard the Noctilux as hassle, whatever its merits wide-open, it seems to be a challenge getting acceptable results stopped down.

 

Perhaps they should produce a version with no aperture so that it only works at f1 and comes with a set of 2, 4, 8 ND filters...

 

It's an anachronism and surely can't be long for this world?

[j. borger]

I am none the wiser after 2 trips to solms, other than to notice the focus cam has been filed. Performance has improved at f:/1.0 without a doubt but backfocus is very evident to me until f:/8.0 in the 2 - 3 meter range.

 

It will be very interesting to hear and read what others who ordered the Noctilux as part of the 30% offer find over the next few weeks as these lenses start to filter through to them.

 

Hello Eoin,

 

The Noctilux even back-focusses with film ...................... BY DESIGN!

There is a lot written about this in the past by Erwin Putz among others.

I can imagine the M8 with fllat sensor makes it a bit worse.

So i assume you can send that lens in for another couple of times .... but even if they adjust it "within factory specifications" it will never stand the ruler test at all apertures and distances ..... so you have to live with it or go for another lens.

If you want to use that lens mostly beyond f1.0 .. why not buy yourself a nice 50 pre-asph summilux, which draws about the same (with the exception of the swirly bokeh, which is not eveybodys piece of cake) .....

You can even get shorter dof because it focusses to 0.7 m .. instead of 1m

 

I used a Noctilux for months on the M8 ..... never tested for back-focus .. just used it in practice ........ never felt limited in any way .. you will loose some shots anyhow ... the back-focus in practice compensates for user error to the positive or negative .......... just stop testing and use it for a while in dayly practice...... if you can't live with it sell it .....

The Noctilux is not everybodys lens .. far from it ... i could not live with the long focusthrow and bulk for instance...

 

Just my 2 cents .....

[Eoin]

Han, this is the whole point, BY DESIGN, where have you read that Leica have stated this. I have no issue with Erwin's writings, I do read them from time to time and read about back focus there too. But none of this prepared me for a whopping 6 - 8 inches of back focus shooting portraits at 2 - 3 meters, My Noctilux would not even come close to his lpm worst case tests without focus adjust. Granted it's now much better, less than an inch. But on it's return from the first trip to Solms it was still back focusing by the same 6 - 8 inches but focus at f:/1 was greatly improved. The Leica workshop were saying it was correct and tested before returning it to me. I managed to convince Andrea who in turn got a Quality Manager to agree to re-examine the lens and after it's 2nd trip and adjustment the back focus is reduced to an inch or less.

 

So I am suggesting there is sample variation and various degrees of back focus not only with the Noctilux but summilux 35's and 50's also. It's to easy to explain or excuse the fact with technical mumbo jumbo but reality shows that in-fact by design of accident sometimes everything clicks into place and there is no backfocus on some samples of the same lens.

 

I disagree however that the 50 Summilux pre ASPH has the same or very similar finger print to the Noctilux between 2.8 and 5.6. Without a doubt the Noctilux when focused correctly has less contrast and micro contrast, and less well corrected than the Summilux giving a smoother softer tone to a portrait and this is the very specific reason I wanted to try for. The close focus is of no interest to me. f:/1.0 to f:/2 is there should I need it for some reason but a lenses maximum aperture does not mean it's the only aperture you should shoot it at surely?.

 

Anyhow the lens is better than before and perhaps NOW within spec, but that does not explain to me why in the first place it was IMO so out of spec and not adjusted to the same degree prior to dispatch and on it's first return to Solms.

[pelikan1931]

sending only the lens back to Solms won't do, you have to send your camera back too, it takes two to tango.

 

 

 

why Cosina can produce a Nokton 35/1.2 which is free from focus shift but Leica can't? i like the nokton very much, it is smooth and has none of the harsh asph look. it is free from those drastic price increase too.

[j. borger]

Anyhow the lens is better than before and perhaps NOW within spec, but that does not explain to me why in the first place it was IMO so out of spec and not adjusted to the same degree prior to dispatch and on it's first return to Solms.

That is a very valid point indeed .....

 

About the Noctilux ... we disagree here and that's ok ... in my opinion the lens makes no sens if you do not use it at f1.0. most of the time!

If you plan to use it for the portraits you have in mind ... you should have it optimised for the apperture and working distance you have i mind like Fotografr did ..........

With the Noctilux there will always be some kind of compromise ......

 

Good luck with it!

[Eoin]

sending only the lens back to Solms won't do, you have to send your camera back too, it takes two to tango.

 

Sorry, perhaps I didn't make it clear, on both occasions the M8 was returned to Solms along with the Noctilux.

[Tony C.]

The issue of certain examples of the same Leica lenses showing greater focus shift than others on the M8 is an interesting one. I'm not sure that I fully understand the phenomenon, and would be grateful if some of the more technically advanced users would elaborate.

 

I am quite aware of the necessity to insure that the M8 body is properly calibrated (infinity adjustment, etc.), but given some of these reports, I have the impression that, for example, some 35mm Summillux ASHP lenses show more focus shift than others. The same is apparently true for the Noctilux. So my question is, assuming that a given M8 body is properly calibrated, what part(s) of a lens could be causing these disparities? Is it the mount, or are there small differences in the elements themselves which could cause such disparities? Perhaps something else?

 

Any insights would be appreciated.

 

Regards,

 

Tony C.

[fotografr]

IIRC that article in LFI referred to the 35 Summilux Asph in particular, however my 35 never showed any focus shift. Some do, some don't, a bit of sample variation would suggest it can be compensated for if they understood what's causing the problem.

That being said, I've had my Noctilux back to solms twice for this exact reason, the shift in focus between f:/1.4 and f:/5.6. Twice I was told it needed to be adjusted along with the M8 and I'm still not happy with the results. Never have Leica stated that it is a problem inherent in the optical design in any communication. Other than to say it has been adjusted and they have taken test pictures.

If they said to me, "we're sorry, but due to the sensor flatness and depth the Noctilux will show a degree of back focus with changing aperture and this is normal with the M8 & Noctilux combination" that would be fine, I wouldn't have bought it in the first place. But still I read form members here some Noctiluxes back focus can be measured in millimeters while others need to be measured in inches and a few don't seem to back focus at all.

 

I am none the wiser after 2 trips to solms, other than to notice the focus cam has been filed. Performance has improved at f:/1.0 without a doubt but backfocus is very evident to me until f:/8.0 in the 2 - 3 meter range.

 

It will be very interesting to hear and read what others who ordered the Noctilux as part of the 30% offer find over the next few weeks as these lenses start to filter through to them.

 

Don Goldberg is adjusting mine today for optimum results at apertures of 1.0, 1.2 and 2.0. He told me there would still be a focus shift stopping down from there and that there is nothing that can be done about it. Since I rarely use the lens at apertures smaller than 2.0, that is of little consequence. The shift becomes much less noticeable at smaller apertures anyway due to increased DOF. The implication from Don was that this is common and expected behavior from the Noctilux and I have complete faith in his knowledge of Leica products. In my opinion, the differences reported by people here in the degree of focus shift they experience probably have more to do with they way each person is performing the tests and evaluating the results. Don has an M8 that he uses only for testing lenses and has a pretty exacting setup. Some of these focus shifts are very small and not easy to detect. For example, when he tested my lens there was about 1 inch of shift from f/1.0 to f/1.2 with the lens mounted at a 45 degree angle to his test strip at a distance of just over 1.5 meters. In most of my shooting, this is not something I would normally be aware of.

[Bill Sievers]

This is what draws me to Leica.

 

http://www.flickr.com/photos/captainvideo/1520883650/

 

Long live the Noct1

[fotografr]

So my question is, assuming that a given M8 body is properly calibrated, what part(s) of a lens could be causing these disparities? Is it the mount, or are there small differences in the elements themselves which could cause such disparities? Perhaps something else?

 

Any insights would be appreciated.

 

Regards,

 

Tony C.

 

 

According to Don Goldberg, a shim the thickness of a piece of Scotch Tape is enough to affect the focus. My guess, and it is only a guess, is that minute differences in machining may cause variations in the degree of focus error. I'll know more today when I go to his shop to pick mine up.

[Eoin]

Brent, I accept fully what your saying and I too would trust Don given his intimate knowledge of all things Leica. But I was questioning the LFI article you were quoting and if I recall correctly (I don't have it to hand at the moment) the back focus issue discussed was around that of the 35 Summilux Asph and the recent reports of problems people were having. The article implied it was a known issue and to be expected due to the design of the lens. Here on the forum it was discussed also at length and there were many samples of the lens generally newer ones showed this. However it also transpired that many of the chrome examples including my own and older 35 summilux Asph focused correctly at all apertures.

 

My point is, it's easy to explain a problem with techno babble but I guess it's harder to explain why it does not always hold true, I call it a smoke screen. I'm still thinking about some of the responses I got to my original thread where people seemed to suggest the amount of back focus (8 inches) was normal for the noctilux, it's amazing that it took two trips on a brand new lens to at least get it down to a more manageable 1 inch.

 

It's also interesting that you also like to use the Noctilux stopped down a little, just goes to prove my theory it's not a 1 trick lens.

[rosuna]

I have to believe Leica regard the Noctilux as hassle, whatever its merits wide-open, it seems to be a challenge getting acceptable results stopped down.

 

I suppose a redesign based on the use of ASPH lens elements would improve the Noctilux performance and even would reduce its size. The look of a photograph taken at f/1.0 is unique, and different to the look of a 75mm f/1.4 or a 90mm f/2.0 at the same distance (or the same FoV). The R line of lenses has vario lenses, macro lenses, superteles, etc., and the M line has small superfast lenses, but one of the unique advantages and identity signs of it is the only f/1.0 lens actually in production. For instance, a 75mm f/1.4 or a 90mm f/2 are very common specifications (Nikon, Canon, Sony/Minolta, Olympus, Zeiss... offer that, for reflex or rangefinders), but the f/1.0 is truly unique. IMHO, Leica should redesign the Noctilux and bring a new model to the M line. The performance of the actual model isn't the only problem. I am thinking on the price too...

[pelikan1931]

I suppose a redesign based on the use of ASPH lens elements would improve the Noctilux performance and even would reduce its size. The look of a photograph taken at f/1.0 is unique, and different to the look of a 75mm f/1.4 or a 90mm f/2.0 at the same distance (or the same FoV). The R line of lenses has vario lenses, macro lenses, superteles, etc., and the M line has small superfast lenses, but one of the unique advantages and identity signs of it is the only f/1.0 lens actually in production. For instance, a 75mm f/1.4 or a 90mm f/2 are very common specifications (Nikon, Canon, Sony/Minolta, Olympus, Zeiss... offer that, for reflex or rangefinders), but the f/1.0 is truly unique. IMHO, Leica should redesign the Noctilux and bring a new model to the M line. The performance of the actual model isn't the only problem. I am thinking on the price too...

 

 

if there is one coming, i will sell all my 50s just to get this one.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[fotografr]

I'm still thinking about some of the responses I got to my original thread where people seemed to suggest the amount of back focus (8 inches) was normal for the noctilux, it's amazing that it took two trips on a brand new lens to at least get it down to a more manageable 1 inch.

 

It's also interesting that you also like to use the Noctilux stopped down a little, just goes to prove my theory it's not a 1 trick lens.

 

Yes, 8 inches of focus error is quite extreme and would be more than a little unsettling.

 

I would actually prefer to always use my Noctilux at f/1.0, but even with a 4x neutral density filter and a shutter speed of 1/8000th, it isn't always possible. At any rate, I find that the way the lens renders backgrounds at f/1.4 is almost indistinguishable from f/1.0 and the image quality is significantly better. That's why I sometimes stop down just a bit.