Noctilux as a general lens? (Yet another noctilux thread)

[Singlemalt]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Hi,

 

Question : Is it possible to use the noctilux as a general lens on the M8? I've have seen some pictures using it in daylight and from what I understand it can be good almost to f/1.2 or 2.0 followed by a grey zone and then good again at stopped down further. I also understand there are issues with focusing (easily) and quickly. Does anyone use it as a general lens?

 

My Background/reason for stupid question :

 

This is my first post and I'm a bit of a noob - so forgive me. I am not a professional photographer by any stretch - but I do enjoy low light photography. My first camera was a canon 300D (digital rebel in the U.S.) and I remember trying to wander the streets of sydney at night trying to get some shots and being frustrated with not being able to get a decent picture due to the light. The EF-S lens was horrible. So I bought a Canon f/1.8 which was great. But I still had difficulty getting good shots in intimate situations with friends - indoors, poorly lit areas etc. Then I bought a flash. I hate flash. I tried bouncing the flash and doing all sorts of things but it still didn't work for me. Tripod work just doesn't work in the situations that I use the camera in. So I bought a gary fong diffuser...

 

Now people run away...

 

Not to mention lugging around the monstrosity.

 

I DO think I still have a lot to learn about light and photography but I think I have reached the limit of what I can do with the 300D. I am now thinking of getting the 5D or M8. The problem with the 5D is that it is still huge and still intimidating. If I get the M8 then I'm really think the noctilux is the lens im after for what i want to do ("candlelight" stuff) - but then i see how sharp some of the 1.4 'crons and 'luxs and I falter a bit. They really do look amazing. But i'll probably run into the same problem - especially if the m8 get noisy above 640 ISO.

 

Anyway... I'm just after advice.

 

Thanks.

[35mmSummicron]

going from a canon 300D w/50mm 1.8 "fantastic-plastic" to an M8 with noctilux........saying that is a big change is an understatement.

 

the 50mm F1.0 noctilux is the fastest 35mm stills lens in production so if its "candle-light photography" you are after then it will get you the fastest shutter speed. one benefit of the M8 over any other M rangefinder is that the shutter speed now goes to 1/8000th sec. so if you throw a 2stop ND in front, you can shoot full aperture in bright sunlight at 160ISO.

 

so technically yes you can use a noctilux as a general lens.

whether you actually want to lug a big, expensive, and unique/exotic lens around everywhere is another question of what you want to acomplish as a photographer...

[Jamie Roberts]

Naresh,

 

This is going to sound weird on a Leica forum, but honestly from what you're describing, you should learn how to shoot with the 300 before buying an M8 and a Noctilux.

 

There just isn't that much difference between the 1,8 Canon and Noctilux in terms of speed. Just over one stop, and the Canon has that in low light noise characteristics and is easier to focus.

 

So if you're not getting the look you want, you need to study light. Set the Rebel at ISO 800 and learn to process the results.

 

ISO 800 and f1.8 is more than fast enough for candlelight. Too slow? Push it to ISO 1000. That's almost the same as shooting f1 @ ISO 640 on the M8.

 

I'd suggest you do this for a year--till you get good and repeatable results with the Rebel--and then think about something else that can grow with you.

 

I think the M8 / Noctilux combo will be a recipe for more headaches than you want, personally. And for the money, that Canon 50 1.8--plastic or no--is one heck of a good lens.

 

Oh, and ditch the fong dong thing and learn to bounce your flash. Not just off the ceiling, but off any surface where you can direct the light. Use your fingers (yes) if you want to shape a little flash forward; you don't need the ersatz bare bulb thing (a real bare bulb would be different--and look different again).

 

I hope this makes sense to you and isn't disappointing.

 

Put this another way: you could buy a 40D and a 50 1.2L Canon for less than the price of the Noctilux, let alone the M8 + Noctilux. That combo would be great practice for the Nocti too.

 

The only mitigating circumstance here is if you just love rangefinder shooting. Then I'd say what the heck, get the M8. But don't expect better results with that right away

 

Ok--you asked for advice There it is. YMMV

[Singlemalt]

Thanks,

 

Yes... I am worried about my skill. I've been using the 1.8 to try to get the results I want now for over 2 years. I guess it wouldn't be an issue if the m8/noct wasn't as expensive as it is. The last thing I want to look like is some dork who doesn't have a clue and poses with an expensive camera (not that anyone would have a clue about it). The noct may be too big a step for me - and this is in my mind all the time - until I get better. I guess I was looking to minimize my expense by using one lens.

 

The only problem with ISO 800 is that is too noisy on the 300D - at least for me. In normal light I have had some great shots with the 1.8 (maybe not in the same "great" as many here - but appealing to me).

 

I guess my frustration came to a head when I managed to find this dingy looking night club in melbourne called Manchester Lane where this band was playing some nice Blues. It was awesome. Dark with up lights throwing these red hues on the ceiling. The band playing. Sipping on some Oban. Awesome.

 

There was no way I was going to get what I want without a tripod.

 

The other thing that appeals to me is the m8 does seem to be less intimidating. That means a lot to me. Being inconspicuous is what I want - it takes a while for people to relax with some big slr floating around. That's what I'm hoping the m8 will give me.

 

But I do take your point - and appreciate it!

[tom0511]

1) I dont think the M8+Moctilux is that much smaller than a D300+50/1.8

 

2) I agree with others that f1.8 to f1.0 shouldnt be such a big difference. Also keep in mind that the Noctilux at f1.0 a) is very soft is very hard to focus and even if you focus precisly the DOF is very very shallow and only good for a small percentage of subjects. So often you will want to use f1.4-f2.8 instead.

Overall I would think thatthe 5D is the better available light camera. You could add a 50/1.0 or 85/1.2.

 

3) if you go the M8 way you also might consider the 35/1.4 instead the Noctilux. I would say its the better allround available light lens.

 

4) Having said all the above in 1) and 2) I have to add that I think that its much more fun to shoot with a M8 (for me at least). While I dont think it has an advantage in high ISO I think the M8 has an advantage in sharpness because of the lack AA filter.

 

What exactly are you not getting with your 300d combo what you think you get with the Leica?

[Singlemalt]

Ahh but the m8/noct would be smaller than a 300d/1.8/flash..

 

I guess what I am after in the m8 is :

 

1. Physically less intimidating camera to others

2. Ability to shoot in low light without a flash

3. Better... sharper? more vibrant? images.

4. Fun

 

I actually like the idiosyncracies of the 1.0 lens itself but after getting feedback maybe I should reconsider the 5D or at least 35/1.4 or 50/1.4 with an m8.

 

I've talked to several photographers and even my canon retailer (!) about my problems and what i've done to try and get around it. I understand the 300D is a noisy camera in general - which may be part of the problem. I don't shoot above ISO 800 (at worst). The canon guy even said the m8 would be "perfect".

 

Thanks.

N.

[Venkman]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

May I bring another perspective in, which is M8 and a 50/1.4 Summilux?

 

I think I've read (and I can not speak out of experience here, since I never used DSLRs) that the M8 is easier to use at 1/30th and maybe even below, while a DSLR will lose you there because of the mirror flip?

 

I had wonderful results with it

(example here: http://www.l-camera-forum.com/leica-forum/other/34828-m8-first-birthday-favorite-photo-3.html#post367475)

and it is not the total overkill pricewise. I use a non-asph model which I bought used for < Euro 900.

[Eoin]

I understand the desire for fast lenses, low light and all that, but one must think of the limiting depth of focus achieved wit using such apertures. That being said, I can't really see the need for f:/1.0 and the low micro contrast(image detail) the Nocti would bring. I'd opt for a 35 or 50 Summilux Asph in this situation or a 75 Summicron Asph if distance was a problem . Then set the ISO to 640 and underexpose by 1 to 2 stops and recover in post processing.

 

As for the choice of Leica v's Canon in this situation, that's a personal choice and more down to the ability and skill set of the photographer. The Canon for sure with it's automation would make the task more easy and possibly be a lot cheaper. But I'm kitted out in Leica and I'm sure that would not be a limiting factor to get the "money shot".

 

"Can the Noctilux be used as a general lens?", yes for sure it can, but you have to be prepared to compensate for it's short comings, It's large and slow focusing, unusable between f:/2.8 & f:/4.0 without having to compensate for focus drift, lower contrast and edge sharpness to images, swirly (dizzy) bokeh is some situations. All in all I'd say the Noctilux is better suited to subdued light rather than daylight shooting without a doubt but can be used in either situation. For me it just was not worth the hassle or the price.

 

As they say, the choice is yours!

[Singlemalt]

Wow... thanks venkman - the glass in the dark looks amazing.

 

SM.

[Jamie Roberts]

Naresh,

 

If noise is a problem, look at the new 40D. It's cheaper than a 5d. Don't every waste money on the 50 1.4 Canon; it's worse than your 1.8 IMO.

 

But adding a 50 1.2L Is pretty special, and as I said before, you could get both for the price of the Noctilux.

 

And yes--the M8 is a perfect available light camera. But you need to know how to use it.

 

It's true for me I find it easier to handhold at slightly slower shutter speeds; but a 40D should be good up to ISO 1250 for noise, is a 14bpp camera, has AUTO-ISO (I would kill for this on an M8) and will be more than fast enough in low light coupled with a 1.2L lens.

 

Oh--and you can bolt Leica R glass on it if you want to see the difference between, say, the 50 1.2L and the Leica Summilux 50 R (which is one gorgeous 50, IMO).

[Jamie Roberts]

Naresh--one addendum...

 

I feel like I'm being too harsh here; please understand I own four Leica 50s (2 Rs and 2 Ms) and one of those is a Noctilux

 

I also love my M8--and more and more as time goes by. But it's just not as easy to shoot well as a dSLR unless you just love the rangefinder experience. That's all I'm saying, and there are plenty of good learning options.

 

But if you love the simplicity of the M8, and the quirkiness of a Noctilux, then it's a fascinating combination, to be sure.

 

So you asked for advice, and I guess I'm just saying before you drop $10,000 or more on the combination, you should be sure you want it. That amount of money buys a lot of other stuff!

[cmogi10]

10 grand is a lot of money for a self proclaimed noob to do candlelight photography, you have to make sure you really want it, is there a place you can rent it from?

Unless money is seriously no issue, then eh, go for it!

[jdos2]

I did exactly that on the MP. Noctilux as one of the standard lenses (I also had the 35mm Summilux).

 

Worked extremely well. Don't worry about the backfocus- it didn't bite me much. Love the low light pictures, and found the lens to be amazingly useful under all conditions.

 

While you are at it, get an ND filter (x16 or whatever you can get that's strong enough to allow you to shoot wide open in bright daylight). Just plain fun.

 

J

[c6gowin]

Jamie has laid out some solid common sense advice. I would love to see you get an M8 and a Noctilux or Summilux - they are great tools - but I would hate worse for you to spend $10k and regret it. The only additional advice I can offer is to go find a Leica Demo Day/Workshop or better yet a Leica Akademie trip where you can try the M8 and M lens to see how they fit your shooting style. I attended a Leica Akademie trip in Germany this past summer and got 10 days use of any Leica cameras and lenses I wanted. It was an invaluable way get to know what I really liked.

[LichMD]

Having come from the Canon DSLRs I have to say I've learnt more about photography in 9 months with the M8 than I did in 4 years with Canon cameras. Probably has a great deal to do with how much fun the M8 is to use. I bought the Noctilux and used it as a general lens for about 4 months (a few thousand pics) a great lens, with a number of quircks and a learning curve that requires a great deal of patience. Naresh may be better served with the 35 lux or 50 lux or even the CV 35/1.7 especially if cost is a concern.

Naresh, I love Oban, if you get to NYC drop me a line and I'll point you in the correct direction to practice available light photography while enjoying it.

[Singlemalt]

Thank you. Good advice.

 

I think everyone has talked me out of the noctilux. Not necessarily the leica though. To me the choice has always been between the 5D and the m8.

 

In my head I suspect the 5D is at least the cheaper choice - and I will be able to take fantastic shots with it no doubt. I guess during my travels there have been a few things that have put me off it - things where I think the m8 will have over it. I have seen so many pro photographers with their canons and the their super white lenses. They are huge - and not practical for me. I don't take sports photos. I don't need superfast focusing in that sense.

 

I am attracted to the full frame sensor. The high iso characteristics. The image stabilized lenses. And everything else mind you.

 

I saw this guy taking a picture of this busker in federation square in melbourne. He had a 5D and a off camera flash. The busker was kind enough to pose for him and he took more than a few shots. Light was flashing everywhere and I'm sure the shot was great. But everyone stopped. What he was doing wasn't "real". There was no "moment". It was all a staged scene. That's not what I want.

 

There are several things that make me like the leica. It is a "moment" camera - at least in the past. You can typically hold it lower shutter speeds and take street photography. It is street photography in my mind. I had the chance to pick one up at our local photo store. I loved the viewfinder. I loved its simplicity. That was immediately appealing. I also love the fact that you dont attract attention like a 5D. I know how people react when I have my huge SLR setup - and I hate it. Sure its good in certain situations - but not what I really want.

 

When I think of the photos that have really struck me in the past. They have all been done with leica m's. I love the tradition and worksmanship.

 

In my head I guess that if I get an m8 and when technology eventually moves on I will still have a great camera which will always take great pictures.

 

Anyway...

 

Thats what has been going through my head.

 

N.

[Singlemalt]

Oh yes... And i have thought about the 40D and 400D and the cameras in between the old 300D and the 5D. They are great cameras. But they are all variations of the original 300D in many ways.

 

I want to take the next step (though i admit the "next step" in this case is more like a long jump on the moon).

[Cindy Flood]

Another idea is to upgrade your 300D to a 400D. The 400D is about the same size as the M8 and I think you would find it to be a big improvement. You can get one for about $525 used. You gain MP and high iso performance. With your 50 f/1.8, it would be a nice little package.

 

Edit: You were writing your last post when I was writing this one. It seems like you just are looking for a change. Why not buy an inexpensive film rangefinder and see if you even like the rangefinder way of shooting.

[AlanG]

I haven't seen any of your work, but I bet I can get to the heart of the problem. You may think that shooting in low light will give you great pictures if the images are sharp, well composed, and have good expression. But if the light is "horrible" as you say it is, maybe the problem is the quality of the light, not the quantity. In other words, are you sure you have all of the elements of a nice image and you are just lacking the ability to get the camera steady enough, or get the image focused accurately?

 

Here are two images of BB King that I shot back in 1972 with a Nikon F, 200mm F4, probably at about an 1/8th of a second on 160 Ektachrome (maybe pushed a stop - I can't recall.) The b/w one was on 400 ISO Tri-X.

 

The color one isn't very sharp but has nice expression and interesting light. If I shot it with modern equipment today, it probably would be sharp, but that is all that would need improvement in my opinion. On the b/w one, his face is very sharp. It was just a question of shooting enough frames for a few of them to be sharp. (Due to subject movement and my own ability to focus and hold steady.)

 

So my point is, work on the pictures, and see if you really think the problem can be solved with a different camera as I know I have gotten some sharp images with a 200 F4 lens at 1/8th.

 

Why not post some of your "problem" images and explain how you wish they had turned out?

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!

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Interesting Leica gear

[jerryharwood]

naresh- hi, I have had a noctilux for the last ten years. Firstly it is a fantastic lens, very expensive, but it depends on what you want. It is VERY heavy, and bearing in mind the cost of the M8, together that represents an enormous amount of the readies ! You can use this lens for general purpose work, but be well advised that the depth of field is absolutely MINIMAL, ie inches, so you will have to be very aware of what you are shooting, otherwise you will be disappointed in the results. I used this lens in the field of accident investigation, for which purpose it was ideal. But only you will be able to know what you willuse it for, and assess the results. I would be inclined to go for the 50 F1.4, at least you will have an aperture which will handle 90% of what you want to shoot, and you will have a considerable depth of field. And, it will be considerably cheaper !

Bear in mind that there are a lot of people out there who would delight in relieving you of both camera and nocti, if they get the chance ! I would try, if you can, the M8 with an F1.4 first.