drstefanlenz Posted November 8, 2007 Share #1 Posted November 8, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) Hi, I just love that lens and want to share some impressions. for me f/1 is really great greetings from germany stefan hm, only 3 pics allowed, but ok... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Advertisement Posted November 8, 2007 Posted November 8, 2007 Hi drstefanlenz, Take a look here What M8 and Noctilux can do for me at f/1. I'm sure you'll find what you were looking for!
Guest Essemmlee Posted November 8, 2007 Share #2 Posted November 8, 2007 Were you focusing on the swan at the back of the pond photo and the tree in the foreground of the leaves photo? Only joking!! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Paul_S Posted November 8, 2007 Share #3 Posted November 8, 2007 Autumn leaves always makes me sentimental... Nice pictures Stefan, thanks for sharing. Hope to return the favor soon when my camera and lens return from Solms. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
fotografr Posted November 8, 2007 Share #4 Posted November 8, 2007 Welcome to the F/1.0 fan club. Nice images. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drstefanlenz Posted November 8, 2007 Author Share #5 Posted November 8, 2007 thanx, couldn't do without having to take like 800 pics within a few days all at f/1, everydaylife boredom turns out to be fun:) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexc Posted November 8, 2007 Share #6 Posted November 8, 2007 I love these kind of effects. I achive them with 35 summilux 1/4. Can somebody tell me what is the reason to use Noctilux. Is it that much lower DOF? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
marknorton Posted November 8, 2007 Share #7 Posted November 8, 2007 Advertisement (gone after registration) The Noctilux has much shallower depth of field. At 10m, wide open, the depth of field is 2.475m. For the 35mm Summilux, it's 8.636m. Both figures are from Leica's lens specifications which do not take account of the reduced DoF from the smaller sensor size. Mind you, the 75/1.4 has a depth of field of just 1.682 metres. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drstefanlenz Posted November 8, 2007 Author Share #8 Posted November 8, 2007 i have the 1,4/35 too, it is not like the noct at all Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnbuckley Posted November 8, 2007 Share #9 Posted November 8, 2007 Stefan - you have the perfect last name to admire this glorious lens, which I must say, you put to very good use. Cheers to you. JB Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
voightL Posted November 9, 2007 Share #10 Posted November 9, 2007 The Noctilux has much shallower depth of field. At 10m, wide open, the depth of field is 2.475m. For the 35mm Summilux, it's 8.636m. Both figures are from Leica's lens specifications which do not take account of the reduced DoF from the smaller sensor size. Mind you, the 75/1.4 has a depth of field of just 1.682 metres. Hi Mark, Does the sensor size affect DoF? I thought DoF should be the same, it's just that the image get cropped:confused: Thanks. Mike Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
drstefanlenz Posted November 9, 2007 Author Share #11 Posted November 9, 2007 Stefan - you have the perfect last name to admire this glorious lens, which I must say, you put to very good use. Cheers to you. JB yeah :-) Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
gdi Posted November 9, 2007 Share #12 Posted November 9, 2007 Hi Mark,Does the sensor size affect DoF? I thought DoF should be the same, it's just that the image get cropped:confused: Thanks. Mike Mike, The difference is the in the circle of confusion - the cropped sensor has less DOF for the same lens and print size. You can play with these numbers yourself here: Online Depth of Field Calculator You can also see the DOF differences decreases with decreasing subject distance. 10 meters is quite far for most of these extreme shallow DOF examples. At a more usual 3 meters the difference between the Nocti a Summilux 50 shrinks to a few centimeters ( around 7 for the M8). Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted November 9, 2007 Share #13 Posted November 9, 2007 {snipped}. At a more usual 3 meters the difference between the Nocti a Summilux 50 shrinks to a few centimeters ( around 7 for the M8). But they draw quite differently. I love the Noctilux on the M8, and mine seems to be working just fine EDIT--that's ISO 1250 at f1.0@ 1/16s, btw, so you know it's dark in there! 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! Link to post Share on other sites Simply register for free here – We are always happy to welcome new members! ' data-webShareUrl='https://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/37584-what-m8-and-noctilux-can-do-for-me-at-f1/?do=findComment&comment=398038'>More sharing options...
arthury Posted November 9, 2007 Share #14 Posted November 9, 2007 Jamie, That's what this lens is made for. Excellent way to use this lens to the fullest! "What M8 and Noctilux can do for me at f/1" A lot of blur images if you shoot in brightly lit areas. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted November 9, 2007 Share #15 Posted November 9, 2007 Thanks Arthur--it's going to get a lot of use in dark venues It's astounding to me how that thing gathers light! Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
hdrmd Posted November 9, 2007 Share #16 Posted November 9, 2007 Jamie: Remarkable rendition at such a high ASA. DR Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jamie Roberts Posted November 9, 2007 Share #17 Posted November 9, 2007 David, That's a straight-through ACR conversion with the defaults, and then a dodge and burn to turn it into what *I* saw and not what the *camera* saw. It's so hard to convince people that as the ISO goes up you need to make sure your exposure actually gets enough photons to the sensor It's counter-intuitive from the film days, but that's because my high speed film was usually around 400 ASA and the noise level is low, so when the lights went down you upped the film speed and pushed in post With digital, you get decreasing DR as ISO goes up; for me the sweet spot on the M8 is 640 where I still have a stop in the shadows to play with, but lower ISOs on the M8 can be pushed around a lot more. Still, when the light is very low, and the important DR flat, you can push to higher ISOs with great results. "Out of the camera" that scene is much flatter, but not more noisy, if you see what I mean. I didn't pull shadow detail at all (it fact it got buried a wee bit) but I did raise the midtones and highlights (and blew out the couch) because I could still, even at 1250. This is sometimes why every time a new FW comes out people think there's less noise at higher ISOs--they do a test exposure at 2500 in good light and in good low contrast light 2500 on the M8 is just fine. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.