Is a Noctilux worth it?

[Olaf_ZG]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I know, another question about a lens. And I also know, that only I can answer for myself. Yet, I am still interested in other opinions.

On my M I have a 24mm, several 50’s, and the nokton 75/1.5. I am seriously considering to add the 90mm apo as well as a SL75 apo.

A remark from @trickness about the Noctilux 75mm made me take a look into this lens. I never considered such lens before, but must admit the rendering is really nice, but so is its price.

But instead of a m90 and the SL75, and with selling the nokton, the Noctilux comes within reach (with some additional cash ofcourse).

But will a Noctilux be worth it? I know many here would like one, had one or still have one. If you had one, why did you sold it? If you want one, why don’t you go for it? 
 

thanks, Olaf

[elmars]

I always wanted a Noctilux 50 mm. I bought one two years ago and knew beforehand that I would probably sell it again. It's big and heavy. If you like an M, you usually like small and light lenses. But on the other hand, the Noctilux is beautiful and has an incomparable look at open aperture that you can't get software-wise. I've spent two years taking the photos I wanted to take with it, and now the time has come to sell the lens again.

I don't know if the Noctilux 75 has the same incomparable look. I doubt it because it's the much more modern calculus with much less aberration. If it's just the blur you're after, then I wouldn't expect too much from the jump from 1.4 to 1.25.

[Advertisement]

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

[mdg1371]

The 75 Noctilux is a commitment— it is a heavy beast, and really lends itself to EVF focusing.

When I got mine, I really put it through some intensive testing to see if RF focusing is doable, and it is. However… I found that near minimum focus distance, even with a properly tuned RF, you can miss focus not just through subject or photographer movement or the other usual culprits, but because an image can appear perfect in the rangefinder patch, and you can still tweak the focus ring almost imperceptibly without seeing any difference in the viewfinder- so the RF patch shows zero change, but the focus plane is nudged *just* out of focus. So using the RF can be a touch hit or miss.

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!

[01af]

vor 23 Minuten schrieb mdg1371:

... an image can appear perfect in the rangefinder patch, and you can still tweak the focus ring almost imperceptibly without seeing any difference in the viewfinder ...

The problem is not inadvertently tweaking the focusing ring but inadvertently swaying with your body to or fro in the short time interval between acquiring focus and actually firing the shutter.

.

vor 23 Minuten schrieb mdg1371:

So using the RF can be a touch hit or miss.

The very same is true for the EVF.

[darylgo]

Yes, it’s worth it, the lens has no peers.  75mm eliminates a great deal of clutter and f1.2 isolates the subject further.  Chromatic aberration are minimal to none.  Josh @ Leica Store Miami uses his to check M body rangefinders for good alignment and mine is the same, the rangefinder is spot on.  There is perhaps an episode from them on 75mm, if so they’ll normally show rendering etc.  If the lens is too perfect, clinical, modern or whatever term is used for minimal aberrations a Softar filter will soften it nicely.  It’s a beast of a lens but not difficult to grow accustomed to its handling.  The images are very rewarding. 

[trickness]

@Olaf_ZG the 75 Nocti is a very unique lens - that's what you're buying. Like any Nocti, it requires commitment and adaptation to use effectively. It's HEAVY. It has no focus tab. It makes me a bit paranoid carrying it as it's so expensive. All these things are reasons why people get rid of their Noctis - thats why I think it makes sense to have realistic expectations when considering the purchase of really any Nocti, but especially the 75, which is not a universally loved focal length.

BUT - the insane bite of sharpness this lens has, the rich color rendering (totally different than the 75 SL APO which I also own) - it makes unique looking images. Using it with the SL2 EVF makes the job of getting a sharp image quite easier than with an M. The 75 Nocti is an amazing creative tool, its not always going to be the best lens for the job, it's not a general use lens due to the size, weight and cost - but if you exploit the strengths of this lens, it's highly rewarding. I bought mine after using the lens for a couple of hours at a Leica Akademie event in NYC.

The 75 Nocti and the 75 SL APO are nothing alike in terms of rendering. The SL lens has more accurate color, the Nocti is more romantic.

If you get one, my advice is to shoot with it exclusively for a couple of months until you truly understand what it can do.

Adding a bunch of 75 Nocti images below.

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!

Edited September 2 by trickness

[trickness]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

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!

[trickness]

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!

[trickness]

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!

[trickness]

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!

[trickness]

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!

[trickness]

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!

[Jeff S]

Another guy who discusses the benefits of using it on the SL platform..

Jeff

[Gregm61]

If you REALLY want one then yes, it’s worth it if you can afford it. If you can use one to assist in a money-making career in photography it can be “worth it”.

Anyone wanting one who can afford one will always think it is worth it. For the vast majority who can’t and never will be in a financial position to swing one, no it’s not. 

If you’ve got the financial ability and will never be satisfied until you’ve given it a try, stop vacillating and just buy the thing.

Edited September 2 by Gregm61

[Olaf_ZG]

11 minutes ago, Gregm61 said:

 

If you’ve got the financial ability and will never be satisfied until you’ve given it a try, stop vacillating and just buy the thing.

To me it is just too expensive to buy like that, and would make switch priorities in order to afford it, which is ok, if it will be a lens for “life”, like my other two leica lenses.

[trickness]

Oh and get one used. I got mine for 9K USD.

[mdg1371]

24 minutes ago, trickness said:

Oh and get one used. I got mine for 9K USD.

Same here, I think 9400 USD— there is no real substitute for this lens, I do not use it often but I absolutely will not part with it.

[trickness]

6 minutes ago, mdg1371 said:

Same here, I think 9400 USD— there is no real substitute for this lens, I do not use it often but I absolutely will not part with it.

I think it makes zero sense to get any Nocti new - you get one from somebody who bought it new, had to have it because of the Nocti halo effect, then resells and takes a hit because the lens is "difficult" 😂

[Stuart Richardson]

I will be the contrarian and say that I don't think the biggest area of differentiation between the 75mm Noctilux (1.2-1.8) and other exceptional telephotos is so great as to be all that important. Of the many fine photos shown here, I don't think any of them could not be replicated with a slightly different lens or kit. For example, the 75mm Summilux, 75mm APO Summicron, 90mm APO Summicron, let alone the numerous fast short telephotos offered by other companies...the sea of 85mm 1.2s and 1.4s, 105mm 1.4s, 105mm DC lenses and so on. Planars, Summiluxes, Otus's and so on...and this is leaving aside medium and large format, which bring in legion more exceptionally beautiful lenses. I am not saying that the results will be the same, only that the difference is very unlikely to make or break a photo. The 75mm Noctilux may be the best of the super high speed telephotos, but in the end it is just a lens. A very nice one, but worth 15,000 dollars? I think only to people for whom 15000 dollars is small enough money to even think about using on a camera lens. How many of the world's great portraits were shot on a 75mm Noctilux? I would venture to guess not a single one...

If you have one and love it, more power to you. It is a spectacular lens, but this discussion makes it sound like it will improve your photography, which I think is highly suspect. The best portraitist I know uses a 30 year old Nikon 135mm 5.6 large format lens stopped down to f22 for every single shot. She wins prize after prize... Still, we do work best when we love our tools. I am certainly a lens snob myself, so I should spend more time heeding my own advice. Anyone who wants to give me a 75mm Noctilux will get my sincere thanks, but as a price vs value ratio, I think there are any number of better propositions. If you want to stay in the Leica family, the S cameras and the 100mm or 120mm lenses are pretty spectacular, and available at much more palatable price these days. Or at an even more modest price, a 90mm APO Summicron or 75mm Summilux, one providing the sharpness, one providing the glow (or stopped down, also the sharpness).

Edited September 2 by Stuart Richardson

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[trickness]

36 minutes ago, Stuart Richardson said:

I will be the contrarian and say that I don't think the biggest area of differentiation between the 75mm Noctilux (1.2-1.8) and other exceptional telephotos is so great as to be all that important. Of the many fine photos shown here, I don't think any of them could not be replicated with a slightly different lens or kit. For example, the 75mm Summilux, 75mm APO Summicron, 90mm APO Summicron, let alone the numerous fast short telephotos offered by other companies...the sea of 85mm 1.2s and 1.4s, 105mm 1.4s, 105mm DC lenses and so on. Planars, Summiluxes, Otus's and so on...and this is leaving aside medium and large format, which bring in legion more exceptionally beautiful lenses. I am not saying that the results will be the same, only that the difference is very unlikely to make or break a photo. The 75mm Noctilux may be the best of the super high speed telephotos, but in the end it is just a lens. A very nice one, but worth 15,000 dollars? I think only to people for whom 15000 dollars is small enough money to even think about using on a camera lens. How many of the world's great portraits were shot on a 75mm Noctilux? I would venture to guess not a single one...

If you have one and love it, more power to you. It is a spectacular lens, but this discussion makes it sound like it will improve your photography, which I think is highly suspect. The best portraitist I know uses a 30 year old Nikon 135mm 5.6 large format lens stopped down to f22 for every single shot. She wins prize after prize... Still, we do work best when we love our tools. I am certainly a lens snob myself, so I should spend more time heeding my own advice. Anyone who wants to give me a 75mm Noctilux will get my sincere thanks, but as a price vs value ratio, I think there are any number of better propositions. If you want to stay in the Leica family, the S cameras and the 100mm or 120mm lenses are pretty spectacular, and available at much more palatable price these days. Or at an even more modest price, a 90mm APO Summicron or 75mm Summilux, one providing the sharpness, one providing the glow (or stopped down, also the sharpness).

With respect, you've missed the entire point of what I tried to say in my post - I can't speak to anyone else's.

Firstly, no lens or camera will "improve your photography", I certainly did not assert that and I don't think anyone else here did. Getting better pictures is down to the numpty pressing the button, not the gear.

The 75 Nocti renders uniquely. None of the other lenses you mention render like it. Nobody is saying that makes it the greatest lens ever, or that it is needed to take the "world's great portraits".  Why are you trying to make this some kind of contest? It's just something different. Quite like Leica itself. You could present your entire argument above about the Leica brand and the cameras we use - why not use Sony? Or Fuji? Or an iPhone? We have our reasons for using this brand and this tool. Why do you have to negate the value of this wonderful tool because you either a) choose not to use one or b) you don't want to spend the money? This is such stereotypical reaction to Noctis and really to Leica in general. The other lenses you mention are wonderful - but their existence does not negate the validity of anything else. They're just different. I've got 5 Leica lenses and they all serve different needs. The appropriate question is: what are your priorities? Are you trying to get an affordable portrait lens? Do you want something light? Modern or classic rendering? Auto or manual focus? Is a fast aperture important to you? What about color rendition? I guarantee you that none of the lenses you recommend has color like the 75 Nocti, and please don't say you can make It look the same in post, because if we go there, then again let's just sell all our Leica gear, shoot Fuji (a fine camera brand) and fix everything in Lightroom. 

Your friend uses a different system and wins prizes? Great. There are lots of great photographers and great lenses in the world, but again, why does it have to be a competition? If it was, we'd all look at portrait photos by Arnold Newman, sell our Leicas and go home.

I'm curious - have you ever shot a 75 Noctilux? Because it sounds like you haven't from your post. Not saying its a requirement to have an opinion, but certainly it is a prerequisite to having an informed opinion. 

If you can "replicate" any of the photos above with different gear, please do so and post here. Would love to see those pictures. But then again, why bother? Its the person who makes the picture, regardless of the camera/lens.

The Nocti isn't perfect, it's not the ultimate lens. But it is its own thing, and isn't it great that we have these choices instead of always having to be so damned practical. 

 

 

Edited September 2 by trickness