Replacing my 50 Lux SL and 75 APO with the 75 Noctilux?

[Dr. G]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

I currently have the 50mm Summilux-SL and the 50mm APO Summicro-SL.  I mostly use the Summilux for portraits.  I also have the 75mm APO Summicron-SL that I use for portraits, but also automotive photography, product photography and, at random times, general shooting.  

Understanding that I'd be losing autofocus and weather sealing, what are the pros and cons of replacing both the 50 Summilux and the 75 APO  SL with the 75 Noctilux?  I understand that 75mm is not 50mm, but I would still have my 50 APO to cover that focal length.

Does anyone have both the 50 Lux and the 75 Nocti, and what are your thoughts on the rendering differences?

Edited September 13, 2023 by Dr. G

[Advertisement]

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

[Chaemono]

The 50 Summiliux-SL creates a unique depth rendering wide open that conveys the perception that one can reach in and grab the object in focus. It comes at a price. It flares a bit and the OOF area in front of the focus point is a bit nervous. The 75 Noctilux controls light effortlessly wide open and has equally gorgeous bokeh in front of and behind the focus point. In fact, if you flip a picture taken with the 75 Noctilux wide open on its head, there is no way of telling by looking at the OOF areas that something is wrong. 

[Jeff S]

7 hours ago, Dr. G said:

Does anyone have both the 50 Lux and the 75 Nocti, 

Lensrentals does.

Jeff

[Dr. G]

1 hour ago, Jeff S said:

Lensrentals does.

Jeff

Thnaks, Jeff - I guess I could pick their brain about them, but I was hoping for some insight from members that have used both.

[Jeff S]

2 minutes ago, Dr. G said:

Thnaks, Jeff - I guess I could pick their brain about them,

The idea is to rent from them and draw your own conclusions, based on your shooting, editing and (hopefully) print workflow.  Plus, no comments here can address your findings and preferences concerning viewing, focusing, handling, controls and ergonomics, apart from rendering.  The Noctilux, after all, retails for about $2.5k more than the other two lenses combined.  A few days rental is relative peanuts.

Jeff

[Sohail]

I'm a massive fan of the 50 SL Summilux. It renders beautifully. I've taken many successful images with it that I'm proud of. I haven't used the 75 Noctilux. I've used the 50 Noctilux a little. All I can say is that your hit rate is going to go down dramatically. You'll be left with a very expensive lens and forever trying to justify your investment on the forum pages here but with very few images to show for it. To be honest, I've yet to see a portrait taken with any of the Noctilux lenses that I personally like. 

[LeicaR10]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Dr G,  There are two most excellent portrait photographers that have a lot of experience with the SL 50 Summilux and 75 Noctilux.  The first is Sohail and his above post #6 and masterpiece portraits in the SL2 Image thread offers proof of the value for the lens.  The other photographer is Trickness.  His 75 Nocitlux portraits are also masterpiece works using that lens along with the SL2 and M 50 Summilux lens too.  I would suggest you send Trickness a PM from the forum once you look at some of his photographs and ask his opinion.  I suggest you look at these two links that will demonstrate what the SL 50 Summilux and 75 Noctilux can do in experienced hands. The good news, you have choices, but only you can make the decision that is right for you.  r/ Mark

Try:  https://onfotolife.com/lens_sample_photos?lens_id=374&page=1&focal_min=0&focal_max=800&aperture_min=0&aperture_max=32

Try:  https://onfotolife.com/lens_sample_photos?lens_id=1382&page=1&focal_min=0&focal_max=800&aperture_min=0&aperture_max=32

Edited September 14, 2023 by LeicaR10

[IkarusJohn]

Then again, you could just do it.

You end up with the 50 APO and the 75 Noctilux, and you learn to make the most of them.  I haven’t had those two, but I did have the 50 Summilux-SL, and it was hands down the best 50 I’ve had.  Big and heavy, but fabulous.  The 75 Noctilux-M isn’t on my radar, but I can inderstand why it might appeal.  I’ve had the 75 APO Summicron-SL, and loved that lens too.

I appreciate that this is a generalisation, but I would take a bit of convincing that the 75 Noctilux is better on an SL camera than the APO 75 SL.  From the images online, the Noctilux has that fingerprint (I do have the 50/0.95).  If you take the plunge, why not keep the Summilux and sell the two Summicrons, and get the 75 Noct …

[trickness]

I do not have the 50 SL Lux - mostly because I have the M version and I have absolutely no complaints about it. But I do have the 75 SL APO and the 75 Nocti, which are chalk and cheese.

I do not agree with the assessment above that your hit rate will go down with the 75 Nocti. Not if you are using it on an SL body anyway - the EVF makes this lens really usable in a way it just isn’t on the M, especially when you consider the weight of the 75 Nocti, which I don’t really see as being manageable on an M. It’s kind of a pig on the SL! You never lose awareness of the fact that you are carrying around a ton of glass.

Everybody focuses on the bokeh with Noctis, less so on the rendering of the lens, which to me is what makes the 75 Nocti really special. I can scan through my Lightroom library, and immediately identify which images were taken with this lens. There is something about the color that is very rich and very cinematic, even if you’re not shooting it wide-open. 
 

The 75 SL APO is it a lot lighter, it’s weather sealed, and, of course is auto focus. But I think it also has a very special rendering… If you’d like the 75 focal length, both of these lenses have a lot to offer and are very different to use and the final outcome of the image. But I would definitely call the Nocti a specialty lens - it’s heavy, it’s expensive, it’s manual. Focus… you have to use it with intent. If you are ready to commit to that approach to using this lens, to taking the time to really understand how it works, you will be thrilled with the lens.

But I really can’t emphasize enough that it is a specialty lens. People that get dissatisfied with Noctis seem to buy them because they have unique capabilities and end up hating them because that’s “all they do” and they’re very expensive. Which to me is like buying a Ferrari and then complaining that it’s not good in traffic.
 

You will also read lots of comments from people who say that you can get the exact same results with different lenses that are less money, or a longer focal length, or from the 75 Summilux…. none of which is really true. You can take great pictures with these alternative options, but they are not going to look like 75 Nocti images. Those other lenses don’t have the same glass or the same optical computations or the same coatings. This is not important to a lot of people, who may be focused on the value proposition of Noctis, which is controversial to say the least.

I would not replace the 75 APO SL with the Nocti or vice-versa. They really have nothing in common other than the fact that they are both 75 mm Leica lenses. They are both utterly fantastic tools (as is the 50 SL Lux). 
 

If you do get the 75 Nocti, appreciate it for what it is, not what it isn’t. And no matter what you decide, you’ve got some great glass!!!!!

 

 

Edited September 14, 2023 by trickness

[trickness]

8 hours ago, LeicaR10 said:

Dr G,  There are two most excellent portrait photographers that have a lot of experience with the SL 50 Summilux and 75 Noctilux.  The first is Sohail and his above post #6 and masterpiece portraits in the SL2 Image thread offers proof of the value for the lens.  The other photographer is Trickness.  His 75 Nocitlux portraits are also masterpiece works using that lens along with the SL2 and M 50 Summilux lens too.  I would suggest you send Trickness a PM from the forum once you look at some of his photographs and ask his opinion.  I suggest you look at these two links that will demonstrate what the SL 50 Summilux and 75 Noctilux can do in experienced hands. The good news, you have choices, but only you can make the decision that is right for you.  r/ Mark

Try:  https://onfotolife.com/lens_sample_photos?lens_id=374&page=1&focal_min=0&focal_max=800&aperture_min=0&aperture_max=32

Try:  https://onfotolife.com/lens_sample_photos?lens_id=1382&page=1&focal_min=0&focal_max=800&aperture_min=0&aperture_max=32

My sincere thanks for your kind words, Mark 🙏

[Sohail]

2 hours ago, trickness said:

I do not have the 50 SL Lux - mostly because I have the M version and I have absolutely no complaints about it. But I do have the 75 SL APO and the 75 Nocti, which are chalk and cheese.

I do not agree with the assessment above that your hit rate will go down with the 75 Nocti. Not if you are using it on an SL body anyway - the EVF makes this lens really usable in a way it just isn’t on the M

I guess hit rates depend on the standards we set ourselves. But if you set yourself, say, objective criteria like getting the eyes in focus and try doing that in the field with a manual lens at 1.25 or 0.95, you're not going to have the same success rate as with an automatic focus lens at 2.0. I see a lot of images shot with a Noctliux that I would personally throw away because the focus is off, the depth of field is too shallow, or the bokeh in the background is overly blurred. 

BTW, could you please share some images that you think scream 75 Noctilux in a way that the 75 SL don't. I'm happy to be persuaded otherwise. 

Edited September 14, 2023 by Sohail

[Sohail]

2 hours ago, trickness said:

My sincere thanks for your kind words, Mark 🙏

Likewise!

[trickness]

2 hours ago, Sohail said:

I guess hit rates depend on the standards we set ourselves. But if you set yourself, say, objective criteria like getting the eyes in focus and try doing that in the field with a manual lens at 1.25 or 0.95, you're not going to have the same success rate as with an automatic focus lens at 2.0. I see a lot of images shot with a Noctliux that I would personally throw away because the focus is off, the depth of field is too shallow, or the bokeh in the background is overly blurred. 

BTW, could you please share some images that you think scream 75 Noctilux in a way that the 75 SL don't. I'm happy to be persuaded otherwise. 

I guess we fundamentally have differing opinions on image creation - I don't think sharpness and focus in an image in an unassailable virtue, quite the opposite. I find myself intentionally looking for less sharpness in my images, more motion blur, grain - slower shutter speeds. I'm not looking for National Geographic style portraiture. I'm much more interested in photographers like Anton Corbijn, Peter Lindbergh, Helmut Newton, Arnold Newman, Philippe Halsman, Jeanloup Sieff - all of who certainly know/knew how to focus a camera, but none of whom had sharpness in their photographs as a primary concern. I'm not saying that sharpness isn't desirable for some photographers, nor that a wide open blown out bokeh-fest is the best way to take a picture every time. I think it comes down to what our individual work is about. I take photographs very slowly and deliberately so my hit rate with the Nocti is very high. I would NEVER say this lens' strength is as a tool for use in fast paced environments.

I think using the word "scream" to discuss differences in these lenses is inherently problematic, because it equates to an expectation of some massive difference between the lenses. Its generally acknowledged that many Leica lenses are different in how they render/draw - Mandler vs Karbe is an obvious example of this - but we can also get into ASPH vs pre-ASPH, Summicron vs Summilux vs Summit vs Summaron - and in the case of the 75 Nocti vs the 75 SL APO, of course it's the same. They are two entirely different computations/grindings/elements/coatings - why would they not be different? But to "scream" the difference? I wouldn't use that word. They render differently. This is not my opinion, it's a fact (just ask Peter Karbe). And I say that owning both lenses and having the experience of shooting with them regularly.

I've posted a lot of 75 Nocti images in the M Glass forum area, but I'll post a few more below. I don't expect everyone to like them, but if you enlarge the images you will get a clear idea of the character of the lens, as I've posted images which I hope play a bit more to the 75 Nocti's strengths. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited September 14, 2023 by trickness

[trickness]

This is a 75 Nocti image - not a great one, just a picture of a girl, natural November light. What's hard to see with the reduced resolution is the insane detail that the lens pulls - I can zoom in at 400% and the capillaries in her eyes are pin sharp. So what's unique is the combination of the focus fall off into dreamland, AND the sharpness, and the color palette delivered at the same time. I've added a bit of vignetting here as I think it compliments the image - the lens is bonkers sharp edge to edge.

You could get in the ballpark with a 90mm or longer in terms of focus falloff, but the resolution of this lens and the color rendition are very much its own thing. The differences are quite clear looking at DNGs in Lightroom.

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]

Also 75 Nocti

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]

Also 75 Nocti

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]

Also 75 Nocti

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!

[Sohail]

1 hour ago, trickness said:

This is a 75 Nocti image - not a great one, just a picture of a girl, natural November light. What's hard to see with the reduced resolution is the insane detail that the lens pulls - I can zoom in at 400% and the capillaries in her eyes are pin sharp. So what's unique is the combination of the focus fall off into dreamland, AND the sharpness, and the color palette delivered at the same time. I've added a bit of vignetting here as I think it compliments the image - the lens is bonkers sharp edge to edge.

You could get in the ballpark with a 90mm or longer in terms of focus falloff, but the resolution of this lens and the color rendition are very much its own thing. The differences are quite clear looking at DNGs in Lightroom.

 

Thanks for sharing the images. I'm not sure I get your point. On the one hand, you say you look for "less sharpness", and that it's not something you prioritise or prize. And then the first image you post you talk about the insane amount of detail in the capillaries in her eyes. As for the other images, I'm not sure I'll ever quite get the point of using such an expensive optic to produce images that, at least to my eye, are easily easily achievable, with a cheap entry-level DSLR. And yes I completely agree: we have fundamentally differing opinions on image creation. That's not to say that the kind of images you like or strive for are better or worse than the images I like or strive for but that I fail to understand why you would want to fork out $15,000 if those are your goals. Horses for courses, I guess.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[trickness]

25 minutes ago, Sohail said:

Thanks for sharing the images. I'm not sure I get your point. On the one hand, you say you look for "less sharpness", and that it's not something you prioritise or prize. And then the first image you post you talk about the insane amount of detail in the capillaries in her eyes. As for the other images, I'm not sure I'll ever quite get the point of using such an expensive optic to produce images that, at least to my eye, are easily easily achievable, with a cheap entry-level DSLR. And yes I completely agree: we have fundamentally differing opinions on image creation. That's not to say that the kind of images you like or strive for are better or worse than the images I like or strive for but that I fail to understand why you would want to fork out $15,000 if those are your goals. Horses for courses, I guess.

Well, one could say the same thing about why you need to use a 50 Lux SL to make the Steve McCurry-esque images you shoot - you could also use “ cheap, entry-level DSLR” to take the shots you take.

I’ve given explanations and posted examples and made logical arguments about the questions asked here. You’ve taken a different approach. I’m off to go shoot some more cheap looking, easily achievable images. Wish me luck! 😂

 

 

Edited September 14, 2023 by trickness

[Jon Warwick]

2 hours ago, trickness said:

I guess we fundamentally have differing opinions on image creation - I don't think sharpness and focus in an image in an unassailable virtue, quite the opposite. I find myself intentionally looking for less sharpness in my images, more motion blur, grain - slower shutter speeds. I'm not looking for National Geographic style portraiture. I'm much more interested in photographers like Anton Corbijn, Peter Lindbergh, Helmut Newton, Arnold Newman, Philippe Halsman, Jeanloup Sieff - all of who certainly know/knew how to focus a camera, but none of whom had sharpness in their photographs as a primary concern. 

If you haven’t seen it, you might find a YouTube video from Leica Camera USA to be interesting called #StayHomeWithLeica - Photography Wide Open with Mark de Paola – A Noctilux Discussion …… it really opened my eyes to Mark as a photographer whose beautiful work I very much now admire, and also why the lack of perfect sharpness can be so compelling. 

Edited September 14, 2023 by Jon Warwick