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

[trickness]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

1 hour ago, Jon Warwick said:

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. 

I’ve seen it! I’ve watched it live. And I actually did a class with Mark/Leica Akademie in New York City, where I first tried the 75 Nocti, and that’s what made me end up buying one!

[Advertisement]

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

[Sohail]

7 hours ago, trickness said:

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! 😂

BTW, I was not criticising your images -- only that the kind of images you shoot could be done with a cheap entry-level DSLR (especially in posts #15 and 16). For the record, most of the images you refer to of mine were shot with a cheap entry-level micro four thrids camera -- a Panasonic Lumix Gx8. Happy shooting! 😀

[IkarusJohn]

I don’t think the topic is really about whether or not you need an expensive lens to shoot a great image, though it surely couldn’t hurt …

[Sohail]

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!

\

Shot with a 16MP cheap micro-four-thirds camera in 2015
Olympus OMD-EM1

[Sandokan]

Dr, G.

Why not add the M90 Summilux to your collection?

It is similar physically, has a similar depth of field but is a summi not a nocti. 

Or go old school with either the M75 or R80 Summilux or out of the box - try the Nikon AI 105mm or Canon FD 85mm/1.4 lenses. None of these are razor sharp but I have seen and liked portraits made with these. there is also the Canon FD 135/2 but you need to be in shouting distance to the model. 

[Ken Abrahams]

12 hours ago, trickness said:

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!

Exquisite portraits Trickness and very much in the style of images that you post on this site, whether 75 Nocti or from your 50 lux. I am not big on relating someones work to another photographers style. It's a kind of envy and unwarranted competitiveness to generalise someones images as such, instead of supporting individual creativity no matter what section of the journey they might be. The 75 Nocti is an outstanding lens going by your images. I had a picture of this lens at my work station a few years ago before it became even more expensive. The image and price tag inspired me to build up my lens collection however I didn't quite get to the 75. It's still a possibility depending on some health issues. If I was in the market for such a lens and weighing up my options I would do exactly what the OP is doing and that is doing research and sizing up ones creativity for the need of such a unique lens. Obviously that decision worked for you, Trickness, well done. 

Ken 

[tritentrue]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

6 hours ago, Sohail said:

BTW, I was not criticising your images -- only that the kind of images you shoot could be done with a cheap entry-level DSLR (especially in posts #15 and 16). For the record, most of the images you refer to of mine were shot with a cheap entry-level micro four thrids camera -- a Panasonic Lumix Gx8. Happy shooting! 😀

Would you kindly share with us exactly which cheap, entry-level DSLR and lens could replicate the images you referenced?  I mean replicate with the same level of details and contrast shown in the lashes and locks in the respective photos, and with identically blurred OOF areas?  I'm genuinely curious.

[Hanno]

21 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, 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!!!!!

 

 

I was about to say something similar but not as eloquently and profound as @trickness did  

Depending on the type of portrait you do, whereby AF is important, you may really want to keep the SL-APO 75mm or get a SL-APO 90mm. These would complement so well with the Noctilux 75mm. 50mm has always been my focal lens for so many years, but once I moved into 75mm and 90mm for portraiture, I find it hard to revert to 50mm. It's very personal and I am not arguing against 50mm for portraiture! I just share your love for 75mm (and I can't wait for the XCD 2.5 90mm v release!).

At the end of it, it's not about needs. It's about choices and which choices will inspire you best to go out there and make pictures. 

I second the point made earlier, best would be renting and trying a new lens before buying it, all the more here given the investment and decision on what to keep / sell. Spending some time with it before a final decision. No one here, no matter our experience and portfolio, can do that for you.

Whatever your final choice, indeed you will have amazing and more than you may need gear. Happy shooting.  

 

Edited September 15, 2023 by Hanno

[Sohail]

1 hour ago, tritentrue said:

Would you kindly share with us exactly which cheap, entry-level DSLR and lens could replicate the images you referenced?  I mean replicate with the same level of details and contrast shown in the lashes and locks in the respective photos, and with identically blurred OOF areas?  I'm genuinely curious.

We're obviously seeing differing things. In post 16, I don't know where the focus is—the background is blown out, the hands have haloes, the eyes and glasses are blurred (perhaps deliberately). I'm not seeing any texture or detail in the hair or skin (again maybe a deliberate artistic choice). Perhaps, if you can explain where the strengths of a $15,000 lens are being showcased here, then I can respond. The photo (in post #16) doesn't strike me as an image that is beyond the reach of the crappiest DSLR lens and camera. Do we seriously need evidence for this? Now, that's no criticism of crappy DSLRs. I've posted further up an image I took with a micro-four-thirds camera with an even smaller sensor (post #24). But let me be super clear here. This is not a criticism of the image (in post #16). We all have our tastes. Tastes aren't better. They are what they are. But in keeping with the spirit of the question of OP here, I don't see the technical or optical grounds for forking out $15,000 for the 75mm Noctilux based, at least, on these images. 

Edited September 15, 2023 by Sohail

[tritentrue]

18 minutes ago, Sohail said:

Perhaps, if you can explain where the strengths of a $15,000 lens are being showcased here, then I can respond. 

I asked a simple question.  Nice try at deflection, though.

8 hours ago, Sohail said:

only that the kind of images you shoot could be done with a cheap entry-level DSLR (especially in posts #15 and 16).

Manufacturer and model names of camera and lens, please.

[Sohail]

2 minutes ago, tritentrue said:

I asked a simple question.  Nice try at deflection, though.

Manufacturer and model names of camera and lens, please.

The question is pointless. I am happy to deflect. 

[tritentrue]

11 minutes ago, Sohail said:

The question is pointless. I am happy to deflect. 

 . . . because you made a belittling claim that you are unable to substantiate.  

_____________

For OP:  Having previously owned both the 50 'lux SL and the 75 APO 'cron SL, I'd have happily ditched both in favor of the 75 Noctilux if it came with the guarantee that I could make photos like the ones @trickness shares here.

 

 

[trickness]

7 hours ago, Ken Abrahams said:

Exquisite portraits Trickness and very much in the style of images that you post on this site, whether 75 Nocti or from your 50 lux. I am not big on relating someones work to another photographers style. It's a kind of envy and unwarranted competitiveness to generalise someones images as such, instead of supporting individual creativity no matter what section of the journey they might be. The 75 Nocti is an outstanding lens going by your images. I had a picture of this lens at my work station a few years ago before it became even more expensive. The image and price tag inspired me to build up my lens collection however I didn't quite get to the 75. It's still a possibility depending on some health issues. If I was in the market for such a lens and weighing up my options I would do exactly what the OP is doing and that is doing research and sizing up ones creativity for the need of such a unique lens. Obviously that decision worked for you, Trickness, well done. 

Ken 

Thanks Ken, really appreciate your kind words about my pictures. Apologies in advance for the long reply to one particular part of your post (that regarding relating one photographers work to another).

In my post, I mentioned photographers that inspire me, as an illustration of how different influences can lead to different creative outcomes. As much as we all strive for our own unique visual signature, these influences can often be obvious - if not to ourselves, then to others. I don't personally think that referencing a highly accomplished photographer as a possible influence in another member's work is inherently insulting, envious or competitive (it certainly isn't my intent). Some might take it as a compliment. 

What I do find oddly envious and competitive is this trend to dismiss, disregard or disrespect a particular tool in large part because of price. For example (all of which I've seen here):

"SL2 outdated/sucks. Sony/Fuji/Panasonic is cheaper and better"

"SL APO lenses are no better than the cheapest Panasonic or Sigma L mounts"

"$15,000 lenses should take images that I consider to be worth $15,000"

Or the worst one, "I can take the exact same photo with my blah blah blah camera lens"

This last one to me is willfully ignorant and insulting. The camera/lens doesn't take the photo, the photographer does. Truly, I don't look at anyone's work here and weigh it based on the gear used to take the shot - I don't think anyone does. So these comments about someone's images needing to be worth the pricetag of the gear are really provocative. And what is a $15,000 image anyway? Should anyone have to take a $10,000 M11M image to justify their purchase of the camera body? 

If we all had to do that, it would be pretty quiet around here. And really, who among us is at a level of success where we feel we can set that standard for anyone else? One should set it for one's own self. These things are just tools, paint brushes, they're different, they're fun, and yeah we all wish they were cheaper. Not sure why some people are so soggy about these things.

When someone doesn't own or hasn't used a product comes into a thread and dismisses that photographic tool, or examples of work that were shared by another user to show the product in actual use, to me that's just automatically disqualifying. There's so much "I haven't used this AT ALL but I have something else that I think is just as good and this thing is too expensive so I think it sucks now prove to me it's worth the money" on here/the Internet - it's just pure methane. 

One could read some posts in this thread and come away with the impression that the 75 Nocti, and by extension all Leica products, are overpriced equivalents of a Canon Rebel Ti with a kit zoom lens. (Come to think of it that's EXACTLY the look I was going for in my pictures! 😂) And on some level - this is right! Because a great photographer can make a great picture with any camera. 

But the Noctis are FUN 😎

 

Two guys walk into a photo meet. Once shares his experience with a lens he owns, pros and cons, shares a few images taken with the lens.

Another guy walks in, says "I don't own/haven't used this overpriced lens, but I can take exactly the same pictures with my $300 kit. Prove to me your pictures are worthy of the retail price"

I guess it's up to the OP to decide which is more helpful. Perhaps both are, in a way. 

 

Anyway - sincerely, thanks as always for your mature and kind thoughts Ken.

 

 

 

 

Edited September 15, 2023 by trickness

[trickness]

To bring it back to pictures - here's one (I've posted this before in another thread, apologies to anyone that's already seen it) - that to me shows the 3 things the 75 Nocti is superb at - sharpness and resolution in the focus areas, falloff beyond that point, and lastly the richness of the color rendering. This was a very quick street portrait, about a two minute interaction. I was going for subject sharpness in this shot because, well, I felt like it!

The 75 Nocti has a different kind of sharpness to the 75 APO SL - I'd call it kind of "gainy", almost like the resolution has been boosted - not in an unnatural way though. With the SL APO, everything is sharp in a more modern way. It's hard to explain unless you're looking at DNGs side to side.

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 15, 2023 by trickness

[Sohail]

1 hour ago, trickness said:

What I do find oddly envious and competitive is this trend to dismiss, disregard or disrespect a particular tool in large part because of price. For example (all of which I've seen here):

You can't be envious of a tool. You can't compete with a tool either. And the idea of disrespecting a tool is even more weird. For the reasons I explained, it is not a reliable tool for getting sharp images (if like me you value sharpness) because it's a manual lens with a very shallow depth of field. Is this me disrespecting the 75mm Noctilux? Competing with it? Envious of it? Disrespecting it? 

Edited September 15, 2023 by Sohail

[Sohail]

1 hour ago, trickness said:

To bring it back to pictures - here's one (I've posted this before in another thread, apologies to anyone that's already seen it) - that to me shows the 3 things the 75 Nocti is superb at - sharpness and resolution in the focus areas, falloff beyond that point, and lastly the richness of the color rendering. This was a very quick street portrait, about a two minute interaction. I was going for subject sharpness in this shot because, well, I felt like it!

The 75 Nocti has a different kind of sharpness to the 75 APO SL - I'd call it kind of "gainy", almost like the resolution has been boosted - not in an unnatural way though. With the SL APO, everything is sharp in a more modern way. It's hard to explain unless you're looking at DNGs side to side.

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!

Could you please tell me where exactly you were focussing so I can assess your claims about sharpness, resolution and fall off behind that point. My point is that if you can't get a lens like that to reliably and consistently focus where you want it to, what's the point of it? When it works, I'm sure it's magic.

Edited September 15, 2023 by Sohail

[IkarusJohn]

I have to agree with @trickness.  

7 hours ago, Sohail said:

But in keeping with the spirit of the question of OP here, I don't see the technical or optical grounds for forking out $15,000 for the 75mm Noctilux based, at least, on these images. 

So, it’s not actually the images or the technical qualities of the lens - they are a given, as each lens (particularly Leica lenses) have a distinctive fingerprint.  I don’t thinnk there can be any doubt about that.  While the image above, taken with a cheaper micro 4/3 camera, reinforces trickness’s point that a good photographer can usually take a good image with any camera or lens, it isn’t the same as the images taken with the 75 Noctilux.  That doesn’t make it a bad image - it’s very good, for what it is.

The problem with the cut to the chase quote above is that it is either saying that trickness’s images are, objectively, not very good and/or the lens isn’t worth it, based on the output.

Not sure this is very helpful for the OP, or progressing the discussion.  It’s just one more opinion, laced with distaste either at Leica striving for perfection with these lenses, and their pricing, or with tricknes (which I assume is not the case).  We get it.

Edit - As to the dreadlocked image in post #16, it has a particular artistic approach, both in framing, exposure and post processing.  It is one of a number of the images taken with the 75 Noct, showing a different approach.  It is just another example of a strong image taken with this lens.  Surely, we’ve moved on from one viewer’s idea of technical perfection, when the image clearly serves the photographer’s purpose?

Sure, @Sohail could take a similar (somewhat derivative of Steve McCurry’s Afghan Girl) image with a cheaper camera.  So what?

Edited September 15, 2023 by IkarusJohn

[Olaf_ZG]

7 hours ago, Sohail said:

We're obviously seeing differing things. In post 16, I don't know where the focus is—the background is blown out, the hands have haloes, the eyes and glasses are blurred (perhaps deliberately). I'm not seeing any texture or detail in the hair or skin (again maybe a deliberate artistic choice). Perhaps, if you can explain where the strengths of a $15,000 lens are being showcased here, then I can respond. The photo (in post #16) doesn't strike me as an image that is beyond the reach of the crappiest DSLR lens and camera. Do we seriously need evidence for this? Now, that's no criticism of crappy DSLRs. I've posted further up an image I took with a micro-four-thirds camera with an even smaller sensor (post #24). But let me be super clear here. This is not a criticism of the image (in post #16). We all have our tastes. Tastes aren't better. They are what they are. But in keeping with the spirit of the question of OP here, I don't see the technical or optical grounds for forking out $15,000 for the 75mm Noctilux based, at least, on these images. 

I both admire @Sohail and @trickness for their portraits made. Where @Sohailis great with the sl50lux, @trickness rocks it with the n75.

image on post #16 is not my taste, but then #17 is one of @tricknessbest portraits ever (to me).

Probably all good be done with a lesser set up, but the optics might help in making an image from good to great.

I thank you both for showcasing your work as well valuable contributions to this forum.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica L-Mount

[Sohail]

8 hours ago, IkarusJohn said:

I have to agree with @trickness.  

So, it’s not actually the images or the technical qualities of the lens - they are a given, as each lens (particularly Leica lenses) have a distinctive fingerprint.  I don’t thinnk there can be any doubt about that.  While the image above, taken with a cheaper micro 4/3 camera, reinforces trickness’s point that a good photographer can usually take a good image with any camera or lens, it isn’t the same as the images taken with the 75 Noctilux.  That doesn’t make it a bad image - it’s very good, for what it is.

The problem with the cut to the chase quote above is that it is either saying that trickness’s images are, objectively, not very good and/or the lens isn’t worth it, based on the output.

Not sure this is very helpful for the OP, or progressing the discussion.  It’s just one more opinion, laced with distaste either at Leica striving for perfection with these lenses, and their pricing, or with tricknes (which I assume is not the case).  We get it.

Edit - As to the dreadlocked image in post #16, it has a particular artistic approach, both in framing, exposure and post processing.  It is one of a number of the images taken with the 75 Noct, showing a different approach.  It is just another example of a strong image taken with this lens.  Surely, we’ve moved on from one viewer’s idea of technical perfection, when the image clearly serves the photographer’s purpose?

Sure, @Sohail could take a similar (somewhat derivative of Steve McCurry’s Afghan Girl) image with a cheaper camera.  So what?

To clarify: I never disputed that the 75 Noctilux has a distinctive fingerprint. I never expressed an opinion on the artistic merits of trickness' photos. I never said his photos were not very good. I simply made the claim that to buy a 75 Noctilux (and trade in very fine lenses) is not in my view a sound decision because your hit rate for photos (where sharpness matters) will go down dramatically. Further, if you want to take photos like post#16, you don't need a 75 Noctilux. That result can be achieved with a cheap entry-level DSLR. That's why I posted a photo of my own with a cheap 16MP entry-level micro-four-thirds camera.

[Sohail]

7 hours ago, Al Brown said:

"Proper plane of sharpness placement is just a bourgeois concept".
                                                                     -- Henrietta Higgs-Bozon.

Indeed. Destroying the focus ring and disabling the autofocus feature on your camera is a radical and revolutionary act that will free the proletariat. Let's all do it!