Noctilux 35mm f1.2

[ZHH]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It's interesting that it looks smaller than the 35 1.4 FLE CF. 

[archive_all]

2 hours ago, ZHH said:

It's interesting that it looks smaller than the 35 1.4 FLE CF. 

I don't think it does. The length looks similar but it looks to be a bit larger in diameter.

[lexffm]

If you look at the image, the lens extends about two-thirds over the lens release button. This gives it a diameter of about 65mm, which is about 7mm larger than the Summilux 35 FLE.

 

[sometimesmaybe]

16 hours ago, costa43 said:

Do you have any experience with the 40mm f1.2 by any chance?

alas no. i prefer 35mm as it gives me more room to crop the images to 4:5. the rendering of 40mm should be similar to the 35mm? from memory the 35mm f1.2 has gone through 3 optical design changes with v3 and v4 being the same

[sometimesmaybe]

14 hours ago, overexposed said:

it would be awesome if leica goes beyond 1.2

from memory Zenit made a 35mm f1.0 for M mount. i doubt wetzler would go beyond f1.2. it seems to be quite the trend at the moment releasing 35mm f1.2 (Nikon and Viltrox in the last few months)

[costa43]

Judging by the picture in the rumoured image, it seems like it is an f1.2. It’s a good compromise between speed and size/weight. 

[padam]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

When the current Lux is €5900 already, this being produced in smaller numbers has to be at least twice as much.

[Crem]

We now have more evidence in firmware it's a 35mm 1.2. So looks like not a 40mm.

Edited May 14 by Crem

[Crem]

On 5/10/2025 at 1:27 AM, padam said:

When the current Lux is €5900 already, this being produced in smaller numbers has to be at least twice as much.

I very much hope it's not 2x the Lux price. That clearly falls in the really not worth it to me category.

Edited May 14 by Crem

[Kiwimac]

I’m not really sure of the intent of a marginally faster 35. There’s already f1.4 in at least two current offerings. 
 

Would f1.2 really make massive improvements? 

[adan]

1) Increasing the aperture to f/1.2 earns this lens the label "Noctilux." Just as the marginal change from f/1.4 to f/1.2 earned the 1966 50mm f/1.2 the new name "Noctilux" - created especially for it. A 35mm "Noctilux" has been a popular request for years in the "What should Leica's next new M lens be?" sweepstakes.

2) Optical design does not stand still. A clean-sheet f/1.2 design in 2025 should perform better than the "warmed-over-and-tweaked 1990s design" of the 35mm f/1.4 ASPH. Just as the 2022 35mm APO-Summicron-M-ASPH significantly improves on the "regular" 35mm Summicron-M ASPH (1997).

3) Collectors, collectors, collectors! They have to buy anything new and different from Leica (even by a marginal amount) to avoid "falling behind" in the collectors-race.
        3a) Same applies for "gotta have the newest and latest" hobbyists.
        3b ) Bragging rights. Leica may not yet have equalled the Zenitar 35mm f/1.0, but at least they are no longer behind Voigtländer and others

[sometimesmaybe]

17 hours ago, Kiwimac said:

Would f1.2 really make massive improvements? 

depends on use case

not really if you stop down for more DOF such as landscape or street. that extra 0.33 to 0.5 stop is really handy when i shoot portraits. 

that extra light might also help if you need to shoot film in low light 

[evikne]

18 hours ago, Kiwimac said:

Would f1.2 really make massive improvements?

I hope and expect it will have a little more character than the 35 FLE. 

[Kiwimac]

Having owned (and foolishly sold) the 35 Apo Summicron, I’d have difficulty in being happy with anything not at least as perfect as that now. 
 

The other interesting thing will be the price of course. Here in NZ the 0.95 now costs more than some small cars!

[roma]

I’m afraid it’s going to be another unreachable (price wise) lens for most of us. I’d love to have something like this but not for $8-10k that it’ll cost.

I’ll just have to keep saying to myself: “What I have is fine, just keep using it more.”

[streetrattakesphotos]

On 5/7/2025 at 8:35 PM, RexGig0 said:

The difference between f/1.2 and f/1.4 is not likely to be enough to make any difference in my low-light shooting. I will, however, pay attention to other significant differences, in optical correction and performance. As it is, I use either the Zeiss Distagon 35mm f/1,4 ZM, or the Re-Edition Steel Rim Summilux-M 35mm Classic, depending upon the optical correction or character I want. 

A 40mm or 43mm M lens would capture my attention. I have used 40mm and 45mm SLR lenses, and often shot a 24-70mm f/2.8 zoom at about 40mm.

It might depend on the vignetting. Don't forget it's not all about the surface specs.

[Crem]

4 hours ago, evikne said:

I hope and expect it will have a little more character than the 35 FLE. 

I'm really curious what direction they will go. The lens looks rather small for a Noctilux which makes me wonder how corrected it is. From the photos it looks smaller than the Summilux 28.

[adan]

1 hour ago, Crem said:

I'm really curious what direction they will go. The lens looks rather small for a Noctilux which makes me wonder how corrected it is. From the photos it looks smaller than the Summilux 28.

Make sure you are estimating the scale correctly, using the one constant (the lens mount diameter)

The 35 barrel appears to overhang the lens mount a lot more than the 28 f/1.4 - maybe as much as to the red lines I draw here. I might guess the lens will use an E55 filter size (same as 90 Summicrons) rather than the 28's E49. Probably the same length as the 28 also (but just "looks" shorter due to the different proportions).

Also interesting is that the focus ring is in fact a focus ring - it has full 360° knurling |||||||||||||||| for gripping the focus ring with several fingers to turn it (a la 50 Summiluxes - may have a tab also, or not).

I'll jump into the sweepstakes and predict a weight of ~500g - or more. 🤪 But I guess we'll find out eventually.

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!

[Crem]

43 minutes ago, adan said:

Make sure you are estimating the scale correctly, using the one constant (the lens mount diameter)

The 35 barrel appears to overhang the lens mount a lot more than the 28 f/1.4 - maybe as much as to the red lines I draw here. I might guess the lens will use an E55 filter size (same as 90 Summicrons) rather than the 28's E49. Probably the same length as the 28 also (but just "looks" shorter due to the different proportions).

Also interesting is that the focus ring is in fact a focus ring - it has full 360° knurling |||||||||||||||| for gripping the focus ring with several fingers to turn it (a la 50 Summiluxes - may have a tab also, or not).

I'll jump into the sweepstakes and predict a weight of ~500g - or more. 🤪 But I guess we'll find out eventually.

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!

Great analysis and this makes a lot of sense. I missed that point about the overhang when I looked at it originally. It’s definitely not a Summilux 35 FLE replacement in terms of weight and size. 

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[costa43]

On 5/14/2025 at 4:27 AM, Crem said:

We now have more evidence in firmware it's a 35mm 1.2. So looks like not a 40mm.

This basically confirms it 100%.