Jump to content

M8 and Noctilux As Seen In LFI


Recommended Posts

Advertisement (gone after registration)

In the LFI that just arrived in my mailbox, there's a pretty terrific piece on a pair of Dutch brothers who use the Noctilux to shoot fashion photography. It's interesting because while a couple of photographs have that patented Nocti bokeh, several of the pictures are razor sharp, or at least certain planes are sharp. The photography of the model's faces, though, tends to be spot on in focus and sharpness, with blurring as you get further from the eyes. In these guys' hands, the Nocti works, but it draws me to two conclusions.

 

1.) Perhaps I need to get my Nocti to Solms, because even allowing for backfocus, I could never get something that sharp when wide open.

 

2) I suspect many of the images are shot at 2.8, where the Nocti takes on a different, more traditional characteristic. That said, they could probably get most of what they need with the Summilux, and not have to strain their arms lifting an M8 and Nocti...

 

For those who have seen the article, does the Noctilux seem to perform them as it does for you? If the answer is yes, and at 1.0, then darn, I'm going to have to get this backfocus thing dealt with...

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 90
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted Images

There's are two other possibilities. 1) They use a tripod. (Don't think so.) 2) They have younger eyes, and can focus better. Ah, now that's a possibility... and something the Solms hospital can't correct...

Link to post
Share on other sites

I used to get very sharp photos using the Noctilux and film. It was my favorite lens. I haven't been able to get the same sharpness with the M8 and Noctilux. I even sent them both to Solms to be matched and I still can't focus it right. It could be my old eyes, too, :) , but the 75/1.4 works fine and is super sharp with the M8. I need to practice more but when I couldn't get sharp photos after sending it to Solms, I just gave up. Hope you have better luck!

 

Tina

Tina Manley- powered by SmugMug

Link to post
Share on other sites

I think a lot has to do with a combination of old eyes and the fact that digital reveals flaws that we didn't see with film. After saying that I'd always ask people to judge a lens from prints and not by looking at 100% magnification views in Photoshop. Revisiting many of my film shots reveals that compared to a Tri-X the M8 is a far superior device in terms of resolution., but yet the old Tri-X negatives still look very good when they're printed.

 

Yet after all that I've just sold my Noctilux. Perhaps I was sucked into the quest for higher resolution - I'm not so sure, but whatever the reason I'd hardly used my Noctilux since buying the M8. The fact that I just about got twice what I paid for the lens in 2002 helps to soften the blow.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Advertisement (gone after registration)

Noctilux and film are a perfect match and I may go back to using my M7 and film just to use the Noctilux. Most of the photos from this one on are made with the Noctilux:

 

Weldi Brooks photo - Tina Manley photos at pbase.com

 

I agree, Steve, that it's probably a combination of old eyes and digital showing up more than film. So, just for the Noctilux, it will be film.

 

Tina

Tina Manley- powered by SmugMug

Link to post
Share on other sites

Jaap

 

Only one of those shots that you have linked to has that true "only with a Nocti" feeling as far as I am concerned.

 

Just a link, Andy... #3 and #6 I would say for the Noctilux look.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Go here,

Divisions of photography

to see the intro(2nd) page of my website where I have done a short (?) review of the M8 + Noctilux. Nothing more than my 'Love Affair' of the combo wherin I present about 20 pics done with it.

 

Briefly, my combo was sent back to Solms (actually twice) and returned in what I consider perfect focus. OOF shots are now my fault, I believe.:D It is my most used combo when shooting for myself.

 

Edit: I should add, perhaps unneccesarily, that 99% of my shots were @ f1.0, otherwise, why use this lens!

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thank you for linking to their site. Yes, those are the shots. And they are, I believe, quite wonderful. But seeing them: the perfection in focus (as compared to what I know I can do) can't be explained by younger eyes, I guess. If these are shot at f/1.0, then I think I do need to get my Nocti, which I adore, better calibrated with my M8. It's not just me! There's a little bit of a focus issue.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Noctilux and film are a perfect match and I may go back to using my M7 and film just to use the Noctilux. Most of the photos from this one on are made with the Noctilux:

 

Tina,

 

Your photographs are inspirational; not just those posted here today but also from your smugsmug galleries.

 

Have you any examples of Noctilux and M8?

 

Dubois

Link to post
Share on other sites

John, those fashion images are extremely post-processed (and well done at that). But viewing them at web resolution, with all the PS trickery, it makes me assume they've gone through some punishing rounds of sharpening and high-pass filters to get that crisp sparkle. My young-ish eyes (I can focus a 90 cron at f/2) were able to focus an Nocti with no problem. The sharpest point in the frame was right where I intended it, no back focus, and yet it didn't appear as sharp as the Dutch photos, and I assume that if you viewed prints of those Dutch photos you'd see the Nocti flaws become more apparent.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, Dubois. I don't have many M8/Noctilux photos posted because most of mine miss the focus :( Here's one, though:

 

Belly Dancer, II photo - Tina Manley photos at pbase.com

 

Converted to B&W.

 

Tina

Tina Manley- powered by SmugMug

 

 

Tina wouldn't that photo be better titled Boy in amazement? Whatever.

May I ask why you maintain 2 different photo sites?

I have a hard enough time maintaining and updating my one site.

Ed Chatlos (Shootist)'s photos- powered by SmugMug

Link to post
Share on other sites

John,

my Noctilux went to Solms twice, the second time together with my M8 and my 35/1.4asph as well as the 75 and 50 Summilux lenses for calibration.

In my case I could still not focus the Nocti reliable. It has nothing to do with my eyes, but more with focus shift and also with the fact that the fault seemed to be slightly different at different distances.

Also digital sensors seem to show it more clearly, if the focus is not spot on.

I sold it and rather use my 50asph or the Zeis 50/1.5.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hi, Ed. Actually, I have more than two :) One for friends and colleagues to discuss photos, one for travel blogs, one to sell photos myself, one to sell photos through an agency, one that's free so I've left my portfolio up there, etc. I've tried to consolidate them all into the SmugMug site but it's not as easy for people to leave comments there and I like to have the interaction of comments so, for the time being, I have at least five :)

 

Tina

Tina Manley- powered by SmugMug

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...