Krosya
Konicaze
rogue_designer said:Assuming I had unlimited funds? Probably the Noctilux f1.
But I would miss using it on my Canon P's.
So maybe the Canon 50 1.2, just because it's LTM, and so much more versatile.
Hexanon 60/1.2 is LTM as well. I'd go for Hex, is I had the money for it. Meanwhile Canon 50/1.2 is a way to go for me.
raid
Dad Photographer
I have briefly used as loaners the Canon 0.95, Nikkor 1.1, and the Noctilux 1.0. I own a Canon 1.2, so this is what I voted for.
pvdhaar
Peter
Basically, I wouldn't get any of them. They're too fast for me.. and that implies bulk that I don't feel like carrying around. Spoils the whole RF idea in my book. But if I had to choose from this list, I'd go for the Hexanon because of the focal length..
georgef
Well-known
photobizzz said:
HA...I'm with you there! I have and LOVE the CANON 1.2....and to those who complain about its "inferior optics" I say:...pffffft! :angel:
Maybe its just me (as usually is the case), but my photog stops when the morning light comes to between ISO 800 at f1.2 and f.1.4 hehe.
Sure a nokton 1.0 onto an M8 would be very desired indeed, but on my planet, driving around the city in a 1,000$ car in the middle of the night with a 3,500$ lens onto a 4,500$ RF is, well....not gonna happen
. The 1.2 onto my RD1 is about as expensive as it will get for me....I do carry a big cron 90 2.0 with me, but thats purely for self defense
beezerc15
shep
none of the lens which are on the poll,my choice would be my leitz elmar 50mm f2.8 circa1958 ltm mount.though i have a summarit f1.5 it is just brill.
regards john
regards john
gberger
Member
The 50mm Summilux ASPH, with high speed film.
Just going from 50 to 100, or 100 to 400 negates the needs for a huge bauble of glass on the front of an M6 or an M7. A 1.4 lens with 400 film is an excellent cxompromise.
I've used an 1.4 with 3200 in theaters. Yeah, the grain is there - - -but it would still be there with a Noctilux and 800.
Just going from 50 to 100, or 100 to 400 negates the needs for a huge bauble of glass on the front of an M6 or an M7. A 1.4 lens with 400 film is an excellent cxompromise.
I've used an 1.4 with 3200 in theaters. Yeah, the grain is there - - -but it would still be there with a Noctilux and 800.
Andrew3511
Established
I used to have the fairly well-regarded 55mm f1.2 Zuiko, but frankly in the situations where you most wanted speed, in poor light, often with light sources in the frame, it was just not adequate wide open with low contrast, flare and coma. I was better off with the f1.4 and underexposing by 1/2 a stop. Stopped down a bit it was a good lens, but the extra weight was just not worth it. The Summilux (not the asph) is pretty good at full aperture and the 35mm lux is useable. I can find a lot of other uses for the money I would pay for a Noctilux, which is the only one that I'd buy.
x-ray
Veteran
Nokton 35 1.2 --- much better for my applications shooting in very low light. Easier to hold at lower speeds that are needed for extremely low light shooting. Exceptional wide open performance.
selma-1
Established
Fast Low Light Lenses
Fast Low Light Lenses
Make mine a Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 in Nikon Rangefinder Mount. I tried a poll on this with out much feedback! There are only currently 3 in the world that I know about.:bang:
Fast Low Light Lenses
Make mine a Voigtlander 35mm F1.2 in Nikon Rangefinder Mount. I tried a poll on this with out much feedback! There are only currently 3 in the world that I know about.:bang:
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
It has to be the 35mm Nokton ... but if I didn't have an M8 with the 1.33 crop factor that might not be the case.
If not ... ideally a Noctilux f1 but due to my reluctance to spend that much money on a lens ... probably the Hexanon 50mm f1.2
If not ... ideally a Noctilux f1 but due to my reluctance to spend that much money on a lens ... probably the Hexanon 50mm f1.2
gdi
Veteran
It has to be the 35mm Nokton ... but if I didn't have an M8 with the 1.33 crop factor that might not be the case.
If not ... ideally a Noctilux f1 but due to my reluctance to spend that much money on a lens ... probably the Hexanon 50mm f1.2
Ha! Only the Noctilux can make a Hex 1.2 seem affordable!
lorriman
Established
I like my contextual portraits, and I need a lot of oof background to make it a portrait, and not a candid or a glorified snap. Often the background I would prefer is just too close, and so is the wall to my back. And then f1 would be handy.
Sonnar2
Well-known
Money aside, I would love to try a Zunow LTM, preferably a black one.
Except on a black LEICA III... :
Except on a black LEICA III... :
Roger Hicks
Veteran
An awful lot of people seem to be coming at this backwards.
Do you feel yourself limited by the speed of the lenses you already have? In other words, do you find yourself forced to use higher ISOs/EIs than you like, or longer shutter speeds than you can reliably hand-hold?
Or do you like REALLY shallow depth of field? This is where the boring shots come in, in my opinion. Yes, it can be an essential part of your photographic style. Or it can be 'me-too' garbage, as is all too often the case.
If you really feel yourself limited by the fastest lens you own, then something still faster is an excellent idea. But if you just generally think it's cool to have a super-fast lens, you're probably a twit.
I've used a 50/1.2 Nikkor on my SLRs, and 35/1.2 Voigtländer, 50/1.2 Canon and 50/1 Noctilux on my Leicas. I used the Nikkor so little that I sold it; despite the adulation heaped upon the Canon, I don't think it's a very good lens at wider than f/2; the Voigtländer is very nice indeed but I'll live with 1/2 stop slower on my Summilux; and for raw speed, the Noctilux has it all.
So have I bought the Noctilux? No, because I've just bought a Thambar -- an even more specialized lens! Merely because a lens is specialized is no reason to denigrate those who buy it, IF they have a use for it (obviously I'd not buy the Thambar otherwise).
But it was touch and go between the two. And if I can sell my 12x15 inch Gandolfi FAST, I might buy the Noctilux as well.
Cheers,
R.
Do you feel yourself limited by the speed of the lenses you already have? In other words, do you find yourself forced to use higher ISOs/EIs than you like, or longer shutter speeds than you can reliably hand-hold?
Or do you like REALLY shallow depth of field? This is where the boring shots come in, in my opinion. Yes, it can be an essential part of your photographic style. Or it can be 'me-too' garbage, as is all too often the case.
If you really feel yourself limited by the fastest lens you own, then something still faster is an excellent idea. But if you just generally think it's cool to have a super-fast lens, you're probably a twit.
I've used a 50/1.2 Nikkor on my SLRs, and 35/1.2 Voigtländer, 50/1.2 Canon and 50/1 Noctilux on my Leicas. I used the Nikkor so little that I sold it; despite the adulation heaped upon the Canon, I don't think it's a very good lens at wider than f/2; the Voigtländer is very nice indeed but I'll live with 1/2 stop slower on my Summilux; and for raw speed, the Noctilux has it all.
So have I bought the Noctilux? No, because I've just bought a Thambar -- an even more specialized lens! Merely because a lens is specialized is no reason to denigrate those who buy it, IF they have a use for it (obviously I'd not buy the Thambar otherwise).
But it was touch and go between the two. And if I can sell my 12x15 inch Gandolfi FAST, I might buy the Noctilux as well.
Cheers,
R.
Uwe_Nds
Chief Assistant Driver
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
Im good with 50 Summilux (pre-asph or ASPH) -- fast focus & good all around lens. The lens Id really like to take for a spin is the Hexanon 50/1.2 althought its only marginally faster than my Summilux.
Last edited:
Peter Klein
Well-known
I really love the Voigtlander 35/1.2. As I mentioned in another thread, it is sharp wide open, and it doesn't have wiry or swirly bokeh--it has a kind of smooth bokeh like a 1960s Summicron. That's a winning combination. And on the M8, it's a normal lens. I'm a 50mm guy with film and a 35mm guy with the M8.
Of the lenses in the actual poll, I think the 50/1.2 Hexanon gives the nicest looking rendition wide open, so I voted for that.
No, I wouldn't turn down a Noctilux if someone gave me one. But it is just too expensive for me, and there are too many problems with focusing on the M8.
Roger's points about the Canon 50/1.2 are well taken, but hey, it's f/1.2 and it's mine.
Why own a superfast lens? Me, I like to go where the lights are low, and that extra half stop makes a difference sometimes.
--Peter
Of the lenses in the actual poll, I think the 50/1.2 Hexanon gives the nicest looking rendition wide open, so I voted for that.
No, I wouldn't turn down a Noctilux if someone gave me one. But it is just too expensive for me, and there are too many problems with focusing on the M8.
Roger's points about the Canon 50/1.2 are well taken, but hey, it's f/1.2 and it's mine.
Why own a superfast lens? Me, I like to go where the lights are low, and that extra half stop makes a difference sometimes.
--Peter
Last edited:
maddoc
... likes film again.
I just found this photo in the flickr account of this person:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mgay/
where he also uploaded a photo of my Noctilux / Hexar RF, which he has taken (stolen) from my pbase account... :bang:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/mgay/
where he also uploaded a photo of my Noctilux / Hexar RF, which he has taken (stolen) from my pbase account... :bang:
johannielscom
Snorting silver salts
I owned and shot a Canon 50mm 1.2 LTM but sold it in favour of the M-Hexanon 50mm 1.2 which I currently own. Yet, thinking of getting a Canon lens back.
Slightly OT: The Canon lens I owned wasn't completely agreeing with the Leica M3 I own, but it's fairly easy to take the rear mount off, I shimmed it for optimal focussing at 2 mtrs with thick sewing thread. Just started out with a meter of thread wound on the rear element, and re-attach the mount. Kept disassemling, adding 10 cms at a time and re-assembling until it focussed perfectly. Easiest job I ever did with matching a lens to a body, rather classic feel to the approach as a bonus
Although my M-Hexanon still needs to be optimized for my M3's, I put my vote in for it, since it renders such rich colours when shooting low light with slide film!
Slightly OT: The Canon lens I owned wasn't completely agreeing with the Leica M3 I own, but it's fairly easy to take the rear mount off, I shimmed it for optimal focussing at 2 mtrs with thick sewing thread. Just started out with a meter of thread wound on the rear element, and re-attach the mount. Kept disassemling, adding 10 cms at a time and re-assembling until it focussed perfectly. Easiest job I ever did with matching a lens to a body, rather classic feel to the approach as a bonus
Although my M-Hexanon still needs to be optimized for my M3's, I put my vote in for it, since it renders such rich colours when shooting low light with slide film!
This shot looks to me like a photo taken by Leica Tom. Another stolen photo, no doubt. Maybe the whole photostream is stolen photos
Last edited: