50/1.1 Nokton the Real Story

B-9

B-9

Devin Bro
Local time
11:27 AM
Joined
Jul 9, 2009
Messages
2,448
Ill save the long backstory for another time and place.

I've been pondering on the Nokton 1.1 but all I see is reviews bashing the optical quality in favor of the Leica Noctilux

Lets get real for a moment, Im a user, far from a pixel peeper, caught somewhere between being cheap and wanting more out of my gear.

I was wondering if anyone has anything good to say about the Nokton?
My main motivation behind looking at the Nokton is my curious hobby of photographing fellow lushs at the many bars my small town has to offer.
F1.1 is tempting, but I'm in limbo as if Ide be any better off with a Summarit or 1.5 Nokton

How does the Nokton perform in the real world? Outside of sloppy reviews.
 
You'd save more money buying the VC 1.5 which is a good lens, but it aint 1.1, it aint a Noctilux either, sod the naysayers, a J3 is nice too.
 
um, the key point is that the 50 f1.1 Nokton is capable of f1.1 depth of field. And you're getting that capability at a fraction of the cost of any Noctilux.

The 50 f1.1 Nokton is a fantastic lens for the money, if you need a lens that shoots at an aperture wider than f1.4.

There are some fantastic lenses for the Leica at f1.2, the most affordable being the Canon 50mm f1.2. It has a very classical bokeh to it.

If you want or need to go faster than f1.1, how much you want to afford is going to guide what you get.
 
I had a Nokton F1.1 for awhile, and it was a great lens in almost every way. Very good real-world sharpness given the aperture and price, and solid build quality, and it'll surprise you how good it is wide open I think. However, I just couldn't get around the size of it.

People's standards differ here - it's not much bigger than an SLR 50/1.4, but on a Leica it felt pretty big, enough that I never wanted to bring it with me anywhere. That said, I personally don't like taking huge cameras to a bar, so you might be better off with a smaller F1.4 lens and faster film/higher ISO.
 
Hi, i used one sample for a while, it´s not a bad lens, but´s huge, my sonnar zm does everything better than the nokton....also a better perfomer is the canon 1.2 lens...of course it has it´s own character and is small from flange to top.
 
i moved this thread about a cv lens from the leica m section to the cv section of rff...please respect the rff forum structure.
 
7 Simple Observations

7 Simple Observations

I own the Nokton 50/1.1. I love it. If you look into the front of this lens you may fall in love as well.

Here are seven simple observations about the CV Nokton 50/1.1.
  1. The Nokton is a big lens in the rangefinder world.
  2. The Nokton is a small lens in the (d)slr world.
  3. If you need 1.1 to get the shot, 1.5 don't cut it.
  4. If you use 1.1 to get the shot, your focus must be accurate.
  5. 1.1 makes shooting wide open FUN!
  6. The Noctilux may be just a tiny bit better.
  7. The Nokton is WAY less expensive.
 
I love the 50mm Nokton (and I also own an F1 Noctilux).

There are differences between the two lenses, but their essences are the same--big, fat, lush renderings and colors capable of producing backgrounds that mimic impressionist paintings

BTW, I read Steve Huff's review, and his illustrative photos are a bit misleading. Why? Because the 2 lenses were consistently focused at different points (an issue not mentioned by the author), which caused the backgrounds to be rendered differently.

The Nokton's backgrounds didn't appear quite as diffused and soft as the Noctilux's. But if you look carefully, I think you'll see the point of focus in his Nokton shots is farther back than the Noctilux ones. This is important because it brings the background of the Nokton shots more into focus. Not a lot, but enough to be noticeable and to be mistaken for a less desireable bokeh.
 
I am one of those whom had the Nokton 1.1 come apart. The aperture blades came apart before I finished my first roll of film, so I didn't get enough images out of it to make a decent review.

Recently I have been using a Nokton 1.5. I find this lens to be an outstanding performer, even better than my 50mm Summilux. The Nokton is more or less permanently mounted to my M4.

I have had great results with the Canon 50/1.2, but somewhat iffy results with the J3.
 
brusby said:
I love the 50mm Nokton (and I also own an F1 Noctilux).

There are differences between the two lenses, but their essences are the same--big, fat, lush renderings and colors capable of producing backgrounds that mimic impressionist paintings

BTW, I read Steve Huff's review, and his illustrative photos are a bit misleading. Why? Because the 2 lenses were consistently focused at different points (an issue not mentioned by the author), which caused the backgrounds to be rendered differently.

The Nokton's backgrounds didn't appear quite as diffused and soft as the Noctilux's. But if you look carefully, I think you'll see the point of focus in his Nokton shots is farther back than the Noctilux ones. This is important because it brings the background of the Nokton shots more into focus. Not a lot, but enough to be noticeable and to be mistaken for a less desireable bokeh.
Click to expand...

Exactly the comment I was looking for, Thanks a ton for all the responses!
 
I have one and happen to think its a fine lens. It has possibly two "flaws" (depending on how you look at it) that can be a little problematic for some but I think are over stated. The first is that its bokeh is not particularly brilliant - it tends to be "busy" or "caffeinated" as someone put it. But people who grumble about this tend to compare it with the Leica Noctilux which is 10x more expensive so I cant take it seriously. Personally I can live with it. The second is that it has focus shift as you stop down - it is optimized and pretty much at its optimum sharpness when shoot wide open. Again I believe focus shift is an feature of ultra fast lenses unless you wish to ante up $10,000 for Leica's equivalent (and probably even then). But if you mainly shoot the lens wide open then its not an issue.

Another issue - not a flaw with the lens - is that having such a shallow depth of field and if you shoot it on a Leica M camera, you really do need to have the camera and lens calibrated together to make sure you are getting the best out of it. If you don't you run a risk that the two won't give optimal sharpness. This is a feature of the Leica system. (Of course you can also avoid this issue by putting the lens on a micro four thirds camera using an adapter. Which I have also done.

In short, for $1000 its a good buy. But I am sure an f1.4 lens would be perfectly acceptable in most instances.

I should add that Kai the reviewer from DigitalRev did not like it terribly much mainly because of the bokeh issue but again he is a Noctilux afficianado (and a bit of a tosser to boot - although funny sometimes). But you can watch the video for what its worth and he was reasonably balanced in his comments.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5T1LMd81UQ
 
Ask Tom A about this. He's used every version of the Noctilux. He'll tell you that this is 97% of the Noctilux at only 10 to 20% of the price.
 
Also a big fan of digitalrev, it was Kai's review that first got me interested in the lens. As far as I'm concerned a lens of this speed SHOULD be optimized for shooting wide open :)
 
I would like to add to what Peter M. said above. I was lucky enough to have bought a used Noctilux back when they were $1,400. I only use it when I really need the speed. My .72 M6 will not always focus it well. When used on my M6 .85 it does very well. Choice of body is important on these very fast lenses with thin depth of field. I don't have the 50 f1.1 but I have two other VC lenses and I like them. Good Luck. Joe
 
peterm1 said:
I should add that Kai the reviewer from DigitalRev did not like it terribly much mainly because of the bokeh issue but again he is a Noctilux afficianado (and a bit of a tosser to boot - although funny sometimes).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s5T1LMd81UQ
Click to expand...

That resonates with me, too much self adulation .
The lens? Jury's still out for me but when you really want shallow DOF then this is a contender, not a Noctilux whatever that does. I'm not convinced the Leica does it better or whether its aficionados are just trying to justify their expenditure but it's an entrance level start to extreme shallow DOF.
Then again, I have other similar lenses between 1.2-1.5 and they all do very pleasing things.
Got the money spare? Get one. Do you really need to think about that? Leave it and get a J3.
 
peterm1 said:
. . . It [the Nokton] has possibly two "flaws" . . . The second is that it has focus shift as you stop down.
Click to expand...

Last weekend I did a test for focus shift on all my 50mm and longer Leica M lenses. I was trying to see which lenses would keep the intended focus point in focus as the lens was stopped down. Several were able to do so, but the F1 Noctilux displayed some of the most drastic focus shift, to the point were the intended point of focus actually went out of focus as it was stopped down. It would require refocusing to keep things sharp when closed down a few stops.

So, significant focus shift is not a distinguishing characteristic of the Nokton, but one shared by both the Nokton and Noctilux.
 
I love my 50/1.1 Nokton. It certainly has its pros and cons & I will generally go with my 50/2 Summicron due to the size/weight/rendering unless I want the low DOF or need the speed, but if I'm shooting at night, or want the isolation of f/1.1, it's exactly the right lens for that!

The size/weight is a factor & why I favour my 50/2 for general photography. It's a touch soft at f/1.1, but really, it's f/1.1! It sharpens up significantly at f/1.4 FWIW.

The focus shift is real & is noticeable, but it's easy to correct on my M8/M4-P, plus I've been using it a lot on my X-Pro1, where the EVF means that focus shift isn't an issue at all.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom