Canon 50mm/0.95-Noctilux-Nikkor 50mm/1.1

First I like to give lots of thanks to Raid for doing this thread and the "Motha of all 50mm..."
The Nikkor 1.1 provided by me for this project was purchased recently from Australia and was in a "collection" for the last 8 years and probably never used during that period!
It is estimated that less than 200 exapmles of this lens exist in screw mount.

Kiu
 
Kiu,

No doubt that your Nikkor is a very special lens no matter which mount it happens to be. I think that even with my limited testing it is clear that this lens can perform well. Thanks for entrusting me with it.

Raid
 
A very interesting lens test, probably the first of its kind where all three of these very fast 50mm optics are compared at one time.

I am a little suspicious of the results attained with the Noctilux. I've seen too many pictures taken with this lens at F1.0 that are nothing short of spectacular. I own the Canon 50/0.95 and, while better than most folks think, is not in the Noctilux league.

I did enjoy seeing the results of the F1.1 Nikkor. A very rare optic that now, unfortunately, is relegated to the collectors.

Jim Bielecki
 
Jim: I will try to give the Noctilux a second test since Fred allowed me to keep his lenses another week. I will this time be even more careful than beforein the photos. Maybe I can get better results?


Raid
 
I have taken another two rolls of film with the Noctilux. Once I have the rolls developed and scanned I will post the best images here.

Raid
 
Here are some new results for the Noctilux 50mm/1.0. My eyes cannot do any better I am afraid, so this is the sharpness that I get.

http://www.photo.net/photodb/folder?folder_id=683401

I used this time the M6 with the 0.85 finder. Some photos were taken on a heavy Gitzo tripod and others were taken hand held. The tripod supported images are in sequences of three images; one at 1.0, one at 2.0, and one at 4.0. Some images were taken with XP2 rated at 200 and some were taken with FujiPress 800 rated at 400. I changed the images to B&W.


Raid
 
Last edited:
Here is a photo of my wife in the kitchen of our home. I used FujiPress 800 in my M6 and the Noctilux at 1.0 hand held. The out of focus areas look smooth and not as harsh as with some other fast lenses.


5445308-md.jpg


During the focusing process, I kept on thinking about which part of the face to have in focus. Usually, you want the eyes to be focused perfectly.



Raid
 
This is a photo of me looking in the mirror. I had to think hard where to focus at 1.0 in such a situation. The result is not so bad after all.

5448698-md.jpg


Raid
 
I am shooting a couple of test rolls to check the accuracy of the focus on the Nikkor-N 1.1
I am using a Nikon S3 and an older Nikon M synch(much older than the S2 I loaned Raid).
I will post some sample shots.

Kiu
 
Kiu: Let us know what you get. Most likely, the lens needs reshimming or it should not have improved with the wrong (Contax) mount being used.
Keep this thread alive!


Raid
 
>>I had to think hard where to focus at 1.0 in such a situation.<<

When in doubt, always focus on the eyes. Always. Human brains (and many animal brains) are hard-wired to look at someone's eyes in order to gauge their mood, so we're drawn to eyes when looking at photographs.

I'm always shooting my lenses wide open (though I haven't anything faster than 1.4).
 
Vince: Yes, I know what you are saying, but still it was sometimes difficult to see a clear focuspoint at 1.0.The eyelashes or the eyes? The nose or the chin?There was hardly any room for minute focusing error.

Raid
 
NIKON KIU said:
I am shooting a couple of test rolls to check the accuracy of the focus on the Nikkor-N 1.1
I am using a Nikon S3 and an older Nikon M synch(much older than the S2 I loaned Raid).
I will post some sample shots.

Kiu
Click to expand...

Hi Kiu,

FWIW, I recommend not only doing test photos but also measuring with
a tape measure at close distance (when the RF is aligned) and comparing the
measurement to the lens' distance scale. Also, a tripod is important
because of possible back-lash. Then you can isolate body from lens issues.

Best,

Roland.
 
>>Vince: Yes, I know what you are saying, but still it was sometimes difficult to see a clear focuspoint at 1.0.<<

I hear, you Raid. I have enough trouble with f/1.4. A lot of shots have dead-on focus, but plenty do not.
 
Raid, more thank you's for taking the time and effort to do these tests. While they are still subjective, they do show us practical results from some interesting lenses. Only the resources of such a wonderful group could allow something like this to happen. All the members directly involved are owed a debt of gratitude from those of us interested in this project. Thanks, guys.

I'm still amazed at how well the older lenses hold up, compared with the newest entry. I guess those little women with the abacus(es) did very good work !! These early lenses were amazing in their day, and still pretty awe inspiring today. The easy availability of the 0.95, and its relative low cost is a boon to us users. I'm inclined to think much of its bad press came from testers who did not take proper precautions to have good RF focusing, or suffered camera shake from the unaccustomed weight. That and just naysayers can shift the balance of opinion, warranted or not.

I'm looking forward to the next group of shots with the Nikon, and hope the possible problem with the focusing is cleared up. It's a rare privilege to view these images, for all of us.

Harry
 
Harry: I am also quite impressed by the lenses tested. Lenses like the Nikkor 50mm/1.1 or the Noctilux 50mm/1.0 are beyond my budgetn whereas the Canon 50mm/0.95 plus a Canon 7s would be manageable one day after selling off some stuff. I liked them all.The good thing that came out for me was the use of the Nokton lenses. I finally found one locally with a Prominent. Now it has opened new GAS for a Prominent-Contax adapter and a Contax camerato use the Nokton on. I don't know much about Contax cameras except that the Contax II looks nice. FrankS got his two Contaxes CLA'd by some top guy,and I have no clue how much such a service would cost if I buy an old Contax.

Oh well. I will survive without more cameras or lenses.

Raid
 
Last edited:
ferider said:
Hi Kiu,

FWIW, I recommend not only doing test photos but also measuring with
a tape measure at close distance (when the RF is aligned) and comparing the
measurement to the lens' distance scale. Also, a tripod is important
because of possible back-lash. Then you can isolate body from lens issues.

Best,

Roland.
Click to expand...



Roland: I am also looking forward to Kiu's test results. That lens was awesome. You somehow "feel" the special status of this rare lens. Its built is beautiful in all aspects from outside. It was a good time for me to host such beauties. Kiu needs to have the lens thoroughly tested for reshimming needs. I am quite sure that the lens needs adjusting.

Raid
 
Focusing issue with the 1.1

Focusing issue with the 1.1

Here are two images I took with the 1.1 mounted on a Nikon M Synch.which is much older vintage.
Apparantly the focus is OK both pictures shot at 1.1 on Kodak Max 800,taking the picture of the plant I focused on the nearest leaf and the picture of car was focused on the tail light, Both pictures were shot at minimum focusing distance.
The dummy drugstore lady cropped the car picture! I guess I got her with the smaller frame of the Nikon M.

Raid, I think you may have mismounted the 1.1 on the S2, always remember than when mounting a Nikon RF lens on a body requires to have both camera and lens set on Infiniti.

Kiu
 

Attachments

  • 02_02.JPG
    02_02.JPG
    18.5 KB · Views: 0
  • 05_05.JPG
    05_05.JPG
    12 KB · Views: 0
NIKON KIU said:
Here are two images I took with the 1.1 mounted on a Nikon M Synch.which is much older vintage.
Apparantly the focus is OK both pictures shot at 1.1 on Kodak Max 800,taking the picture of the plant I focused on the nearest leaf and the picture of car was focused on the tail light, Both pictures were shot at minimum focusing distance.
The dummy drugstore lady cropped the car picture! I guess I got her with the smaller frame of the Nikon M.

Raid, I think you may have mismounted the 1.1 on the S2, always remember than when mounting a Nikon RF lens on a body requires to have both camera and lens set on Infiniti.

Kiu
Click to expand...

Kiu,
Neither of the two photos displays sharpness well on my monitor. Maybe you could take additional photos of something that is easier to inspect for sharpness.

I agree with you that there is always a possibility that I did not mount the lens corectly, but what about the other Nikkors that I tried out? They came out sharp. It is strange that the 1.1 lens was sharp when used with the Contax adapter and soft without it. It should have been the other way around.

Regards,

Raid
 
Raid,
Keep in mind that this lens is NOT that sharp @ 1.1, especially at minimum focusing distance..but look very little light fall-off.
And also keep in mind that the other two lenses you tested were internal mount lenses that have no focusing helical as opposed to the 1.1 which is an external mount.

Look at the lettering on CL 55...it's legible,also look at the very very shallow depth of field, you can't read the writing on the tag bracket.

Kiu
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom