Renzsu
Well-known
My statement was directed at ONLY lens performance - not at YOUR ability to take photos or anything else. So no reason to be offended. I thought it was clear, but....Whatever.
I see people are getting sensative about my questions/critique of this lens, so I'll try to clear the air - when I do my research of the lens - I look at as many photos as I can find that were made with it. And thread like this usually helps. Thats when I noticed that so many images look different. I'd think that same lens has same performance - AGAIN not an artistic view, but pure technical stuff, and in this case it didnt look consistent. So I asked. If anyone can explain this - great! If not - well, I didnt mean to hurt anyone's feelings. Geez - God forbid I ask questions about the lens at the camera forum.......:bang:
Look, I'm not offended, I just didn't like the passive aggressive wording you chose... for me it sounded ignorant, as if picking a top quality lens would just transform everything into award winning photography.
It would help if you can explain what you expect from this lens.. just saying 'better' doesn't mean anything, how would you expect us to reply to that?
Look I use this lens if I want really sharp in focus subjects and smooth oof subjects, crisp details, stuff like that (or when I just need a 50mm lens of course, I don't have any other 50's anymore). Of course you will see this in photos such as close up portraits wide open. Stop down the lens and you'll see less and less difference with other lenses.
I don't really know what else to say, the lens delivers for me and I look forward to using it on a digital in perhaps a year or so if I'm lucky.
On with the pictures!
MikeL
Go Fish
My statement was directed at ONLY lens performance - not at YOUR ability to take photos or anything else. So no reason to be offended. I thought it was clear, but....Whatever.
I see people are getting sensative about my questions/critique of this lens, so I'll try to clear the air - when I do my research of the lens - I look at as many photos as I can find that were made with it. And thread like this usually helps. Thats when I noticed that so many images look different. I'd think that same lens has same performance - AGAIN not an artistic view, but pure technical stuff, and in this case it didnt look consistent. So I asked. If anyone can explain this - great! If not - well, I didnt mean to hurt anyone's feelings. Geez - God forbid I ask questions about the lens at the camera forum.......
Kroysa, why taking the victim stance? It can't be you or your posts? No one is taking this personally or being sensitive. And your question was pretty well answered in Aizan's and Renzu's posts:
different films, exposure, and post-processing can give extremely different looks from any lens, especially when all you're looking at is a jpg. nothing mysterious going on...or is there?
ederek
Well-known
Thanks for looking! Yes, Dreher Dark, very nice! It was interesting - I met 2 people that night specifically because I was shooting a Leica. The woman Mariann in the gallery emailed me a link to her friends blog - some great street work: http://severinkoller.at/blog/
Ok, back to the images... Here are some from an evening at the Sowa Studios in the South End of Boston. Thought they'd offer some good comparisons of the lens at different apertures.
Only so much shows in a web jpeg. I put all these and a few more in a web gallery at full resolution for those who want to peep (and see how much hand shake I had that night, as I recall!):
http://bit.ly/afd06W
To Renzu's point:
Renzu said:
Here are a couple with a string of white christmas lights hanging in the background... The first shows the "stars", f between 2.8 and 4
M9, ISO200, 1/60
and then wide open, 1/250
And Barbara Leiner, the artist. Walking into her gallery was wonderful, such warm colors. Processed only slightly in LR, the orig untouched image is in the gallery, I am happy with how the lens captured the feeling.
I like the bokeh of this lens, really smoothed out a busy background of paintings:
There are 2 of these in the gallery, think this was wide open. The blue background is natural evening light coming in a window:
The lens is tack sharp, lots of detail in the pencil. I thought Ellen had such beautiful hands, really drew me in...
I stopped it down to f3.5 or so to bring out the rope on the chair that Ellen was sketching - should have stopped down even further...
Just a slight crop on this one, left too much white space in upper right:
Harel Kedem is an artist with a strong environmental message, I like this but it lost some of the context of his work:
Stopping down a bit reveals a bit more of the artists work in the background:
SAY NO to BOTTLED WATER
Someone mentioned the lens performance at close focus distance. Going to .7 meters is one of the things I love about this lens and why I don't use my rigid 50 cron more. Wide open:
...remember to have FUN!
Last edited:
mfogiel
Veteran
This is one of most recent shots. I like this lens for the versatility, excellent portrait rendition and non excesive contrast.
matt335
Well-known
That's a wonderful photograph !!
nephilim
Established
Here is some stuff from my first months with an M-camera (sorry for the frames):
Ektar 100
TMax400 in Rodinal
I really like the 50 Lux Asph, much more than the 50 and 58mm lenses on I've used on Nikon F-mount. My only nitpick is the feel of the focus ring, which could be a bit more smooth. It takes a notable amount of force/torque until the ring starts to rotate, and that's the case from near to far limit. Everything is being sent to Leica right now, as my recently purchased 90/2 APO Asph needs to be calibrated. Let's see what they can do about the 50.
Ektar 100
TMax400 in Rodinal
I really like the 50 Lux Asph, much more than the 50 and 58mm lenses on I've used on Nikon F-mount. My only nitpick is the feel of the focus ring, which could be a bit more smooth. It takes a notable amount of force/torque until the ring starts to rotate, and that's the case from near to far limit. Everything is being sent to Leica right now, as my recently purchased 90/2 APO Asph needs to be calibrated. Let's see what they can do about the 50.
vonion
Newbie
Wondering why the bokeh in pic 1 goes that way..
Thanks for looking! Yes, Dreher Dark, very nice! It was interesting - I met 2 people that night specifically because I was shooting a Leica. The woman Mariann in the gallery emailed me a link to her friends blog - some great street work: http://severinkoller.at/blog/
Ok, back to the images... Here are some from an evening at the Sowa Studios in the South End of Boston. Thought they'd offer some good comparisons of the lens at different apertures.
Only so much shows in a web jpeg. I put all these and a few more in a web gallery at full resolution for those who want to peep (and see how much hand shake I had that night, as I recall!):
http://bit.ly/afd06W
To Renzu's point:
Here are a couple with a string of white christmas lights hanging in the background... The first shows the "stars", f between 2.8 and 4
M9, ISO200, 1/60
and then wide open, 1/250
ramosa
B&W
great lens. i had a cron for my first two years with a rangefinder and then, just a few weeks ago, switched to a lux. i think it'll be the perfect 50mm for me, with a mix of the nocti magic and cron standard. that said, the cron is no slouch ... and the nocti would have been intriguing if it wasn't so large with such a long throw (in focus).
khc1013
Anthony
I would assume that was not taken wide open.
time
Established
Turtle
Veteran
For all the praise of its abilities, there are just not that many genuinely great shots from this lens. Maybe that is something to do with those who buy them and why, or the FL or... I dont know what!
I have seen what I find to be amazing work from CV 25 skopars, 24 Elmarit asphs, 28 Elmarits, 35 crons (all types) 50mm summicrons, 50 1.5 Noktons and many other lenses. While I recognise the technical brilliance of the 50 lux asph, I have yet to much application where I personally get why someone would go to all the additional expense over a cron or CV 50 1.5. With all the explanations of 'I really needed the speed', unless one comes out with something convincing, I cant help but feel it proves only that we are all capable of finding dark places and pressing the shutter button. Or creating 'bokeh.'
I don't begrudge people spending the money on what they want to own, but I would love to see shots where I see where that extra money has really mattered -where the viewer can see why they squeezed that last drop out of the 50mm performance. Oddly enough, this 'investment in a tool - results' relationship seems more apparent with the Noctilux 1.0 than with the more humble lux asph. The latter seems to have been responsible for a very high proportion of technically competent but otherwise boring photographs that look rather like they have been taken from a 'How To...' photography book from twenty years ago.
Sorry if this sounds negative, but I am amazed that a lens so heavily lauded seems associated with so little apparent application of this brilliance. Sure there are some super shots out there, but far, far fewer than I would expect.
I have seen what I find to be amazing work from CV 25 skopars, 24 Elmarit asphs, 28 Elmarits, 35 crons (all types) 50mm summicrons, 50 1.5 Noktons and many other lenses. While I recognise the technical brilliance of the 50 lux asph, I have yet to much application where I personally get why someone would go to all the additional expense over a cron or CV 50 1.5. With all the explanations of 'I really needed the speed', unless one comes out with something convincing, I cant help but feel it proves only that we are all capable of finding dark places and pressing the shutter button. Or creating 'bokeh.'
I don't begrudge people spending the money on what they want to own, but I would love to see shots where I see where that extra money has really mattered -where the viewer can see why they squeezed that last drop out of the 50mm performance. Oddly enough, this 'investment in a tool - results' relationship seems more apparent with the Noctilux 1.0 than with the more humble lux asph. The latter seems to have been responsible for a very high proportion of technically competent but otherwise boring photographs that look rather like they have been taken from a 'How To...' photography book from twenty years ago.
Sorry if this sounds negative, but I am amazed that a lens so heavily lauded seems associated with so little apparent application of this brilliance. Sure there are some super shots out there, but far, far fewer than I would expect.
Last edited:
P. Lynn Miller
Well-known
Interesting...
I have been very impressed by the neutrality of the Nokton 50/1.1 and the Nokton 50/1.5 is a gem of a lens. I have and use both. The only thing I do not like about either lens, is the lack of focus down to 0.7 metres. As near as I can tell, the Summilux 50 ASPH is only lens that combines the attributes of Nokton's... extremely neutral, very high resolution, contrast and extremely resistance to flare, in a package that focuses to 0.7 metres.
I must admit... I would consider acquiring a Summilux 50 ASPH at some point even if I may not be competent enough to really get my money's worth.
I have been very impressed by the neutrality of the Nokton 50/1.1 and the Nokton 50/1.5 is a gem of a lens. I have and use both. The only thing I do not like about either lens, is the lack of focus down to 0.7 metres. As near as I can tell, the Summilux 50 ASPH is only lens that combines the attributes of Nokton's... extremely neutral, very high resolution, contrast and extremely resistance to flare, in a package that focuses to 0.7 metres.
I must admit... I would consider acquiring a Summilux 50 ASPH at some point even if I may not be competent enough to really get my money's worth.
Freakscene
Obscure member
Yes, indeed. The 0.95 Noctilux is even better than the 50/1.4 asph, but only focuses to 1 m. I was glad when I found that, actually. I'd have been in a huge hole, cash wise, if I'd found that the 0.95 focused to 0.7 m. The consistency of the contrast throughout the aperture range and focus distance is a real achievement.
Marty
ampguy
Veteran
not sure
not sure
the cron asph 35/2 does that sometimes, but in a much more elegant cinematic look.
I guess this is *the* lens for .7m-1m 50/1.4 RF use, but the Noctilux E60 f1 never gave the harshness of this lens, nor does the pre-asph 50/1.4 after 1m.
I have to wonder if going from custom glass to off the shelf glass, has something to do with the radically different look of the older designs, and unique look at specific apertures.
not sure
the cron asph 35/2 does that sometimes, but in a much more elegant cinematic look.
I guess this is *the* lens for .7m-1m 50/1.4 RF use, but the Noctilux E60 f1 never gave the harshness of this lens, nor does the pre-asph 50/1.4 after 1m.
I have to wonder if going from custom glass to off the shelf glass, has something to do with the radically different look of the older designs, and unique look at specific apertures.
P. Lynn Miller
Well-known
I share the same sentiment, although for the price of the Noctilux f0.95, it should focus down to 0.7 m. I wish Cosina would have spent the time and money to make the Nokton 50/1.1 focus to 0.7m, floating rear elements are nothing new... my 1970 Nikkor 28/2 and 35/1.4 both have 'floating' rear elements to improve close focusing.
As for the 'starlight' bokeh, most lenses will exhibit such highlights when not used at maximum aperture unless there is a bazillion aperture blades.
semilog
curmudgeonly optimist
It's a rather new lens and there just are not that many copies of it in the wild, yet.
Give it time. And in the meantime, check this thread for some terrific work:
http://www.rangefinderforum.com/forums/showthread.php?t=92921
dovevadar
DoveVadar
A magnificent lens. I like to see it more on film which I find a challenge to dig out any on the net. This lens on a digital M cuts my eyes.
Here are some with Protra 400VC. Hope it helps people like me:
Here are some with Protra 400VC. Hope it helps people like me:
