M9/Summilux OR M8/Noctilux

M9/Summilux OR M8/Noctilux

  • M8.2 w/ 50mm Noctilux f1

    Votes: 63 16.4%

  • M9 w/ 50mm Summilux pre-asph f1.4

    Votes: 322 83.6%
  • Total voters
    385
I wonder what is amazing about a Canon 50/1.2 used at full aperture ... :eek: (Maybe I have only used and seen bad copies)
 
LeicaTom said:
Yeah I second that choice.......M8.2 and a Canon f1.2/50 ~ M9's will come down in price in the next 2 years, (just like M8's did) and the Canon f1.2/50 is an amazing lens, still affordable but, I think only in a short while, they will be $1,000 + in minty condition soon, once the rest of the people shooting realize they don't need a Noctilux.........
(just a waste of good money in my personal opinion)

I have never liked the look a Noctilux gives :/

Tom
Click to expand...

Neither the Canon 50/1.2 nor the 50/1.1 Nokton are in the same class as the Noctilux or Summilux. It's a nice lens, but very much a substitute an equal.
 
The ISO 2500 that I'm getting out of my M9 looks like the ISO 640 from my late production M8. The M9 is new. You are picking up more than a full stop of usable ISO with the M9. Put the 35/1.2 or 50/1.1 Noktons on it, you will have better low-light performance compared with the M8 with Noctilux.

The problem with the Canon 50/1.2 is the type of glass used. It Etches easily when lubricants from the helical outgas and deposit on it. The Black 50/1.8 has the same problem, for some reason the 50/1.4- not as much. I don't know why, maybe different types of glass were used for different elements and the positioning is a factor.
I have had two Canon 50/1.2's, and sold them on RFF for under $300. One sold recently. They are simply not as good as the 50/1.1 Nokton and are not worth anywhere near the same price.
 
Last edited:
Man if the M8 was as bad as the M9 is at 2500, but only at 640 I would throw it in the trash can. I've shot the crap out of digital at high ISOs. Even got a shot or two out of the D700 at 25,600 that was great, but from what I've seen yet I won't be using the M9 above 800. Even converted to black and white I'm not sure I could be happy. Neopan 1600 looks better.
 
deirdre said:
I have an M8 and I love it to pieces, but if I had the scratch, I'd get the M9.
Click to expand...

Same here. I made the switch after selling some gear and saving. I realize I have some learning to do, but comparatively the M8's files process well and with less work than the M9's files. Sharper and closer to "finish" shape out of the camera (better WB for example), sweet-spot size (quicker to process), print really well (surprisingly so at higher iso's).

One lone vote for the M8 and Noctilux. I'd shoot that combo in a heartbeat.
 
Last edited:
Lenses endure but camera bodies come and go.

The M8 is yesterday's child (although it is still an excellent camera), and the M9 will also be in this position one day.

The lenses however will last through many changes of bodies. The M8 I have my f:1.0 Noctilux on now is the third Leica body for me with this lens.

If the Noctilux "look" suits your style of shooting and vision of the world, then go for that lens. Outright speed may not necessarily be the primary reason people buy it (bokeh, micro contrast etc). WRT the camera body, the faster shutter in the M8 may just help.

The Noctilux is not for everyone, but only you know if it fits your view of the world. If so, then anything else is a compromise. Develop style with a Noctilux and M8 now and save up and trade the M8 later for (eg) the M10. This may give you the ultimate combination in the end. The base lens signature will (mostly) remain the same on either sized sensor, with vignetting and effective focal length as the obvious major departures.
FWIW
Mike
 
After looking at the few files I have above ISO 800 from my M9 it seems that it is imperative that the white balance be set correctly. After fixing the white balance the shots look worlds better as the noise doesn't stick out so badly.
 
Mister E said:
Are you shooting DNG? What kind of NR are you using? I have not see anything this clean even out of ISO 1600. I am speaking from my experience with my M9 as I just picked one up. It must have been pretty dark to shoot ISO 2500 in there with a f/1.2 and 1.1 lens. I wasn't saying your star/nebula/whatever image was full of noise, I was saying my images at 2500 were unusable, but perhaps I am leaving a step out in the processing.
Click to expand...

I am shooting 16-bit DNG in the M9, and using Lightroom 3.3 to convert to JPEG. I am not doing anything special: import the DNG into Lightroom, and export it to JPEG. Anything in between is default Lightroom settings, I have not created any profiles.

The museum was "no flash photography allowed" as they used a lot of video projection. The attendant stated "I have to ask you to turn off the flash of your camera". When I told her it did not have one- she asked "How does it take any pictures!"
 
For anyone constrained by budget, the Noctilux is not 'worth it' - it's a cult lens with some special qualities (including being often very stiff and slow to focus, which put me right off it), so the Nokton 1.1 will do you fine if f1.1 is where you like to stay.

A pre-asph lux is a more flexible prospect as it can be sharp and (pretty much) doesn't display focus shift - certainly not the major shifts that the Nokton does.

But why are you asking about two different effective focal lengths (FOV's)? If the M8/50 combo suits you for what you do, the M9/50 combo will likely be too wide, so it's more like a 75mm lens you will need - in which case the CV75/1.8 is a staggeringly good lens for the money, in certain respects beating the legendary 75mm Summilux (also a gem, but way pricey, and also a pig to handle).

As others have noted, high iso on the M9 trumps the M8 convincingly - not to mention that I've experience random banding with the M8 at 1250, even in daytime conditions.
 
About the relatively poor noise performance of M8 / M9 compared to D700 / 5D ... I have yet to see one photo taken on film that comes even close to real 1600 ISO and in color ...
 
Sure it is. My point is that C41 film exposed for 1600 ISO does not really deliver 1600ISO performance. If you want some shadow details (or more or better), you have to expose at 1250 or even better 800ISO to get the best out of 1600ISO film at night. That is from my experience.
 
Get the Noctilux, a lens is for life but a camera is replaceable.

Save up for the M9 (which is the better camera), and use the M8 for a trade in.

 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom