My Noctilux Diary

[deepwhite]

I hesitated a lot before finally deciding to start this thread. You all know what most Noctilux threads ended up in the past.

I thought a lot before buying this lens. Then I thought, just buy it and use it for a while. After that I'll know. If it turns out that I don't like it, I can always sell it at about the same price.

------

The first thing I do, when getting a new lens, is to mount it onto the R-D1s and take a couple of test shots. That's the fastest and cheapest way to know if the lens's got any problem in focusing or other area.

The following are test shots during the first night I got my E60 Noctilux with built-in hood.

At that point, I loved what I saw, but not enough to justify the purchase. Later I understood why.

- to be continued

 

[maddoc]

Arys, these are nice ! (... and sorry for not having replied your email ! 😱) I like the colors and the out-of-focus areas. Using the Epson might be challenging to focus ... 🙂

Cheers,

Gabor

 

[P. Lynn Miller]

While I have made up my mind to buy the Noctilux f1,0, I am doing so with the knowledge that it is a specialised lens and will not work miracles on my photography. But I will be following your 'diary' with interest.

Forget about the naysayers and antagonists, the Noctilux is nothing more than an expensive, specialised lens. Not unlike buying a 600 f4.0. Simply share your experience, findings and photos for us photographers to enjoy.

Thanks,

 

[deepwhite]

I've been practicing with one specific lens on a film body one day, and on a digital body the other. After a while I started to see the difference, and learn the fact that, even with the same lens, I have to think differently between film and sensor.

So the next day I mounted the Noctilux on the Bessa R2A and took more shots with the rest of the roll (Fuji RDPIII).

The funny thing is that, when I got the roll developed, the scanner in the store was malfunctioning and gave me not-so-good files. I'd been on the edge of buying a film scanner myself, and that incident just pushed me over...to the Nikon Coolscan 5000ED.

During scanning my own film, I've noticed the difference. It's much softer, but not "not-sharp-enough" on the other hand. The color transition is smoother and denser than on the R-D1s.

Yet this is only the beginning of my understading the Noctilux.

- to be continued

 

[maddoc]

To my understanding, the 99,999 % perfect flat surface of an imaging sensor should give slightly different results compared to a slightly curved multi-layered film emulsion surface when using extreme wide-open apertures. So the results with film should be a tad softer.

 

[deepwhite]

maddoc,

It's ok not replying my e-mail (or when will the mail trading ends?!) ;-) I just wanted to thank you for the advices you gave me before I made my decision.

Surprisingly I found that the R-D1s is very good, if not the best, for focusing with the Noctilux. The 1:1 VF really helps a lot. The 0.85 M7 is great too; the 0.72 Bessa R2A is good enough; the 0.6 Hexar RF is hard to use sometime, especially in very low light.

Later I found the different way to use the Noctilux with the R-D1s. The "logic" is totally different from using it on a film camera.

More on these later.

------

P. Lynn Miller,

I'm learning new things everyday, with the Noctilux. I'm really not sure if these new things can be done with other lenses too, for example, the Summilux 50/1.4 II that also receives great reputation. Yet I bought it anyway, by fate or by chance, and it's MY lens now. I'll just focusing on how to using it as well as possible.

I hope you got your Noctilux too, and join me (and other masters here) for a nice discussion. 🙂

 

[deepwhite]

The other day I went out with a new roll of film (E100GX). It was 6:00pm and the sky was beautiful. So I took a few shots.

The clouds in the photos are really soft. I don't know if I could do that with other lenses, but I loved what I saw. And this softness turned out to be one of the characteristics I love about the Noctilux.

- to be continued

 

[edhohoho]

I like this thread a lot. Thanks for posting your pictures and experiences. Very spontaneous results and opinions yet organized in terms of presentation and collecting of meaningful thoughts.

When I first got my lens, I just put it on the R-D1 and started shooting randomly, taking more of a "gunshot" approach through tiral and error. I'm not sure if this link will work, but I have a few of my pictures here:
http://www.flickr.com/photos/21079345@N05/sets/72157607048618276/

Not all of them shot wide open, and not a necessity since I just liked the fact that I could carry this one lens and use it literally day and night.

I look forward to following this thread.

Edmund

 

[maddoc]

The photos of the sky are beautiful, I like the softness in these. Looking forward to see more photos !

@ Edmund, I just had a look at your set of (Noctilux)-photos. Amazing, and I like this series because they are not only f/1.0 shots.

 

[P. Lynn Miller]

I know that the Noctilux has a reputation for corner fall-off and you seldom shoot blue skies or blank walls, but those are dark corners.

Very much enjoying this Noctilux exhibition.

 

[Freakscene]

To my understanding, the 99,999 % perfect flat surface of an imaging sensor should give slightly different results compared to a slightly curved multi-layered film emulsion surface when using extreme wide-open apertures. So the results with film should be a tad softer.

The surface matters much less than the depth. Film has a physical thickness, which helps to limit softness due to focus shift and slight focusing errors, so film images will appear sharp within a greater range of focus error. If you focus incorrectly wide open, you will see it immediately on either type of image recording medium.

Neither film nor digital have inherently more resolution or subjective sharpness. That is usually more about the medium (sensor or film) and processing (whether analogue or digital). It is easier to manipulate digitally, but that doesn't mean you can't do it with film.

Marty

 

[semrich]

I find I like using and get more images I like with the Noctilux and B&W film. If I could only have one camera and lens it would be the MP and Noctilux.

Here is a couple from Milan:

 

[deepwhite]

I sent a roll of RDPIII to the store for development. They told me to get it back after 8:30pm. I arrived 15 minutes earlier, so I walked around and took a few shots (E100GX).

The red barrel is used to burn "paper money" to the gods or our ancestors. I have no idea why it was on the bench, but it looked nice.

Also, for some pics I figured it look better with the "natural frame", ie the black edge of the slide itself. So I cropped less when I scanned those pics.

What surprised me with this picture was that, these were actually very plain little flowers we see by the roadside everyday. Yet they looked really dreamy now.

I got the roll and was on my way out. Then I took this picture in the stairway. I just love taking pictures of "things" for no reason.


Although I'm not going to use the Noctilux at f1.0 or in dim light only, I must say that I really love this lens in the dark. The next day, however, I went out with it in the broad daylight and learned something new about this lens again.

- to be continued

 

[bigdavid]

you paid for a noct to shoot these?

anyway, good luck with the lens

 

[tomasis]

sounds like fun adventure for you 🙂 I just sit and look. very nice pictures.

 

[deepwhite]

you paid for a noct to shoot these?

Of course not. I paid for a noct to shoot many many more in the future. 😉

------

These are half of the shots I took during the first week. I'm posting the other half in the following posts later. Been working for the past 16 hours, so you have to forgive me for the slow updating speed. 😱

 

[Prosaic]

Most people dont go far beyond those type of test shots with the Nocti. A portrait of the dog and daughter or two. Then buyers remorse kicks in. Im curious about the direction your diary will take in a few weeks from now...

 

[deepwhite]

I've browsed through a lot of Noctilux shots before I really bought one. Therefore I've been having this impression that I'm going to use this lens to take artistic and dreamy shots or in low light.

One day I went to a store to buy the Nikon Coolscan 5000ED film scanner. When I got out of the store, the road light caught my eyes. I reached for my camera, but then I thought:

"This is daytime. Should I use the Noctilux in the daytime?"

"This is just a road light. Did I buy the Noctilux just to take the shot of a cute road light?"

Then I realized I was being ridiculous. I bought a camera and a lens to capture things in my life. Why am I limiting myself? :bang:

The road light. Very different from the others in Taipei.

The MRT train just entered the station. Yet since the shutter speed was 1/2000 sec it just doesn't look like moving at all.

This is an f8 shot. It's very different from a "Noctilux shot" in my mind. But I like it.

I read people saying that the Noctilux is only useful within f1.0~f2.8, and thus not a good general-purpose lens. With this shot and the other similar ones, however, I think I'd be very happy to shoot anything with it, anytime of the day.

------

When I got home I saw something in front of the apartment. I took the shot and wrote some lines about it on the blog. I did my best to translate them to English; the rhythm of the lines is gone, but you'll get a rough idea anyway.

[Tangling]

Love Is tangling by nature
Even when withering and dying away
We still don't know how to
Let go

------

The next day I worked for the whole day. By the nighttime I went out with the Bessa R2A + Noctilux again, and tried something new. It turns out that my eyes were wide open by my new exercise.

- to be continued

 

[KM-25]

Here are some images used in a restaurant ad campaign, they should be easy to spot:

http://www.luluwilsonaspen.com/

 

[Andrew Sowerby]

OT re KM-25's link: they've gotta lose those stripes!