KM-25
Well-known
The color saturation, the shallow DOF and the low light of this lens is beautiful, pardon the goofy snap shot...
KM-25
Well-known
Another ad campaign, check out that detail in the 100% crop:
KM-25
Well-known
The look wide open, the sharpness, I mean, how else on earth can you get this look, right?
maddoc
... likes film again.
@ KM-25: tweaked in Photoshop ?
KM-25
Well-known
Adjusted for color tone, dark enough blacks to hold the ink down on the K layer of CMYK, small amount of sharpening, all you would do for pre-press.
MikeL
Go Fish
Canon glass? You could just use Nikon glass as well.
Rayt
Nonplayer Character
Every Leica lens you can buy has an equivalent in CV or ZM but not the Noctilux, the 75mm Summilux and the 35mm Summilux pre asph. These three lenses have characteristics that make shoot Leicas special.
maddoc
... likes film again.
I agree and would add the Super-Angulon-M 21/3.4, 35mm, and 50mm Summilux ASPH to the list. For the latter ones there is for sure no equivalent from any other manufacturer.
maddoc
... likes film again.
Hm ... to me it looks like photos taken with a Summarit 50/1.5 with scratched front element and fungus inside the lens... But one never knows ...
If these were really taken with a Noctilux, I would have had it checked and serviced.
MikeL
Go Fish
Hm ... to me it looks like photos taken with a Summarit 50/1.5 with scratched front element and fungus inside the lens... But one never knows ...
Heh heh, I think he's trying to be smart, but......
deepwhite
Well-known
Taste is a personal thing. I myself prefer as little digital manipulation as possible, for photography or audio engineering. It kills "details" more than analog processing, and details, IMHO, are the most important element for "touching".
That's why I'm very happy scanning my own films, because I can set the "parameters" to their minimum value. If they have to be "on". The stores usually do too much sharpening and boosting too much contrast and saturation. I know it's a good way to make most costumers happy (birthday shots, travel thos, etc.), but if I use a soft and low contrast lens, I certainly don't want all that over-processing.
But I'm not a professional photographer; I don't know what the "customers" would ask one do. As a record producer, I know that certain compromises - and often big ones - have to be made. Like pushing the overall volume over the limit....
------
As for which lens is "replaceable", I have no idea, since I haven't been able to really use too many lenses myself. Yet I would like to think of it as fate: I looked, I bought, I used it. Sometimes I really want one lens but couldn't find any one with a good price; later when a good one shows up, my mind is set on something else. Before the Noctilux I was looking for a 35/1.4 ASPH, but never found one; then this Noctilux, that was 1/3 cheaper than the cheapest on eBay, showed up. And here comes this diary. ;-)
I've seen many great works taken with the Canon 50/0.95, old Nokton 50/1.5, Summilux 50/1.4 generation II, Summitar 50/1.5, etc.. Yet I think going directly for a Noctilux is the most "economic" way to sweep away the doubt in my mind. I'm sure people who still love their Noctilux know what I'm talking about.
------
Going back to endless work now. Incoming: 1st B/W with Noctilux.
That's why I'm very happy scanning my own films, because I can set the "parameters" to their minimum value. If they have to be "on". The stores usually do too much sharpening and boosting too much contrast and saturation. I know it's a good way to make most costumers happy (birthday shots, travel thos, etc.), but if I use a soft and low contrast lens, I certainly don't want all that over-processing.
But I'm not a professional photographer; I don't know what the "customers" would ask one do. As a record producer, I know that certain compromises - and often big ones - have to be made. Like pushing the overall volume over the limit....
------
As for which lens is "replaceable", I have no idea, since I haven't been able to really use too many lenses myself. Yet I would like to think of it as fate: I looked, I bought, I used it. Sometimes I really want one lens but couldn't find any one with a good price; later when a good one shows up, my mind is set on something else. Before the Noctilux I was looking for a 35/1.4 ASPH, but never found one; then this Noctilux, that was 1/3 cheaper than the cheapest on eBay, showed up. And here comes this diary. ;-)
I've seen many great works taken with the Canon 50/0.95, old Nokton 50/1.5, Summilux 50/1.4 generation II, Summitar 50/1.5, etc.. Yet I think going directly for a Noctilux is the most "economic" way to sweep away the doubt in my mind. I'm sure people who still love their Noctilux know what I'm talking about.
------
Going back to endless work now. Incoming: 1st B/W with Noctilux.
Last edited:
Freakscene
Obscure member
All personal preference:
The photo of the flowers with the people in the background shows one aspects of the Nocti's bokeh that really bothers me - when I use mine I try to keep the bokeh in front and avoid specular highlights in the background.
I agree that the 50/1.4 asph and the 75/2 asph are in a class of their own, but the 75/1.4 Summilux (as great a lens as it is) produces indistinguishable results from the 85/1.4 AiS Nikkor and a number of other lenses with the same basic design. The Nikon 28/1.4 is very close to the Leica 35/1.4 asph (and I had the 35/1.4 aspherical, which I sold to fund a trip to go and take photos because I couldn't justify the cost when all I wanted to do was use it). I love my Leicas, but to quote Tina Manley: "I [] use Leicas because they are quiet, unobtrusive, mechanical, and reliable. The excellent glass is a bonus for which I am very grateful".
I would definitely use a Leica M even if their lenses were only so-so. They would need to be fast, but some of them are excessively good for my typical uses - handheld, medium or fast film. Flare control is important, but sheer resolving power and the extreme optical measures that Leica takes to keep their lens designs among the most advanced in the industry I simply don't need. It's just a bonus to me that that they are excellent.
Marty
The photo of the flowers with the people in the background shows one aspects of the Nocti's bokeh that really bothers me - when I use mine I try to keep the bokeh in front and avoid specular highlights in the background.
I agree that the 50/1.4 asph and the 75/2 asph are in a class of their own, but the 75/1.4 Summilux (as great a lens as it is) produces indistinguishable results from the 85/1.4 AiS Nikkor and a number of other lenses with the same basic design. The Nikon 28/1.4 is very close to the Leica 35/1.4 asph (and I had the 35/1.4 aspherical, which I sold to fund a trip to go and take photos because I couldn't justify the cost when all I wanted to do was use it). I love my Leicas, but to quote Tina Manley: "I [] use Leicas because they are quiet, unobtrusive, mechanical, and reliable. The excellent glass is a bonus for which I am very grateful".
I would definitely use a Leica M even if their lenses were only so-so. They would need to be fast, but some of them are excessively good for my typical uses - handheld, medium or fast film. Flare control is important, but sheer resolving power and the extreme optical measures that Leica takes to keep their lens designs among the most advanced in the industry I simply don't need. It's just a bonus to me that that they are excellent.
Marty
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
I'm not a Noctilux owner and unlikely to be one sadly but that's by choice. I chose to blow my dough on an M8 which I figured would serve me better than an expensive enigmatic unique lens like the Noct. It was the correct decision for me but I do still admire the Noctilux from the wings ... and to be honest I really miss the images we used to see from Ned Bojic from this remarkable lens when he was around the forum.
I hope you push your boundaries with it the way Ned did because that really got my attention ... I'd been a total sceptic of the value of what I regarded as a waste of money before seeing his work. I envy you owning one of these and I do hope you become a little more daring with it!
I hope you push your boundaries with it the way Ned did because that really got my attention ... I'd been a total sceptic of the value of what I regarded as a waste of money before seeing his work. I envy you owning one of these and I do hope you become a little more daring with it!
Last edited:
KM-25
Well-known
Well the moral of this story for me is that none of the images I posted were with the Leica Noctilux. They are with my $300 Nikon 50mm 1.2 AIS on either a D3 or D700.
The reason I have posted this experiment is that despite all the claiming of the Noctilux to be the second coming, I simply never see anything done with it that truly speaks of it's ability....and I have poured through hundreds of photos now, they all look the same.
I chose the samples to show because they have succeeded at actually making me money in the style that I would use a Noctilux if I had one. I used one for a week, it was awesome, but not 4, 5, 6 or 10 thousand in a wooden box awesome. And for the reasons I use a Leica, light, smaller and unobtrusive, it was somewhat out of place.
The images I wanted to see published from the 50mm 1.0...like the ones I see from Canon fast primes or even Nikon fast primes, well, they never show up. All I see are static shots of people or objects that never tell me I really need to fight for one on an ebay auction or put my order in to B&H for 6 grand.
So as cool as it is, I view the Noctilux as a connoisseur's or a collector's lens, not a photographer's lens. And yes, I realize the 50 1.2 Nikon is not as good as the Noctilux, but it is still *really* good and has earned me at least three new Nocti's in terms of income in the past 8 months that I have had it. Besides that, Nikon and Leica are both coming out with new ultra-fast 50's, the Leica being a .95 that should play well with the M8 and be a stunner on a film M.
And as far as over-processed, this laptop is off somewhat so that is good to hear. I try to keep it neutral but also consider that I shot with a polarizer on with all but the food shots on the web.
I guess what I am trying to say here is show me something simply spectacular with the Nocti, something National Geographic would practically be tripping over them selves to run double truck, because ladies and gentleman, I have never seen it from people who shoot with this lens.
Experiment over.
The reason I have posted this experiment is that despite all the claiming of the Noctilux to be the second coming, I simply never see anything done with it that truly speaks of it's ability....and I have poured through hundreds of photos now, they all look the same.
I chose the samples to show because they have succeeded at actually making me money in the style that I would use a Noctilux if I had one. I used one for a week, it was awesome, but not 4, 5, 6 or 10 thousand in a wooden box awesome. And for the reasons I use a Leica, light, smaller and unobtrusive, it was somewhat out of place.
The images I wanted to see published from the 50mm 1.0...like the ones I see from Canon fast primes or even Nikon fast primes, well, they never show up. All I see are static shots of people or objects that never tell me I really need to fight for one on an ebay auction or put my order in to B&H for 6 grand.
So as cool as it is, I view the Noctilux as a connoisseur's or a collector's lens, not a photographer's lens. And yes, I realize the 50 1.2 Nikon is not as good as the Noctilux, but it is still *really* good and has earned me at least three new Nocti's in terms of income in the past 8 months that I have had it. Besides that, Nikon and Leica are both coming out with new ultra-fast 50's, the Leica being a .95 that should play well with the M8 and be a stunner on a film M.
And as far as over-processed, this laptop is off somewhat so that is good to hear. I try to keep it neutral but also consider that I shot with a polarizer on with all but the food shots on the web.
I guess what I am trying to say here is show me something simply spectacular with the Nocti, something National Geographic would practically be tripping over them selves to run double truck, because ladies and gentleman, I have never seen it from people who shoot with this lens.
Experiment over.
Last edited:
Paulbe
Well-known
Hello deepwhite and thank you for your diary. Please keep it going, as your initial post mentioned you weren't trying to start a lens war. I am enjoying your photos and your comments.
Thanks again!
Paul
Thanks again!
Paul
infrequent
Well-known
@KM25 - that was awesome! does the nikkor come with a humidor?!
Rafael
Mandlerian
That's a moral?
I'm sure that deepwhite's thread was the most appropriate place to conduct your "experiment."
MikeL
Go Fish
KM-25 (or kodachrome boy as Ned used to call him), I've modified your quote a bit, I hope you don't mind.
Sorry deepwhite that your thread was derailed, but some were raised by wolves (aka lacking class).
Sorry deepwhite that your thread was derailed, but some were raised by wolves (aka lacking class).
marke
Well-known
Ned Bojic
Ned Bojic
Keith, I also miss his unique eye, and the mastery he had of this lens. I believe I read here (or at LUF), that he had dropped his Nocti and it broke open a few weeks ago. I think it's in for repairs right now. But surely he must have more than ONE lens????
Ned Bojic
Keith, I also miss his unique eye, and the mastery he had of this lens. I believe I read here (or at LUF), that he had dropped his Nocti and it broke open a few weeks ago. I think it's in for repairs right now. But surely he must have more than ONE lens????
deepwhite
Well-known
I would like to thank everyone in this thread, sincerely, no irony intended at all. Your reaction is milder than I've seen in most other Noctilux threads....
Except for KM-25. Please find my reply to you in an independent thread I'm starting later.
------
Still working. Should be updating this thread a couple of hours later. In the meantime, anything is welcome here. I'm just an amateur that's learning to use a new lens.
------
p.s.: I'm also a worshiper of Ned's Noctilux shots. I'll try hard. Very hard....
Except for KM-25. Please find my reply to you in an independent thread I'm starting later.
------
Still working. Should be updating this thread a couple of hours later. In the meantime, anything is welcome here. I'm just an amateur that's learning to use a new lens.
------
p.s.: I'm also a worshiper of Ned's Noctilux shots. I'll try hard. Very hard....
Last edited: