My Noctilux Diary

marke said:
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????
Click to expand...


LOL ... how typical that Ned would do something like that. He had no pretentions about his equipment ... no matter what it cost it was there to be used. I still remember the pics of his M7 covered in snow and ice! 😛
 
Deepwhite - Sorry this is the first time I have seen your thread. Do keep posting photos, Noct or not. I think you have a good eye and enjoyed looking at your photos.
 
KM-25 said:
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.
Click to expand...

Well ... all photos I have seen taken with the "fast" primes from Canon and Nikon are exactly that, static shots of people or objects. These lenses are cheaper compared with a Noctilux but you get what you pay for ...

I would never spent 5000 US$ on a mocked up M6 with 35-50-90 FL (MP-3) with a 50/1.4 lens in a presentation box in favor for a Noctilux with hood and both caps (4000US$) + M4-P (900 US$) but I prefer to take photos and don't need a fondler's Leica in presentation box. Each to his own...
 
I think it is somewhat good that Km25 posted some pictures so we could judge ourselves how good Noctilux is. Canon and Nikkor are just some jokes which some guys can afford and boast that they can make good pictures as Noctilux. Well it is up our eyes. It is remarkable that Km25 has some difficulties to see some differences. Is it maybe that he is dreaming in his Nikon world with kodak colors 🙂

Km25, why do you boast that you earn 3x prices of Noctilux with $300 piece? It is kinda of funny. You love Nikon too much that you lost sense of reality that you were posting in Leica M series forum.

Deepwhite, continue to post some pictures. Would be great if you can afford some nice color films like Velvia and show some shoots 🙂
 
KM-25 said:
...and I have poured through hundreds of photos now, they all look the same.
Click to expand...

That says more about you than the lens. Your experiment failed. You didn't pull the wool over your subjects' eyes. If anything you vindicated the Noctilux, a lens distinguished by its wonderful signature, not by some banal consideration such as mere sharpness.
 
oftheherd said:
Deepwhite - Sorry this is the first time I have seen your thread. Do keep posting photos, Noct or not. I think you have a good eye and enjoyed looking at your photos.
Click to expand...

Deepwhite, I echo this sentiment.

I find your photos interesting and engaging. Keep going.

And don't bother yourself with the "experiment." You have your own artistic journey to put all your efforts onto, don't be upset over someone else' problems.

Having said that, a forum thread is not an ideal place for a "diary", use a blog server and post the link here, so people who like your "diary" can follow it, and naysayers cannot mess with it.
 
Ah, well, such is life, eh?

I think the Nocti is a cool lens albeit a little "cultish". But I also found in using it that it was just not as usable to make pictures that go beyond the gimmick aspect. So I went looking for shots that blew me away that were not just gimmicky and found none. No, not even Ned's screamed "I WAS TAKEN WITH A NOCTILUX!!!"

As for the pics I posted, all out takes that the clients would not mind being posted on the web. In those cases, the gimmick of wide open with swirly bokeh was part of the campaign. Better to do it with a lens than in photoshop I say.

And finally and by far most importantly, not one person's photos on this thread are bad. They just don't speak to me in ways that other Leica photographers images do that make me want to go out and buy one. So if I offended you, that was not my intent so keep at it and enjoy that crystal ball sized hunk of glass.

And as far as me using an MP-3, it's so not the second coming either, they should have made it a .85 so that it paired better with the 50 1.4 that it came with. The shutter release could be smoother like my M3 and it seems to take on dust much quicker behind the finder glass. I use the MP-3 specifically with Kodachrome, just like my M3 and M6. Bottom line, I have not seen the box it came in for over a year, it gets used and scratched, not fondled.

And I could order a Nocti right now and not feel a financial pinch, but I like to put my money into things that make sense to me, like month long trip to a foreign land, or the launching of a new website for my business.

But to quote an email I got from a well known Leica shooter who I will not reveal:

"I had one for about a year. I just did not use it that much because I don't care for tools to get in the way of making the photos I need to make, which the 1.0 often did. The 1.4 is an infinitely more usable lens and when it came down to it, the editors was never going to be able to tell the difference anyway."

And as far as the new thread that seems to have popped up in this forum, I have not read it and I won't. This has nothing to do with me. This has everything to do with the very best images that are made with Leica not being with a Noctilux.

So I will occasionally look on Flicker to see if that stunner has arrived as it will perhaps one day. For now, I will get back to making pictures.

Get out and shoot, forget what I wrote if it does not sit well with you. But also realize I am entitled to my opinion and I am not calling any of you lesser photographers because you enjoy this lens.
 
Wow. This thread is such a mixed bag....

1. KM25 echos my feelings, in many respects, about the Noct. People who buy them, with a few exceptions, buy them because they're enamored of two things: the status, and/or the "gimmick" of shooting at f1. There are a decent number of examples where shooting at f1 is responsible for creating interesting imagery. Oshima's work is an excellent representation of that. But, look at the sum of his portfolio, and you'll see that he creates interesting imagery with any piece of gear he uses.

When i look at Noct pictures, and i've seen a LOT of them, usually what i see is a lot of 'test imagery.' People buy the thing, and then walk around 'DEMONSTRATING' shallow DOF, rather than concentrating on making images. But, that's not the fault of the lens.

2. There is so much (too much) ridiculous rhetoric where the Noct is concerned, by people who continue to assert that those who don't own one don't own one because they "can't afford" it. That's just narcissistic and silly. It's a choice for a lot of us. I could buy the one in the "coffin" this minute if i wanted one. I just don't want one. There will always be those who will continue to assert that 'naysayers' are jealous.... Whatever. I think Ned said once that he bought his by existing on ramen noodles for a month or two. I guess that's admirable, in a way. I think he then went on and declared something about "jealousy" or somesuch.... Which was funny, because when i was reading it, i was on vacation, and while away, i made enough money during those two weeks to buy five of the things and pay for the trip. IT'S NOT ABOUT THE MONEY. Some people base spending on VALUE. If one doesn't want to shoot f1 cliches, and/or lug around a massive hunk of glass that can't be focused on anything that isn't dead still... well, it's a value decision.

3. KM25's "hijacking" of this thread is rather puerile, though. It would have been less so if KM25 could have managed to have posted 'good' examples using his 'fake Noctilux.' He claims to be making money with photographs like that. I'm an art director, and i just can't imagine what market he's selling to with that kind of stuff. But, whatever. People will buy anything. But, a note to KM: If you're trying to prove a point, you should actually prove it to other people. Not just yourself... before you begin to congratulate yourself. This is sorta like standing on the deck of an aircraft carrier in a flight suit and proclaiming "Mission accomplished."

4. The Noctilux is a cool lens. In the right hands. I like Oshima's pictures. I liked a couple of Ned's. I have a friend who shoots marvelously with one. But, the ratio of people who use it to good effect is very low. And, as i continue to say, when i look through my collection of hundreds of photography books, and as i recall all of the photographs i've seen in galleries or exhibitions... NOT ONE of those images was shot with a Noctilux.

Who, other than Tina Manley (a very nice woman, by the way) has published/exhibited a body of work that includes Noctilux photographs? Not that that's the primary criteria for ownership, but it might reinforce the 'for' argument if this lens weren't used exclusively by internet 'testers.'

I won't proclaim it a "connoisseur's lens" or a "collector's lens." It's a lens. Period. But, it's tremendously overhyped. It's like a plungercam. Or a Holga. It's nice. For a while. Maybe it represents a particular stage in your photographic development. But, seriously, how long can you go on making ultra-shallow DOF pictures? Individually, sure, we can marvel at the results. But, when it's a gimmick for gimmick's sake, the pictures don't really hold up as anything more than a technical exercise.
 
Double Negative said:
Now that high speed film exists and/or being able to push films quite easily without golfball-sized grain, f/1 isn't the holy grail that it used to be, IMO. That's not to say that the Nocti or similar lenses are useless or suck - when you need f/1, you need f/1. But more often than not, f/1.2-1.4 will work just as well if not better and for a helluva lot less money.
Click to expand...
No question.

But equally, I've taken enough pics with the Noctilux that I REALLY like -- there is a strange 'painterly' quality wide open -- that I am severely tempted. Not many shots, but enough. And mostly in 'available darkness' at ISO 1250 or 2500.

Let's see what happens after the Leica embargo comes off on the 15th. Will there be a new Noctilux? How fast? And if there is a new one, will prices for the old one go up or down?

Cheers,

R.
 
Last edited:
CK Dexter Haven said:
3. KM25's "hijacking" of this thread is rather puerile, though. It would have been less so if KM25 could have managed to have posted 'good' examples using his 'fake Noctilux.' He claims to be making money with photographs like that. I'm an art director, and i just can't imagine what market he's selling to with that kind of stuff. But, whatever. People will buy anything. But, a note to KM: If you're trying to prove a point, you should actually prove it to other people. Not just yourself... before you begin to congratulate yourself. This is sorta like standing on the deck of an aircraft carrier in a flight suit and proclaiming "Mission accomplished."
Click to expand...

Yep, what can you do, it was 4-something A.M. and I got out of bed intending on going to the bathroom once and ended up going twice so to speak. It's OK, I can take my lumps..🙂

As for the pics, they were as I said out takes. The mug is a snapshot of my lady in a pizza joint and the second two are a out take and an exposure test from the same campaign. The ad campaign was a series of shallow DOF images for print ads in which the result was to be a suggestion of otherwise common surroundings in a resort town. The negative space was key as to the style of text used was as important as the background image.

The reason I chose these was to show how sharp the lens is at 1.2 even at the sides and if it is not as smooth as the Nocti, the look wide open.

I just hate the internet for this kind of discussion. There are so many absolutes in opinions that arise and no one can just take someone's word on anything anymore due to rampant posers. So at first I played a fun little trick in a typical Nocti thread and then went on to scatter random unrefined thoughts in the wee hours of the morning. It's too bad I did not post it later and make it a fun reply instead of arrogant and seemingly disingenuous.

That is the way the ball bounces sometimes, what can you do except for apologize and move on to more positive notes?

Part of me wants to go find a Nocti right now and try to shoot the quintessential shot with Kodachrome 25 in my M3, which I have never done. But I also know that I can never become so enamored with a piece of gear to the point that I fail to make the other important images in my life.

And buy the way, I used to work on the flight deck of a carrier....
 
KM-25 said:
I think the Nocti is a cool lens albeit a little "cultish". But I also found in using it that it was just not as usable to make pictures that go beyond the gimmick aspect. So I went looking for shots that blew me away that were not just gimmicky and found none. No, not even Ned's screamed "I WAS TAKEN WITH A NOCTILUX!!!"
Click to expand...

For all the pictures I've seen of Ned's using a Nocti, gimmicky doesn't seem to be part of his vision. He has often said that one of the reasons he likes the lens, is because of it's versatility.


But to quote an email I got from a well known Leica shooter who I will not reveal:

"I had one for about a year. I just did not use it that much because I don't care for tools to get in the way of making the photos I need to make, which the 1.0 often did. The 1.4 is an infinitely more usable lens and when it came down to it, the editors was never going to be able to tell the difference anyway."
Click to expand...

I agree that the 1.4 is a more usable lens, that's the main reason why I decided to get one over the 1.0.
 
Besides Ned's work, I also love the wonderful Noctilux shots from Tommy Oshima, Moaan and our own Maddoc. ;-) And many others. I can't mention you all, sorry.

------

I'm sorry I over-reacted. Please stop the argument now. I'll stop first.
 
Last edited:
There are certain things in life, which we thought to be cliche, turn out to be so true.

For example,

"Buy the worst car, but buy the best house."

or

"If you don't do it now, you'll never do it."

or

"If you own a Leica, you owe yourself shooting a roll of B/W."

------

I started shooting film again (the last time was 10 years ago with the little Canon Ixus in APS format) this April. Among all the rolls, only one was B/W (with the good old Zeiss Ikon Contessa). So that day I just loaded a roll of 400TX and went out.

Then, when I got it processed and scanned, I suddenly realized why people always say "You got a Leica. Shoot it in B/W." As it's only my second roll of B/W I know it's not good enough, but I'm starting to see the charm.

------

2829966836_2e54bcb656_o.jpg


I've been here, the scene, the situation, a lot, waiting in the car for my girlfriend in the bookstore.


2829966976_798f0b9e20_o.jpg


By the night I was feeling bad. Girlfriend's not around; don't want to talk to anybody.

So I went to the manga store for my own solitude.


2829967132_9cb2013e6b_o.jpg


When I went out, I was surprised to see there were still some activities in the city.

I stood before the crossroad, waited for the traffic light to turn green, one, two, three, "click". (Yes, it was a Bessa, not a Leica M, so it was a "click".)


2829967346_23cd3261df_o.jpg


In Taiwan, you can see a lot of stickers with religious saying, sticked to a road post. Christian, Buddha, Dao, and a lot more. We are on the intersection of western and eastern cultures.


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