New M43 lens: Noktor 50mm f/0.95, native M43

[scottwallick]

Interesting.

www.noktor.com

Via PhotoRumors, which reports:

Focal Length 50mm
Maximum Aperture F0.95
Minimum Aperture F16
Autofocus No
Internal Focusing No
Rear Focusing Yes
Minimum Focus Distance 1.9 ft. (0.6m)
Angle of View 46°
Lens (Elements) 8
Lens (Groups) 7
Dimensions 2.9×2.1 in.
Weight (280g)
Mount Type Micro Four Thirds
Accepts Filter Type Screw-on
Filter Size 62mm

Crazy.

A few sample photos have been posted by Noktor via Twitter.

Discuss.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

Whoa. Real?

 

[principe azul]

http://43rumors.com/ft5-hot-new-noktor-hyperprime-lens-50mm-f0-95-for-microfourthirds/

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1041&thread=34532492

So a bit disappointing.

50/0.95 sounds good on film, but on M43 it's equivalent to 100mm in focal length and f/2 in DOF.

So where's the 25/0.5?

 

[GoneSavage]

I'd have to see more sample shots to be sure, but it seems a bit low on contrast.

 

[johannielscom]

Filter size 62mm, overall weight 280 grammes? All plastic, thats for sure. Either that, or another PhotoShop fake. That Noktor website leads to Twitter straight away. Not a decent product page in sight anywhere.

I'll believe it when I hold it!

 

[principe azul]

Either that, or another PhotoShop fake.

Someone in the dpreview link I gave reckons it's a mockup of an existing C-mount lens adapted to M43. With no AF. Pages on the website have been removed but exist in Google's cache: search for

site:noktor.com

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Great. The m4/3 crowd could then shoot fuzzy, soft images with no dof.

 

[scottwallick]

I agree that I'll be more interested if there's a 17mm, 20mm, or, better yet, a 25mm lens. I'm also not terribly fascinated by lenses wider than f/1.4.

We'll see.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

Looks like it's actually a Senko TV lens.

 

[Thardy]

http://43rumors.com/ft5-hot-new-noktor-hyperprime-lens-50mm-f0-95-for-microfourthirds/

http://forums.dpreview.com/forums/readflat.asp?forum=1041&thread=34532492

So a bit disappointing.

50/0.95 sounds good on film, but on M43 it's equivalent to 100mm in focal length and f/2 in DOF.

So where's the 25/0.5?

I don't quite follow. Is it bad for this lens to perform like a 100 f/4? Shouldn't a 100 f/4 in 35mm have shallower DOF than a 50 f/2 in 35mm.

I do agree that 2x crop is bit too much unless you're far away from the subject.

 

[principe azul]

Hi Thardy,

Sorry, I just jotted some thoughts down without any consideration for whether they would make sense to anyone else...

It'll perform like a 100mm/1.9 would on film. If it's manual focus (and new, and expensive), I'm not clear what the benefit would be over sticking an old 50/1.4 on an adaptor to give you the equivalent of 100/2.8. A stop more DOF, to be sure, but not a deal-breaker for me.

The 25/0.5? A 25/0.5 in M43 would give a 50/0.95 film equivalent, which would be a lot of fun.

Me, I've a 35/1.2 and a 50/1.5 (in 35mm) which I can press into service for occasional long-lens equivalents on M43. So it's rumour of fast wides in M43 that excites me. But the 14/2.8 isn't impressing me - a focal length common to all but one of the M43 zooms, and only a stop faster - in DOF terms, the equivalent of a 28mm/5.6 - basically a Soviet Orion!

 

[gerikson]

there's a C-mount 26mm f/1.1, but you'll have to pay $1,300 for it used:

http://lawrenceripsher.com/blog/2009/12/switar-26mm-f1-1-f1-1-review.html

 

[venchka]

Wasn't/Isn't there a 25mm 1.4 lens for 4/3? A lens that Leitz was involved with? Will that lens work on Micro 4/3?

 

[antiquark]

Wasn't/Isn't there a 25mm 1.4 lens for 4/3? A lens that Leitz was involved with? Will that lens work on Micro 4/3?

Yes, Summilux-D 25mm ASPH. It will work on micro4/3 with an adapter. It's pretty big though (not my pic):

http://www.flickr.com/photos/minami/509320258/

 

[Robin Harrison]

I have one of these - a 50mm Navitron f0.95 in c-mount. I've been wanting to do the conversion to M4/3 for a while, but it's not trivial (normal c-mount converter won't fit due to hugeness of lens. I did put together a crude solution involving negative dipoptre filters, but I probably lose some T-value speed in the process.

The thought of a company being founded on the premise? Strange! I guess they must have found some new old stock of these things, a few hundred, say, and must have realised that converting them to M4/3 and sticking a brand on them would increase their value ten fold!

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I have a Canon 50/0.95 TV lens with the C-Mount adapter.

That will work. It's big.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

I have a Canon 50/0.95 TV lens with the C-Mount adapter.

That will work. It's big.

There's no way that would fit on a G1 or GH1, is there?

 

[Sonnar Brian]

Yes- the C-Mount adapter for the 4/3rds should have plenty of clearance. This lens was used on a C-Mount camera before. The C-Mount adapter that came with the lens gives a good extension. It can be used for Canon Breech-Mount and for 39mm thread mount lenses.

 

[squirrel$$$bandit]

No, I don't mean it won't fit on the mount--I mean, what about the fake SLR hump overhang?

I bet that lens looks hilarious on the GF1...

 

[Sonnar Brian]

I'm not sure. Looks like I'm going to get an Olympus E-PL1, small and has the built in flash. For my wife, of course... Nina asked for a good digital camera, one that was more capable. But it has to have the flash, and needs to be smaller than the Panasonics.

Plus, they names it after a 1960s programming language.