cmogi10
Bodhisattva
75 Lux or a low priced alternative, the Zeiss sonnar. (Totally loving this lens right now)
Krosya
Konicaze
pphuang said:"Bad" can be quite subjective -
I understand that. I suppose I should clarify - by "Bad" I meant - what any given user would judge their own shot as a "bad" shot with Noctilux.
ferider
Veteran
cmogi10 said:
Hate to say it but I told you
I am totally in love with Bertha, does everything the Noctiluxcould do but better ....
Roland.
kevin m
Veteran
Dave, it seems to be hit or miss with the 50/1.2 depending on the copy you get. I got a mint one off ebay (the glass passes the "flashlight test") and I've been pleasantly surprised. Very little vignetting wide open and a very natural, pleasing transition to OOF, IMO.
The attached pic was shot at f1.2, focused on the giraffe's eyes. I sent mine off to DAG for a CLA to replace the 50-year old grease.
Attachments
ferider
Veteran
Which film do you use, Kevin ?
kevin m
Veteran
Sorry, I forgot to mention... It's NPZ, Fuji 800.
rogue_designer
Reciprocity Failure
Dave Wilkinson said:Strange......I recently got one-on a '7' body, and could not get rid of the damn thing fast enough!, no nothing wrong with the glass or the focussing, but after a lifelong love afair with superb Nikkors, I had to agree with most reviewer's comments, - 'less than satisfactory'.....'nothing special', still....'one man's meat.........'
I guess, like anything it comes down to personal preference. I love mine, and it seems to love me back. At least for the way I shoot, and the look I want.
cmogi10
Bodhisattva
ferider said:Hate to say it but I told you
could do but better ....
Roland.
Some irrational part of me still wants a Noctilux.
Luckily it's not an option right now.
wt67
Member
I agree that the 50mm Summilux 1.4 is a nice alternative, but with a faster speed film, I could never understand the need for the Noctilux. But again, the Summilux is a lovely lens and something that I would highly recommend.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Is there a 'next best'? Not if you want a 50/1 M-fit RF coupled lens.
If you don't mind the designs of 40+ years ago, significantly inferior in every way, you can buy two Canons: 50/,95 (with 'collector' written all over it) or 50/1,2. The latter is a fast lens for the money if you don't mind low sharpness and high flare. I've had two; the current one was cleaned and restored by Balham, the best in the business (they do a lot of Ministry of Defence work).
Personally I'd rather drop a stop and use the current 1,5/50 C-Sonnar, my favourite 50. The Noctilux comes in second (and I'm currently using both) and after that the Nokton's fine. I've never used a 50 Summilux so I can't comment.
The 35/1.2 Voigtländer is a lovely bottle (I've used that too) bit it ain't a 50 and it ain't f/1.
Cheers,
R.
If you don't mind the designs of 40+ years ago, significantly inferior in every way, you can buy two Canons: 50/,95 (with 'collector' written all over it) or 50/1,2. The latter is a fast lens for the money if you don't mind low sharpness and high flare. I've had two; the current one was cleaned and restored by Balham, the best in the business (they do a lot of Ministry of Defence work).
Personally I'd rather drop a stop and use the current 1,5/50 C-Sonnar, my favourite 50. The Noctilux comes in second (and I'm currently using both) and after that the Nokton's fine. I've never used a 50 Summilux so I can't comment.
The 35/1.2 Voigtländer is a lovely bottle (I've used that too) bit it ain't a 50 and it ain't f/1.
Cheers,
R.
nitrox1
Member
Rogue_designer,
The bar shot is fantastic. It represents everything I love in a photograph. Outstanding.
I don't have a nocti, so I don't have a dog in this hunt. I would very much love to get one, and with my GAS in full swing I probably will sometime next year.
For now I'm happy with my 35 and 50 summicrons.
John...
The bar shot is fantastic. It represents everything I love in a photograph. Outstanding.
I don't have a nocti, so I don't have a dog in this hunt. I would very much love to get one, and with my GAS in full swing I probably will sometime next year.
For now I'm happy with my 35 and 50 summicrons.
John...
shadowfox
Darkroom printing lives
Rogue, those look like shots from a hazy Summar
I like it...
All this talk about lenses that cost thousands... all I want is a Summar...
(did I say this already?)
I like it...
All this talk about lenses that cost thousands... all I want is a Summar...
(did I say this already?)
kevin m
Veteran
Who am I to believe, Roger, you, or my lying eyes?
Perhaps you had two bad copies, but my 50/1.2 is about as flare-resistant as my pre-asph. Summilux 50.
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Dear Kevin,kevin m said:Who am I to believe, Roger, you, or my lying eyes?
Perhaps you had two bad copies, but my 50/1.2 is about as flare-resistant as my pre-asph. Summilux 50.
Me, every time.
I have mixed feelings about this lens. Under good conditions, it's great. Under adverse conditions -- anything against a bright background -- it flares mercilessly (veiling flare, not diaphragm-reflection flare). As for sharpness at full aperture; well, there's not much I wouldn't back against it.
I'll take a row of good shots with it. Then I'll go beyond its limits and get SERIOUS flare -- which hasn't happened yet with the Noctilux.
If I could afford a Noctilux, the 50/1,2 wouldn't get a look-in. But the owner of the Noctilux I'm using will want it back sooner or later, and besides, the Canon is worth so little that I can't be assed to sell it. But I use it instead of the 1,5/50 C-Sonnar mainly when I want the softness (at f/1.2 or f/22).
The half-stop over f/1,5 isn't normally decisive, given the speed of modern films: the Canon came out before Kodak Recording Films 2475 and 2485, and when High Speed Ektachrome (160 ASA) was the fastest slide film on the market.
'Two bad copies'? Entirely possible, though as I said, a Balham rebuild argues against the flare aspect at least. But my opinion is shared by most other people I have met (not corresponded with on the internet) who are comparing it with Summiluxes and Noctiluxes (f/1.2 or f/1),.
And, as I confessed in the earlier post, I've never used a 50 Summilux. Maybe it's flary too.
Cheers,
R.
Last edited:
kevin m
Veteran
Prosaic
Well-known
ferider said:Hate to say it but I told you
could do but better ....
Roland.
Who´s Bertha?
Hacker
黑客
borismach said:No! For lens of $500, its character is dfinitely a flaw.
bm
No, the price is flawed!
Hacker
黑客
ErikFive said:
Definitely the M-Hexanon 50mm f1.2. You lose only half a stop, have modern coating and optics, superb build and a look between the Noctilux and the ultra modern sharpness of the Lux ASPH.
maddoc
... likes film again.
That's true. But ... what "flaws" in case of the Noctilux ? This lens is quite flare resistant and sharp, also at f /1.0. Focus shift ? Well yes but as I remember the same is true for the Sonnar 50/1.5. The only "flaw" of the Noctilux is that it needs some practise to focus it (or an 0.85x or better 0.91x VF magnification) ...kevin m said:Too true. When you pay $5,000 for a lens, it's flaws are "character;" when you pay $500 for a lens, it's flaws are just flaws.
BTW, at minimum distances and full aperture, the Summilux 75/1.4 has a much shallower DoF compared to the Noctilux (23mm vs 10mm)
Hacker
黑客
maddoc said:
With f1, there is a certain, undeniable look to the pictures. Stepping down, the lens is very sharp. I'm not sure why this lens always gets bashed, but often, it relates to the price and the weight.
I did a poll for fast lenses and lo and behold, the Noctilux wins by a huge margin, unlike say the Biogon 35 vs the Cron 35 ASPH, where it is too close to call.