Next best thing to a Noctilux?

[rogue_designer]

Why has one to spend Noctilux money to find a good example of Canon? Time and money waste after all.

Brian, you bet that I never gonna touch any of those Canon lenses in my life even future eight lives. After a glimpse on the lens turns of me already. Simply impractical lens of that ridiculous design which owners of Canon 1ds MKII would not mind of.

Wait up a second... Do you think we're talking about the 50 1.2 for Canon EF-S autofocus SLRs?

Or the 50 1.2 for Canon rangefinder LTM - cause that's what we're actually talking about.

Honestly, I'm having a hard time following your rambling. So I'm just going to chalk it up to a breakdown in communication, and move on.

 

[tomasis]

rogue, I did speak about the size. it is way too large by rangefinder standards IMHO it belongs to another world i.e. SLR. I don't see any difference between SLR and RF lenses by Canon when I judge by size. I hope that made it clear. It is lovely of you to suspect about EF-S. It made my day and I'm sorry for my bad english.

Brian, I think I had to make the balance up by badmouthing of this lens while other do with Noctilux which apparantely is not owned by many here, right? They shout about price, but they didn't had chance to try if it was worth the price.

 

[rogue_designer]

You do realize, it's really tiny compared to the Nocti?

 

[tomasis]

How about 0,95? I don't even compare 1.2 to Nocti. How tiny is 1.5 compared to 1.2? This goes on It is up your real needs. I'd go for full stop difference myself from Summilux. If you use 1.8/2.0 and 1.2 lenses then it will be fine setup for daylight and lowlight.

 

[Sonnar Brian]

You will never hear me badmouth a Noctilux. My biggest regret at a camera show is passing one up for $1,800 on an M3. About 8 (or so) years ago. I had just bought a Nikon SP and could not layout the cash.

Now, my Canon RF coupled 50/0.95 and RF Canon 50/1.2 cost me under $300- together. Believe me, if I fall into another Noctilux at that price, it will not get past me.

 

[rogue_designer]

I won't badmouth the Nocti. It's one hell of a piece of optical engineering.

However, I shoot RF's for fun, not profit. And as such, I can't justify the extreme expense of such a lens (nor indeed even the lesser expense of a summilux). So the sub $400 Canon offers an alternative. Not a replacement by any stretch of the imagination, but very much it's own unique shooting experience and look.

And I can invest the remaining monies in the equipment and tools I need for the rest of my work.

 

[Hacker]

Hexanon looks to be a such nice option. Too bad that those are too few to be reasonably priced though.. but those seem to be faaar much better than that canon C R A P Sorry.

The Hexanon 60mm f1.2 was sold at about US$1600 when it was first released. Now it sells between $2400 and $2700, so I think it would be quite reasonable given the astronomical rise in lenses as a whole.

The 50mm f1.2 while it came with a set with the camera and is beautilfully finished, was not much cheaper either, and a Mint copy available now is priced at US$2198. http://cgi.ebay.com/ws/eBayISAPI.dll?ViewItem&ssPageName=STRK:MEWAX:IT&item=150209184380&_trksid=p3984.cWAT.m240.lVI

Reasonable? Expensive? A bargain? What do you think?

 

[foto_fool]

Hacker - sorry but by my standards $2,200 is not a bargain, and this is the only lens that gives me GAS these days. I think Noriaki is high asking that much, when he split the set and is only asking a litttle under $800 for the "Limited" body. The 50/1.2 should not sell for any more than the more rare 60/1.2 IMO.

 

[Hacker]

Hacker - sorry but by my standards $2,200 is not a bargain, and this is the only lens that gives me GAS these days. I think Noriaki is high asking that much, when he split the set and is only asking a litttle under $800 for the "Limited" body. The 50/1.2 should not sell for any more than the more rare 60/1.2 IMO.

The 60mm had a 800 piece run vs the 2001 of the 50mm. The marginal difference is best left to the market. Personally, the 60mm looks better.

 

[tomasis]

brian and rogue, i agree with you

hacker, thanks for telling prices. it is difficult to say how much it is worth price now. I couldn't say it is bargain for sure but the initial market price 1600$ sounds quite reasonable. When prices go up that much, those become more as collectable lenses, unfortunately Maybe it is same thing with Sonnar lenses for Rollei RF and other limited edition things.

When I know there are used noctiluxes for $3000 then it leaves no hard time deciding for low light lens next to 1.4/1.5 for me. I don't really want to own some lenses with half stop differences. But if you use only f2.0 lenses so 1.2 options would be good choice for lowlight.

You know, I would say Hexanon is the best next lens after Noctilux if it was not that limited edition.

 

[kevin m]

Either you're a Photoshop genius or the right 50/1.2 is better than any I've ever seen.

Hah! Roger, I can assure you it's almost certainly the latter.

 

[Dave Wilkinson]

rogue -- my canon 50 1.2 is all your fault -- ever since you let me borrow yours last april.... I wanted one... I got a great one from pcb_rf and haven't really thought about noctilux since... the canon is a stellar lens...

C'mon guys!......lets not 'beat about the bush'!!.....the're soft and hazy!!, - but if that's what ya like - fine! - I thought about keeping mine, - as a paper weight for my desk, - or to throw at those damn cats in my back yard on a night!


Cheers, Dave

 

[rogue_designer]

C'mon guys!......lets not 'beat about the bush'!!.....the're soft and hazy!!, - but if that's what ya like - fine! - I thought about keeping mine, - as a paper weight for my desk, - or to throw at those damn cats in my back yard on a night!

Heh... feeding the trolls again?

I think it just takes a certain type of photographer to bring out the best in this lens...

You know the kind.

Accomplished.

 

[Dave Wilkinson]

Nice shots!........Jupiter 3...or 8?

 

[tomasis]

Nice shots!........Jupiter 3...or 8?

Are you my other lost brother?

 

[Kim Coxon]

Let's keep it friendly and avoid the personal comments.

Kim

 

[MikeL]

Let's keep it friendly and avoid the personal comments.

Kim

Kim, this is a thread with Noctilux in the title. Good luck.

 

[Dave Wilkinson]

what's your problem today, dave?

Give these guys a visit, they might give you a hug and help you work out your issues:
http://www.yorkshiresolutions.org.uk/

Nah!....can't teach an old dog new tricks!.....anyway....I apologise guys, - maybe after a hard week I was feeling mischievous and like 'winding-up' a few folks, but unlike a lot of recent posts, there was no malicious intent.....honest!

Regards, Dave

 

[kevin m]

Canon 50/1.2 @f1.2, minimum focus. Fuji NPZ.

Can you duplicate this with your Jupiter 3. I own one and I certainly can't.

It's a little soft, but there's no OOF weirdness going on, and virtually no vignetting. And it's half a stop faster than the Jupiter.

 

[Hacker]

Mostly, it gets bashed for the price .... There are bigger and or heavier lenses out (90mm Summicron f/2.0, Summilux 75/1.4) but the Noct seems to be unacceptable for it weight / size since it is "only" a 50mm lens ...

I'm sourcing for a Zunow or a Nikkor-N f1.1 right now, and I hope it does not get bashed because of its price.