Noct-Nikkor vs et al

[Timmyjoe]

I've started this new thread because I didn't want to hijack the Nikon F3 Tribute thread.

Having heard so much about the Noct-Nikkor over the years, and never having actually used one, I'd love to see a comparison. Having the same scene shot with the Noct-Nikkor, and a current Nikkor 50mm f1.2, (and maybe the new AF Nikkor 58mm f1.4, and just for good measure, a Canon FD 50mm f1.2L (which has been compared to the Noct-Nikkor)). And I'd love the scene to contain people's faces, the subject matter that I think shows the strengths and weaknesses of a lens.

Anyone up for that challenge (and anyone have the lenses for such)?

Best,
-Tim

 

[Calzone]

I've started this new thread because I didn't want to hijack the Nikon F3 Tribute thread.

Having heard so much about the Noct-Nikkor over the years, and never having actually used one, I'd love to see a comparison. Having the same scene shot with the Noct-Nikkor, and a current Nikkor 50mm f1.2, (and maybe the new AF Nikkor 58mm f1.4, and just for good measure, a Canon FD 50mm f1.2L (which has been compared to the Noct-Nikkor)). And I'd love the scene to contain people's faces, the subject matter that I think shows the strengths and weaknesses of a lens.

Anyone up for that challenge (and anyone have the lenses for such)?

Best,
-Tim

Tim,

An interesting thread. Thanks.

I will say the Noct-Nikkor is sharp wide open if you nail the focus. Close focus allows you to do a tight face shot, but beware that the tip of the noze can get fuzzy even if you stop down. Exceptionally good for low coma. Does not have light fall off wide open like a Noctilux, but the focus in the corners wide open will be softer than the Noctitux. I would call the OOF and bokeh "dreamy" especially if close focused. I also feel that the extra 8mm added to the focal lenght adds to the look making it more like a short tele in rendering.

The Noct-Nikkor is a specialized lens that is optimized for use F1.2-F4.0. At F5.6 or more stopped down other slower Nikon lenses have higher performance.

Crossover: I use a F3P with a DK-17 magnifier and a Beattie IntenScreen with an over sized split prism. The VF'er is an eyepoper as far as brightness and magnification. I also modded the F3P so that the light comes on to illuminate the metering LCD's whenever the metering is turned on. This requires use of a MD-4 motor drive due to high battery drain. Without the MD-4 battery drain is excessive. This F3P was ultimized especially for use with the Noct-Nikkor. The added weight of the MD-4 IMHO helps create a stable platform, kinda like why sniper rifles are heavy.

Cal

 

[Timmyjoe]

Would love to see some samples.

I'm also interested to see the difference in how the lens renders when attached to a film body as opposed to a digital body. I've found with other older Nikkor glass, their rendering (especially wide open) can be quite different when shooting them with Tri-X and a film body, as opposed to digitally with a D700 or D4. I've seen them perform much better with film, when shot wide open, which would make sense as in the 1970's and 1980's when these lenses were designed, the engineers probably weren't thinking in terms of digital.

Best,
-Tim

 

[Calzone]

Would love to see some samples.

I'm also interested to see the difference in how the lens renders when attached to a film body as opposed to a digital body. I've found with other older Nikkor glass, their rendering (especially wide open) can be quite different when shooting them with Tri-X and a film body, as opposed to digitally with a D700 or D4. I've seen them perform much better with film, when shot wide open, which would make sense as in the 1970's and 1980's when these lenses were designed, the engineers probably weren't thinking in terms of digital.

Best,
-Tim

Tim,

This is an interesting observation, especially since I traded away my Noct-Nikkor to become more Leica Centric. At this point I want either another Noct-Nikkor, or a replacement, so this thread is very useful to me.

The rig I mentioned above F3P/MD-4/Noct-Nikkor was an unbeatable rig and a hyper fast shooter. Unfortunately I neither scan or post.

Perhaps the only similar like rig was shooting a 0.85 VF'ed M6 with a 75 Lux, but the 75 Lux really sang shot at F5.6-F8.0 and close focused. The 75 Lux has even less DOF and the handling was a lot slower than my F3P/Noct-Nikkor, but the dreamy bokeh and ultra smooth OOF had a great look that I say was similar in rendering to the Noct-Nikkor.

The 75 Lux I perfered over a Noctilux because the Noctilux's light fall off I did not like. Over all I think the 75 Lux has good corners when compared to the Noct-Nikkor though, and in many ways there are strong similarities between a Noctilux and a 75 Lux.

Cal

 

[Addy101]

Having the same scene shot with the Noct-Nikkor, and a current Nikkor 50mm f1.2, (and maybe the new AF Nikkor 58mm f1.4, and just for good measure, a Canon FD 50mm f1.2L (which has been compared to the Noct-Nikkor)). And I'd love the scene to contain people's faces, the subject matter that I think shows the strengths and weaknesses of a lens.

Scared of the Minolta MC 58/1.2 and MD 50/1.2? 🙄

This thread over at Fred Miranda might be informative.

 

[shadowfox]

Don't forget the OM Zuiko 50mm 1:1.2

 

[Mark C]

Oddly, my impression has generally been the oposite. Many of the Nikkor (and other) lenses I did not care for on film really come to like on digital. But we are probably looking at different aspects. I love old Nikon stuff, but never cared for the harsh look of many of the lenses on film. I think it may be that digital just gives much more control over tone and color, but a lot of lenses look better to me on digital even with jpegs straight from the camera.

My older Nikkor 24 and 105 are the main exceptions for me. Those have a nice dimensional look to me on film, more like Leica and Zeiss lenses I usually prefer on film. My old 50 1.4's are not harsh, but fall down in other respects on film. Yet a friend used my 50 1.4 SC for much of his professional work on digital for a couple years.

I'm interested in fast lenses for the speed since I'm shooting film, so will be looking forward to what comes up in this thread. I have a few, but nothing on your list.

Would love to see some samples.

I'm also interested to see the difference in how the lens renders when attached to a film body as opposed to a digital body. I've found with other older Nikkor glass, their rendering (especially wide open) can be quite different when shooting them with Tri-X and a film body, as opposed to digitally with a D700 or D4. I've seen them perform much better with film, when shot wide open, which would make sense as in the 1970's and 1980's when these lenses were designed, the engineers probably weren't thinking in terms of digital.

Best,
-Tim

 

[x-ray]

Here are two images from the Non Noct 50 1.2 AIS and the third from the Nikkor 85 1.4 D AF. The first two are from the 50 at 1.2 and the third from the 85 at 1.4.

Here's a link to one of my 75 Summilux images wide open at 1.4. http://www.rangefinderforum.com/rffgallery/showphoto.php?photoid=58094

The backgrounds on the Nikkor shots were intentionally darkened to bring the subject forward.

In the 70's I owned a Noctilux 50 1.2. I used it for a few years and sold it because it wan't immersed. It was fine wide open under conditions where light sources were in the photo but otherwise my Summicron beat it hands down. In the mid 70's I worked for a company tha issued a 50 f1 Noctilux to me and really can't say it was my favorite lens.

 

[menos]

Great idea for this thread Tim!
I am bookmarking this now and will come back later after producing some samples.

I do love the Noct-Nikkor a lot but never really melted with it as I was digital focussed with my Nikon gear until only very recently, when I upgraded my D3 with some really nice manual focussing screens.

I have used the Noct, have owned and used for a long time the 50/1.4 AF-S (and never really liked it and just a few weeks ago partly traded that never loved 50/1.4 AF-S for a new 58/1.4 AF-S which I absolutely loved from day one.

I didn't shoot much Nikon SLRs last months, as I am more RF centric but promise to come back with some shots.

The Noct is special, so much so, that I actually did everything I could to keep it even over those years when I had no proper body I liked to use it with.

I like how it has a very intense mix between modern traits as high sharpness, high contrast even from wide open, no vignetting as the Noctilux, yet retains a certain special rendering of fine details, one can see in Zeiss medium format lenses, hard to describe.
The finest detail is there but it is not as dead, lifeless sharp and contrasty as today's scientific lenses. There is a bit of lively brilliance to the detail, which makes it look special.

… not to even talk about the smoothest of background renderings (a trait, the new 58/1.4 AF-S highly builds upon btw).

two shots, a few months, a few thousand kilometres and two different cameras apart …
first: D3 + 58/1.2 Noct-Nikkor, second: D800E + 58/1.4 AF-S

_DSC6136-NIKON D3—for_flickr by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

Untitled by teknopunk.com, on Flickr

 

[Timmyjoe]

Xray and Dirk, thank you both for posting images, this is what I was hoping to see.

Xray, from your shots it looks like the Noct renders similar to the 85 1.4D AF lens.

And I can see differences with the shots you took Dirk, between the Noct and the new 58 1.4G lens.

For my liking, the Noct renders a more pleasing image in this sample as I feel the 58 f1.4G is really "blocking" the shadow areas (something I also found I didn't like with the Leica 35mm Cron Asph). To me it makes the image look "heavy" and it doesn't have the same sparkle and life as the Noct rendering.

And Mark, as far as older glass and how it renders digitally or on film, one example I recently discovered was a Nikkor 300mm f4.5 ED-IF AIS lens that I had rebuilt by Nikon, and upon its return, it is tack sharp wide open on my Nikon film bodies when shooting Tr-X, and needs to be stopped down to 5.6 to render tack sharp on my D4 or D700. Had a similar experience a few years ago with a Micro-Nikkor 55 f2.8 lens. Maybe they both are outliers.

Best,
-Tim

 

[Calzone]

And Mark, as far as older glass and how it renders digitally or on film, one example I recently discovered was a Nikkor 300mm f4.5 ED-IF AIS lens that I had rebuilt by Nikon, and upon its return, it is tack sharp wide open on my Nikon film bodies when shooting Tr-X, and needs to be stopped down to 5.6 to render tack sharp on my D4 or D700. Had a similar experience a few years ago with a Micro-Nikkor 55 f2.8 lens. Maybe they both are outliers.

Best,
-Tim

Tim,

Film is more forgiving in many ways. I find shooting digital that nailing the focus is harder. Also any imperfection in technic gets amplified. For sharp pictures I learned that I have to shoot higher shutter speeds than with film. Because of the higher resolution of digital everything gets amplified, but then again If I shoot with good technic, especially at a high shutter speed I can print really big/huge.

Combine how critical focus is and then add the loss of film speed due to stopping down and you can see why maybe perhaps the 300 ED lens might suffer a loss of sharpness. With a 55 Macro its the close focus that aplifies and makes critical the focus and the need for high shutter speeds. The higher the better.

Cal

 

[Timmyjoe]

Haven't used the 55 in a while, but the 300 I've recently tested. Both cameras were tripod mounted on the lens collar, high shutter speed, remote fired, and zone focused to take into account inaccuracies in focus screens, etc. And repeatedly, the 300mm was tack sharp at f4.5 with Tri-X and not tack sharp on the D4 until stopped to f5.6 or f5.6 and a half. Subjects being anywhere from twenty feet to 300 feet away.

It was an eye opener.

Best,
-Tim

 

[Calzone]

Haven't used the 55 in a while, but the 300 I've recently tested. Both cameras were tripod mounted on the lens collar, high shutter speed, remote fired, and zone focused to take into account inaccuracies in focus screens, etc. And repeatedly, the 300mm was tack sharp at f4.5 with Tri-X and not tack sharp on the D4 until stopped to f5.6 or f5.6 and a half. Subjects being anywhere from twenty feet to 300 feet away.

It was an eye opener.

Best,
-Tim

Tim,

Thanks for sharing all this. My digital experience is rather small and limited.

Cal

 

[x-ray]

I would describe the non Noct 50 1.2 as dreamy and painterly wide open but renders nice detail without being harsh. I have a Nikkor 35 1.4 that I'd describe that way but would be between the 85 1.4 D and the 50 1.2 in character. I've become a great fan of these lenses. They're sharp wide open but are very smooth in tone. I'm liking this over super sharp wide open. A stop or two down they're super sharp. Very versatile lenses.

 

[menos]

Here are a few shots from a set of street portraits I took just a few hours after leaving the shop with a 58AF-S.
It shows perfectly what I love about how the Noct-Nikkor and the new 58G - their very special background rendering wide open. This is entirely different from any other Nikon fast 50 lens (including their rangefinder lenses I have):

What amazed me with the new 58G wide open is how extreme fine detail it actually resolves already wide open!
This is shot with a D800E wide open at about 1.2m distance.
He is wearing effect contact lenses behind his real optical glasses (these are not just empty frames).

In the actual 36MP file you can precisely see the actual matrix dots of the colour printing on the contact lenses! THIS IS FREAKING INSANE DETAIL! …was what I shouted out when seeing those files for the first time.

There is no strange special eye over sharpening done here - the effect is solely based in these strange contact lenses.

What I find astonishing about this new 58G lens is that it is optically designed not to be just a clinical, modern supersharp lens only, but it retains some classic character, making it possible to render these smooth backgrounds and a certain dreaminess around fine detail.