Noctilux for the M8

[eleskin]

I want to get a Noctilux for my M8, the only thing is which version? I am thinking the latest version that had the detachable hood, not the one that was made just before the new f.95. I am thinking about going through Sherry Krautter for the purchase (I trust her). I do not want to spend more than $4,200- $4,500 (I could have bought one a few years ago for half!! UGH!!!). Any thoughts?

 

[Al Kaplan]

Ask yourself why you NEED the Noctlux. The focal length is a bit long for a "normal" lens on that undersized sensor. Plus a digi camera can produce some really high ISO's. A 35mm Summilux should cover your needs and take some strain off both your shoulder and your bank account.

 

[Dave Wilkinson]

Ask yourself why you NEED the Noctlux. The focal length is a bit long for a "normal" lens on that undersized sensor. Plus a digi camera can produce some really high ISO's. A 35mm Summilux should cover your needs and take some strain off both your shoulder and your bank account.

But does not have the same bragging rights, or street posing status, Al!😉

 

[sevres_babylone]

Your debutante knows what you need
But I know what you want -- Bob Dylan

I have seen wonderful work with the Noctilux on digitals. Tommy Oshima's work with it on the R-D1 (as well as on film cameras) has always impressed me. I find what I want and what I need is partially dependent on my finances at a particular point in time. I can understand why OP wants the lens and is asking the question, although I don't know enough about the various versions to answer it.

 

[eleskin]

Hi Al,

Well, this is something I wanted since the eaarly 1990's, and I am not getting any younger. I have used this beast on the M8 and I really love the effect it gives for certain very specialized circumstances. I have a 50mm Summicron M (1997) that will be useful for most situations (I also have used a 28mm Elmarit, 35mm Summicron 4th Version, 90mm Tele Elmarit, 135mm Elmarit with eyes, and a 280mm Tele Elmarit). I think it would complete my range of lenses, and would add a unique capability and look for some shooting situations. I know it is expensive, but having tried it and liking it alot, I feel for me it is worth it.

Thanks for your reply Al,

I remember we had a chat about old Miami and the Rascal House, I miss that place alot!!! I go to West Palm Beach alot, and Too Jays is not that bad.

 

[taxi38]

The thing that surprises me is that leica has not developed a 35mm noctilux for its challenged at high iso M8 .The only reason for leaving the M8 in such a state is to sell its beautiful wide aperture lenses to its well heeled but disapointed owners.
Id have thought that the 50mm noctilux a better bet on a digital camera as that all important boka can be optimised ,on a film camera its just luck mixed with experience,I"d still love to have one though if the cash was available,unfortunatly its not,looking forward to your work if you get one...........

 

[Al Kaplan]

That's exactly what I was thinking, Dave. First you should prove yourself with a nice portfolio, maybe even pay for the M8/Nocti combo with money you earned from photography after writing up the cost/benefits: M2/35 Summicron vs. M8/50 Noctilux. Next time you're heading to West Palm shoot me an Email. Lots of available light shots at f/4.5 on ISO 200 film. I'g go nuts putting up with the crop factor on a 15mm lens. http://thepriceofsilver.blogspot.com

 

[peter_n]

I think its a good idea to get the one without the built-in hood, if you can find one. The first version E58 may be a little cheaper still, vignettes a wee bit but optically the same as all the later ones. Beautiful lens.

 

[anabasis]

Doesn't the Nocti backfocus quite a bit when stopped down on the M8? I just read that recently, on a Leica forum.

 

[__hh]

Just a few weeks ago, I was ***that close*** to paying for a noctilux (PayPal had issues with me transferring all that money around). I resorted to picking up the Hex 50mm 1.2 with $2000 in change.

Having had my Hex 50/1.2 for about a week, I am very happy with it. Still don't know what I am missing out my not having a noctilux, but the amount of money saved makes me think that I did the right thing.

People say that each lens "draws" differently, but I personally am satisfied to "only" have F1.2 rather than that extra 1/2 stop and save $2000. Don't get me wrong, the Hex is very well built and image quality is fantastic also - it's just not "THE Noctilux".

 

[Keith]

Just a few weeks ago, I was ***that close*** to paying for a noctilux (PayPal had issues with me transferring all that money around). I resorted to picking the Hex 50mm 1.2 for $2000 less.

Having had my Hex 50/1.2 for about a week, I am very happy with it. Still don't know what I am missing out my not having a noctilux, but the amount of money saved makes me think that I did the right thing.

People say that each lens "draws" differently, but I personally am satisfied to "only" have F1.2 rather than that extra 1/2 stop and save $2000. Don't get me wrong, the Hex is very well built and image quality is fantastic also - it's just not "THE Noctilux".

I reckon a great companion for the Hex 1.2 would be a 35mm Nokton ... and you'd still be $2000.00 better off than the Noctilux and have a lens that gives you close to 50mm on the M8!

The Noct does seem to be a bit of a 'Holy Grail' though!

 

[__hh]

I reckon a great companion for the Hex 1.2 would be a 35mm Nokton ... and you'd still be $2000.00 better off than the Noctilux and have a lens that gives you close to 50mm on the M8!

The Noct does seem to be a bit of a 'Holy Grail' though!

You have just read my mind... I am on the hunt for THAT LENS... the CV 35/1.2 🙂

 

[Roger Hicks]

I loved the Noctilux I borrowed (for a year!) and I'd buy it like a shot if I could afford it -- and if I didn't want a 24 Summilux EVEN MORE.

The Canon f/1.2 is no substitute whatsoever: I gave mine to the friend who lent me the Noctilux, to use on his Canon, as a 60th birthday present. The half stop difference is trivial, I agree. The 'look' isn't. It's completely different.

Likewise, much as I like the 35/1.2 Voigtländer, it's a completely different lens. You might as well say, "No, you don't want a Bentley, you want a Ferrari" (or vice versa). They're both fast and expensive, but that's about all they have in common.

My own view is that the last series (with the built in hood, the one I borrowed) is not only more convenient: it's also newer, and less likely to have seized up from disuse.

There are quite a few M8/Noctilux shots here:

http://www.rogerandfrances.com/photoschool/ps king.html

All in all, my advice is simply 'go for it'. To borrow your phrase, none of us is getting any younger...

Tashi delek,

Roger

 

[Freakscene]

If you want one, get one. I did.

Almost everything here: http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/freakscene/Russia/ was shot with the Nocti. Almost all my music work:
http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/freakscene/bands/ was done with it too. Everything here: http://gallery.leica-users.org/v/freakscene/Noctilux/ is from the Nocti. Mine has paid for itself many times over and I use mine with my M8 a lot. Its main characteristic that I exploit is its flare resistance. Having f1 is a bonus for which I am grateful, but if it was an f1.2 or 1.4 lens I would still have bought it. Nothing else Leica has made comes close in this regard (including the 0.95 version, unfortunately).

Focus shift occurs when you stop down. This happens with this lens on film too, where the results are also apparent. You may need to get your M8 and Nocti calibrated to each other for optimum focus, but this also applies to film Ms (it did to my M7 0.85). Focus shift on the 0.95 is negligible, so if you are really worried about this, maybe that will guide you.

So if you want one the question is which one?

The f1 versions all have the same optical formula and the glass for the highest density elements was probably made in a single batch at the beginning of the first manufacturing run. It is flare resistant enough that a hood isn't really necessary except to protect that huge front element, but for that it is handy. For this reason I like the ones with removeable hoods or the f0.95 version best - the former have hoods that stay in place and the latter has a built-in hood that locks like the hood in the 50/1.4 asph. The f1 versions with the built-in hood have an incredibly irritating habit of the hood retracting when you want the hood to be extended.

Over time Leica probably updated their coating and QA procedures and tolerances. In this respect newer is probably better.

Older ones are more likely to have been used more and thus may be cheaper. The oldest ones have 58 mm filter threads which may be important if you already have a pile of 58 mmm filters, or if you have the Zeiss 18 mm, the new C-V 15 mm Heliar or any other 58 mm thread lenses. Alternately if you have the 60 mm version 75 Summilux, the newer 60 mm versions might be a better idea.

The only one I would recommend against is the first one, the f1.2, which is probably of more interest to collectors and although I haven't used one yet, I think if you want a slower lens the 50/1.4 asph is a better buy.

Good luck with your decision - I am sure Sherry will provide you with a great lens and don't forget to post lots of photos when you get it.

Marty

 

[eleskin]

Well, there is one more thought in my mind. The Konica Hexanon 50mm f1.2 is a fraction of the price of a Noctilux. Many who have this lens have high regard for it. The Noctilux is f1.0 in the center of the frame , but goes to f1.2 etc,, as you spread out. F1.2 is not that far from f1.0. Another factor may be the contrast signature of the lens. It is my impression the Noctilux is lower contrast wide open than the Hexanon. For Black and white this could be a problem. So the Hexanon may be the better buy in terms of cost and performance. I would consider a Hexanon but I have some questions. First is the contrast of the lens wide open, second, the resolution at all f stops, third the build quality, and forth, how well it works with the M8 (how well does it focus, any adjustments required). I seem to be in a center of a triangle of the Noctilux, Hexanon, and Nokton. So more research and input for me before I part with my cash.

 

[tightsqueez]

So many OTHER lenses are better performers than the Noctilux. No big news there. What makes the Noct stand out from other lenses is its signature, no other lens compares at this speed. One thing to consider with M8 use and digital in general, is that because the Noct has lower contrast, it does a better job at capturing the shadows. Fast lenses are meant to be used in low light and you don't want a high contrast lens for this situation. The Noctilux was designed to suit this environment and it does it well.

Depending on your subject, focusing with any fast lens can be a challenge but I think that's what is accepted; it comes with the territory of the lens genre. Factoring which lens focuses better is low on the list, but that's a matter of opinion. More than enough folks cannot handle the long focus throw of the Noct.

If you're worried about money, which is understandable, get something else. If you can sacrifice a bit more cash and want that Noct look, then you know your answer. Personally, there is only ONE lens I wished I would have bought years and years ago.

And that's the one you are contemplating.

 

[Roger Hicks]

So many OTHER lenses are better performers than the Noctilux. No big news there. What makes the Noct stand out from other lenses is its signature, no other lens compares at this speed. One thing to consider with M8 use and digital in general, is that because the Noct has lower contrast, it does a better job at capturing the shadows. Fast lenses are meant to be used in low light and you don't want a high contrast lens for this situation. The Noctilux was designed to suit this environment and it does it well.

Depending on your subject, focusing with any fast lens can be a challenge but I think that's what is accepted; it comes with the territory of the lens genre. Factoring which lens focuses better is low on the list, but that's a matter of opinion. More than enough folks cannot handle the long focus throw of the Noct.

If you're worried about money, which is understandable, get something else. If you can sacrifice a bit more cash and want that Noct look, then you know your answer. Personally, there is only ONE lens I wished I would have bought years and years ago.

And that's the one you are contemplating.

This is the perfect summary of the argument.

Tashi delek,

R.

 

[__hh]

Well, there is one more thought in my mind. The Konica Hexanon 50mm f1.2 is a fraction of the price of a Noctilux. Many who have this lens have high regard for it. The Noctilux is f1.0 in the center of the frame , but goes to f1.2 etc,, as you spread out. F1.2 is not that far from f1.0. Another factor may be the contrast signature of the lens. It is my impression the Noctilux is lower contrast wide open than the Hexanon. For Black and white this could be a problem. So the Hexanon may be the better buy in terms of cost and performance. I would consider a Hexanon but I have some questions. First is the contrast of the lens wide open, second, the resolution at all f stops, third the build quality, and forth, how well it works with the M8 (how well does it focus, any adjustments required). I seem to be in a center of a triangle of the Noctilux, Hexanon, and Nokton. So more research and input for me before I part with my cash.

I can only comment on the following:

Build quality. Whilst not able to compare to the Noct, I am perfectly content with the Hex 50/1.2's build. It is very solid (a big chunk of glass and titanium?), not too bulky, and very tactile with aperture setting and focus. With my copy, there is no unexpected movements/wiggles/freeplay (but acknowledging that one copy is no indication of a fleet of 2001 made).

Focus. Although I have not had the chance to test focus at all combinations, I have done a simple test at F/1.2 and 0.9 metres (closest focusing distance) with the M8. I have managed to get the focus spot on. Will post some photos of this later on when I hop on my PC.

Although I did not a chance to do it, see if you can handle a copy of each lens before making up your mind.

 

[topazbullet]

To save even more money, why not spend about 1/12th of the cost of the Noct and go with the Nokt 40 1.4? Much better matched to the M8, and with the spare change you can get another M or extra lenses. Are the extra stops worth that much?

 

[johnastovall]

To save even more money, why not spend about 1/12th of the cost of the Noct and go with the Nokt 40 1.4? Much better matched to the M8, and with the spare change you can get another M or extra lenses. Are the extra stops worth that much?

Yes it is....

I do extensive very low available light hand held work at night and my two most used lenses for this are the Noctilux on my M8 and the Canon 50/1.0 on a 5D.