Noctilux Photos

[rodneyAB]

very nice combination of color seen here, and, i suspect the out of focus areas enhance the color gradation, and my sense of it, as distant form deconstructs. well done Ned

 

[nzeeman]

strange lens. sometimes it looks very interesting but sometimes it is not impressive at all. i think that 1 f stop over 1.5 zm sonnar is not worth that much money.

 

[phatnev]

I think the problem with the Noctilux is that the outrageous price tag drives off people who would actually use the lens and as far as I know Ned is the only person who frequents the forums and has ever shown the nuances and subtlety of this very special lens.

 

[Ororaro]

strange lens. sometimes it looks very interesting but sometimes it is not impressive at all. i think that 1 f stop over 1.5 zm sonnar is worth that much money.

Cao Nzeeman,

I'm sure you wanted to say it is not worth the price difference versus a Sonnar. I respect your opinion but if I follow your logic, even the sonnar is not worth it. The Nokton is 300% cheaper and is an outstanding performer with, if I remember correctly, TWO aspherical elements. This is as exotic as it gets.

I personally think the Noctilux is worth it. Such sharpness and cotnrast wide open at f1.0 was something unthinkable until Leitz made it real. The mistake people make is they expect something more then a lens can give. They expect the pictures to smell its subjects (like a woman I knew used to perfume herself before someone would take a picture of her). Well, no matter how "3-D" the lens' rendition is, there is no suh thing possible.

 

[Ororaro]

I think the problem with the Noctilux is that the outrageous price tag drives off people who would actually use the lens and as far as I know Ned is the only person who frequents the forums and has ever shown the nuances and subtlety of this very special lens.

You're right about the price tag, Chris.
I also agree with you that we don't see many Noctilux contributions. This is sad and what I'm trying to do is show what this lens does in any kind of light and situation, I'll start scanning some landscape shots and probably some nudes, down the road.

Thanks...

 

[rodneyAB]

Hi Rodney, Ol' internet buddy!

I agree with what you say. What I really like about the shot is the cool light temperature in the shade and warm temperature in the sunny part and they both match very well.

Ok..color temperature...agree, terms i did not think of

 

[kevin m]

I had a chance to buy minty copy for less than $2k not too long ago. The seller was actually willing to take my 50 Summilux plus $900. That was before the price evidently exploded. I couldn't justify it then and I damned sure can't do it now.

There are some really nice shots in this thread, but nothing that seems worth carrying around a huge, heavy and obscenely expensive piece of glass to get.

The next generation of DSLR's are going to make superspeed lenses a moot point, anyway, if the current generation hasn't already. The new Nikon D3 has the ability to shoot at iso 25k. 25-freakin' thousand! One early review says that iso 6,400 on this camera is equivalent in quality to iso 400 on earlier cameras. ( Review here: http://www.daveblackphotography.com/workshop/11-2007.htm ) And yes, it needs to be said that the retail price for this astounding technology costs about the same as the Noctilux.

Canon's working on a replacement for the 5D (which is already crushingly superior to film at high iso's) and I'm sure they will show improved high iso quality as well. The point being that a lens of moderate aperture mounted to these cameras will capture clean images in light levels so low the Noctilux couldn't hope to match it, even mounted to the M8 and its already obsolete sensor.

I'm not knocking anybody's choice of gear; if you've got one and you enjoy it, then mazel tov. For a film shooter it's still a cool, if pricey, tool to have. But in this digital age, the Noctilux is an anachronism; a fine piece of engineering and craftsmanship that's been passed by time. The samurai sword of lenses, if you will.

 

[kevin m]

Geez, I can't wait for Nikon's and Canon's next pro Zoom lenses... 18-200mm f11-f22?

Well, if they made such a beast, I'm sure someone would buy it. I'm a prime shooter, myself. Unless it's on a tripod, I can't stand a big, heavy lens, zoom or prime. Even if it does say "Leica" and not "Canon" on the barrel.

I belong to a wedding photography site (the DWF) and I've seen sample pics shot at iso 25,000 from the new D3. It looked like Fuji 800 color neg to me, except it was, of course, five full stops more sensitive. With sensors that sensitive, even an f1.4 lens is overkill, from a light-gathering perspective. These sensors are rewriting the books about what is possible in low-light photography. They are, to this era, what super-speed primes and 400 iso film were to the 1950's: cutting edge technology.

 

[Ororaro]

Kevin, I agree with you about new technologies. However this is entirely missing the point.

High ISO, pixels and other tech talk doesn't move me at all. I run a wedding business for a long time now and I still use film cameras and Two D2H cameras for weddings (D2H are known as the noise machines, and I just love it that way). The D3 and the other new cameras are good for newbies who won't have a chance to miss a shot anymore, getting clean shots at iso 1 000 000. My wife and grandmother are good candidates for them.

Kevin, I like a good fight in life, usually. This is why I still shoot film and underappreciate digital. I'm 32 and probably what is seen as a die-hard purist. But I've been a die-hard purist ever since I switched my old Minoltas and LeicaflexSL for a Maxxum 7000, when I was 20, in 1995.

Being able to shoot at iso 64000, 124000 and probably 1,000,000 in about 3 years from now is not something too exciting for me.

 

[Olsen]

Why exactly? Did you know you can shoot it in the dark and shoot landscapes with this lens and get perfect sharpness? What other lens does that?

Not the Noct-Nikkor.
Not the Canon f1.0 paper-weight.
Not the Canon f0.95.

Ah! I see! you're talking about talent and composition? You're wrongfully discriminating the Noctilux, then.

If you know your stuff, any Noctilux post is interesting because it rivals any summilux, any time. Instead of always expecting Boke and softness, expect what the Noctilux does best: all around shooting capability.

I have both the Leica 50 mm 1,0 'Noctilux' and the Canon EF 50 mm 1,0L. The Leica backfocuses - and is a short tele lens on my M8 while the 'paperweight' is dead on with my 1Ds II. With AF! I regard them both as collection pieces. For real 50 mm photography I would go for something more high contrast.

 

[kevin m]

High ISO, pixels and other tech talk doesn't move me at all.

Emotionally, it doesn't move me, either. But logically, I had to face facts that for available light capture of color images in ultra low light levels, digital has it all over film. Until recently I shot weddings with two M6TTL's, and I about cried when I sold them to buy a DSLR. The Canon 5D is a wonderful piece of technology, but it's also a soulless lump of plastic. :bang:

I'm still shooting film for B&W, though, and I'm dying to get another Leica body back in my bag. Maybe meterless this time.

 

[Ororaro]

I have both the Leica 50 mm 1,0 'Noctilux' and the Canon EF 50 mm 1,0L. The Leica backfocuses - and is a short tele lense on my M8 while the 'paperweight' is dead on with my 1Ds II. With AF! I regard them both as collection pieces. For real 50 mm photography I would go for something more high contrast.

Olsen,
I've told you in the past and I'm still telling you: Your noctilux probably needs an adjustment. How can someone live with a defective 5000$ lens and be ok with it is beyond me. If you have focus issues, have it fixed.

About your constant contrast problems with your Noctilux, well that too is beyond me. The Noctilux is a very contrasty lens, even at f1.0, which is incredible.

Olsen, there is either something seriously wrong with your Noctilux or your concepts are wrong. The primary strength of the Noctilux is its contrast.

 

[palker]

Hi,

as a newbie to the Rangefinder platform I'm please that you are offering your pictures for us to view. I'm a convert from a D70 and finally D200 (still have it) and after 6 weeks of playing with my M8 I'm now only traveling with the Leica. Feeling immediately comfortable with the camera and enjoying the simple pleasure of life - it is just the easiest way to take photos.
Whilst of course I’m aware of the D3 I most definitely did not want to carry the bulk, my D200 gets heavy at the end of the day. Maybe I’m now being a little narrow minded but I really don’t care about what will be possible with some other camera, at the moment I’m content to find out as much as I can about my M8. Seeing your examples are both inspirational and informative.

Please keep the photos coming; they are simply a joy to see.

 

[lns]

I'd rather look at this thread than just about anything else around.

 

[semrich]

My Noctilux just about lives on my MP, I started shooting film a little over six months ago, and doing my own developing about two months ago.

I don't profess to know a lot about lenses or characteristics, I have no trouble focusing it, or how heavy it is, I just like the pictures I get using it.

 

[TJV]

While I agree that incredible new ways of looking could potentially open up with new sensor technologies, I still think there is a place for an f1 lens. Just look at films like "Barry Lyndon" (I don't know if that's how it's spelt, sorry.) The low light cinematography in that film is stunning and the shallow depth of field looks right for such poorly lit conditions. I think that low light photography is less about capturing noiseless/grainless full tonal images and more about conveying mood and feeling for a place and time. Put it this way, Jimi Hendrix wasn't the technically best guitarist on the block but he certainly conveyed more raw emotion than anyone else of the era.

 

[palec]

Sharpness of in-focus-area of this lens at such high apertures is stunning.

 

[Ororaro]

Hi,

as a newbie to the Rangefinder platform I'm please that you are offering your pictures for us to view. I'm a convert from a D70 and finally D200 (still have it) and after 6 weeks of playing with my M8 I'm now only traveling with the Leica. Feeling immediately comfortable with the camera and enjoying the simple pleasure of life - it is just the easiest way to take photos.
Whilst of course I’m aware of the D3 I most definitely did not want to carry the bulk, my D200 gets heavy at the end of the day. Maybe I’m now being a little narrow minded but I really don’t care about what will be possible with some other camera, at the moment I’m content to find out as much as I can about my M8. Seeing your examples are both inspirational and informative.

Please keep the photos coming; they are simply a joy to see.

I'm not a newbie to Leica R but certainly am to Leica M for already a year now... I decided I'd give rangefinders a try as a therapy against DSLRs. I think you said it well: "enjoying the simple pleasure of life".

 

[Ororaro]

My Noctilux just about lives on my MP, I started shooting film a little over six months ago, and doing my own developing about two months ago.

I don't profess to know a lot about lenses or characteristics, I have no trouble focusing it, or how heavy it is, I just like the pictures I get using it.

Your picture is outstanding. Fits my style perfectly

 

[Ororaro]

Geeesh who wants a Noctilux anyway...... I will start my own 50 0.95 thread were me and the other poorer kids can play

Erik,
Good idea! I also feel the Canon is under documented. I've not seen much from that one and I'm curious.