Noctilux pricing

[kevin m]

Any other comment is of dubious value.

Careful, or you'll talk yourself out of a career, Roger.

Tomasis, she never got the M3. We'll just have to make do with Volvos and Canons, I suppose.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Careful, or you'll talk yourself out of a career, Roger.

Dear Kevin,

It ain't what you say, it's the way that you say it.

There's also the question of what else the readers have to go on. Dealing with someone of known bias is always better than dealing with someone of unknown bias -- especially if they pretend they aren't biased!

Cheers,

R.

 

[Ororaro]

ANY discussion of Noctiluxes brings out extremists of all colours: "It's perfect", "It's too expensive", "It's worthless."

It's just a lens. It does what you want or it doesn't (it does for me). You can afford it or you can't (I can't).

Any other comment is of dubious value.

Cheers,

R.

Hm, not really. I heard its boke is swirly. I also heard it's soft. Then I heard it lacks contrast and then again, I heard it vignettes like crazy. I also heard it's not worth it right when it was 2000$.

The funny thing is, none of the above fit my sample. I chose not to let the bashers (non-owners, please) to propagate the BS. It has nothing to do with being an extremist and all to do with simple comon sense.

 

[kevin m]

Ah, Ned, your pictures speak so much better than you do.

 

[Ororaro]

Kind of an expensive lens to shoot snaps of babies, though. The problem is that most photos I see shot with the Noct aren't done in such carefully controlled situations as your example. They are grainy, soft street shots or in bars handheld at silly show shutter speeds.

I'm just hoping you weren't serious with your comments. Your comments are too illogical and, sadly, too comon hereabouts.

Please note my Noctilux is on my camera at all times. I use it to photograph the most precious person in my life (my baby, which is priceless). I also shoot at night and landscapes. There is not a thing I don't use the Noctilux for.

Please come up with something better. What you see here is the Noctilux in action.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Hm, not really. I heard its boke is swirly. I also heard it's soft. Then I heard it lacks contrast and then again, I heard it vignettes like crazy. I also heard it's not worth it right when it was 2000$.

The funny thing is, none of the above fit my sample. I chose not to let the bashers (non-owners, please) to propagate the BS. It has nothing to do with being an extremist and all to do with simple comon sense.

Ummm... That's pretty much what I was saying.

I don't disagree for a moment that you need to use a Noctilux to appreciate it, and that many 'bashers' don't.

But which bit of my post do you disagree with? I didn't say that everyone who likes it or dislikes it is an extremist. I wouldn't say that either you or I were extremists, and we like the lens, while cheerfully accepting that it's not for everyone. Equally, I don't think you can deny that it attracts both overblown praise and overblown condemnation.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Roger Hicks]

Sure, I'm serious. The Noct is only special wide open. Every click of the aperture ring down brings it into wider and wider company with much less expensive lenses that take every bit as good photos. It's just an my opinion, of course, but why pay $5,000 for a Noct if you are going to shoot it at anything but wide open?

Because you don't want to keep swapping 50mm lenses?

All right, tomorrow (barring mishap) I expect to go to Paris with two 50mm lenses (f/1 and f/2.5).

Very few people will have only an f/1, but I'd rather have only an f/1 than only an f/2.5 -- and I think an f/1.5 is an excellent compromise if you can't be arsed to keep swapping. But f/1 seems like a logical choice to me.

Cheers,

R.

 

[Ororaro]

Same thread. Same people. Same opinions. Same Noctilux.

Today is the 10th anniversary of the end of Seinfeld, btw.

YADA YADA YADA!

Hey brah, Quelle coincidence!
I was hoping you'd jump in, like you usually do, with your classic comment about the Noctilux threads.

 

[whitecat]

Check Ebay for Noctilux. There are many going to 13-14k. Photo Village has a new one for 10k. Just crazy. I guess it's us who do it. I know I had one for awhile and liked it but very hard to facus at F/1.0.

 

[Ororaro]

CIrque,

FOcus with the Noctilux is extremely easy. If you can focus with a 90 Cron, you will focus easier with a noctilux.
I honestly don't understand the fuss around this lens. I use it exactly as I use my 35 1.4. The focusing patch doesn't change for any lens ,so there's no issue at all for me. I use the Noctilux exactly the same way that I use the hexanon 28 or 90 'cron. I simply focus and press the shutter. Given a well calibrated body, the pics will come out just fine.

Some people may freak for wearing a 5K lens around their neck. But they forget they are worth much more themselves. It's all a question of relativity.
Me? I just use my lens and I don't choose the moments.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

"I just can't stop laughing when I think at all the Noctilux bashers when the lens was 2000$, then 3000$ and then 4000$ and now... I laugh at them not because I am mean but simply because they sounded so sure and full of it. Good luck with their Canon lenses is what I say "

That's funny. Good luck to the dentists and dilettantes with their $10k noctiluxes, none of which will produce a image of interest, except for the arcane note that it was shot at f1.

I love good bokeh as much or more than the next guy. But, i'm tired of seeing pictures made for the sake of bokeh. 95% of them look like textbook pictures. This lens was overpriced at $2000. Now, it's "an investment." And, when someone (Leica included) introduces a new version, current 'investors' will shout that the newer, sharper version isn't authentic.... What a funny bunch.

 

[Ororaro]

Such wisdom! Can you really make trips in the future?

 

[yanidel]

Because you don't want to keep swapping 50mm lenses?

All right, tomorrow (barring mishap) I expect to go to Paris with two 50mm lenses (f/1 and f/2.5).

Very few people will have only an f/1, but I'd rather have only an f/1 than only an f/2.5 -- and I think an f/1.5 is an excellent compromise if you can't be arsed to keep swapping. But f/1 seems like a logical choice to me.

Cheers,

R.

If you come to Paris for shooting, delay your trip, it is pouring like crazy right now and does not seem to improve soon.
Though maybe the Noctilux also has the magical power to make clouds go away ??

 

[Ororaro]

The Nocti sux Ned. ADMIT IT!

The Nocti SUX Light and CASH

 

[kevin m]

Same thread. Same people. Same opinions.

Right back 'atcha.

So....


...at what price point would this lens become a ridiculous proposition? The Noctilux, as a lens, is the same as any other lens, you either like it or you don't. Fine. But Jesus, Mary and Joseph, $10,000? Why not $100,000 or $1,000,000? Would the Leica faithful ever admit that this lens is an over-priced paperweight?

No. It's all part of the "Leica mystique." "Mystique," it must be noted, is also a great stage name for a pole-dancer. But heck, this isn't a lens, it's a religion, so all bets are off.

If you want to play with superspeed lenses, there are alternatives that don't require wearing the down payment on a house around your neck. Maybe it's my blue-collar roots showing, but I expect to be "wowed" when a consumer item costs multiples of its competition, and this lens, unlike other Leica offerings, doesn't do it.

 

[gdi]

Check Ebay for Noctilux. There are many going to 13-14k. Photo Village has a new one for 10k. Just crazy. I guess it's us who do it. I know I had one for awhile and liked it but very hard to facus at F/1.0.

I just checked eBay - I see no Noctilux that sold for more than the $6500 for a latest coded version. Others have sold for the $4500-4700 range. And I see no active item with a bid over $5100.

They simply are not going for 13-14K or even 10K. Photovillage is trying to out "Arsenal" Arsenal by $2000. The fact that dealers are trying to get many thousands of dollars more than retail, doesn't make that the going rate.

BUt I don't think the price will drop anytime soon..

 

[tomasis]

kevin, it isn't a mystique for photoghraphers, maybe mystique for consumers. You speak for consumers, huh? For us, photographers, matters the actual widest aperture i.e. F1.0´of the desired lens. Canon 0,95 sucks pretty big for me due its size and weight at first! For the second, it comes uninteresting signature from canon compared to Nocti. It lacks Leica glow (believe or not). That may a be issue for some people who cares for sharpness like hexanon 1.2. Noctilux wins overall with its signature.

So when I look first at mechanics (like acceptable size, weight, handling, ergonomics, build quality), second for signature, glass type.

Third comes last is price. As I said above, that is least obstacle for me to purchase the lens.

I wonder what do you think about prices of Porsche cars. Are those overvalued or holds its value well? Prices of used porsche older than 993 are holding well. This reminds me of leitz products.

 

[yanidel]

kevin, it isn't a mystique for photoghraphers, maybe mystique for consumers. You speak for consumers, huh? For us, photographers, matters the actual widest aperture i.e. F1.0´of the desired lens. Canon 0,95 sucks pretty big for me due its size and weight at first! For the second, it comes uninteresting signature from canon compared to Nocti. It lacks Leica glow (believe or not). That may a be issue for some people who cares for sharpness like hexanon 1.2. Noctilux wins overall with its signature.

So when I look first at mechanics (like acceptable size, weight, handling, ergonomics, build quality), second for signature, glass type.

Third comes last is price. As I said above, that is least obstacle for me to purchase the lens.

I wonder what do you think about prices of Porsche cars. Are those overvalued or holds its value well? Prices of used porsche older than 993 are holding well. This reminds me of leitz products.

Good investors don't buy Porsche as an investment strategy. They buy it because they damn love the car and other investments made them rich!
Same for Noctilux ! Would you invest in something you risk to break everytime you use it ?

 

[ampguy]

The definitive list of top M-mount lens

The definitive list of top M-mount lens

The Noctilux is the 2nd best M-Mount lens. I will list my top lenses, and I have examples from all of them, and of course own or have owned all of them. These are for M-mount cameras:

Top 5 M mount lenses overall:

1. Summicron 35/2 ASPH (latest E39 German)
2. Noctilux latest f1.0 E60

examples here

3. Summilux 75/1.4 latest (German)
4. M-Hexanon 50/2
5. (tie) Summicron 35/2 50th Anniv. V4 pre-asph (Canada) or Rokkor 40/2 (any Japan version)

Top 5 M mount lenses value wise:

1. CV Nokton 50/1.5*
2. Any Rokkor 40/2
3. Summarit 50/1.5 M-mount version
4. CV 28/1.9*
5. (tie) FSU Jupiter 8 50/2 and Industar 22 50/3.5 collapsible*

* need LTM to M adapters

Everything else is not necessarily pure utter crap , just not in my top 5 lists, or I haven't tried or seen anything good from them.

 

[Ororaro]

Ampguy,

I'm having troubles with what you are saying.

You are ranking the lenses you own, correct? Besides, you know your samples can vary, correct? So this is simply a definitive list of your own lens line up and it doesn't necessarily reflect the real world.