Noctilux vs. other lenses (poor mans Noctilux), which is the best value?

E

eleskin

Well-known
Local time
6:03 PM
Joined
Feb 5, 2008
Messages
1,080
Since we see the prices skyrocketing for high speed lenses for our M8's, I wonder which lens out there would give the Nocti "look" for a much more reasonable price. My fastest lens is the 40m 1.4 Nokton. I had a chance to mount a Noctilux on my M8 last year at the Photo Plus expo, and can say it has a unique look to it. I loved the lens for the special purpose it was made for. The painterly out of focus backgrounds are special, and I found the lens to be reasonably sharp at the point of focus.

Does anyone who is an M8 user had the chance to use and compare the Noctilux to other lenses, and determine what would be the best al around value?
 
I don't own a M8 (but a Noctilux for my Film-Ms) and from what I have seen here and elsewhere on the web, the CV 35/1.2 comes very close. If I would have an M8 that lens would be my first choice.
 
Another for the CV 35mm f1.2. Only used on film, but best deal around if you don't mind the size, even if it was $1500+ (my opinion).
 
I love fast lenses. Stuck in film because it's superb and cheap. Picked up a 50 F1.2 Canon FD lens new in the box for $100. Picked up a new F1 well used but working for slightly less than $100. Results - priceless. Cheaper than spending $10K on a digital M body and comparable lens.
 
Beemermark said:
I love fast lenses. Stuck in film because it's superb and cheap. Picked up a 50 F1.2 Canon FD lens new in the box for $100. Picked up a new F1 well used but working for slightly less than $100. Results - priceless. Cheaper than spending $10K on a digital M body and comparable lens.
Click to expand...

Great personal story Beemermark, I'm sure the original poster appreciates it, but I think he's interested in lenses for his M8.

But I'm sure he's more interested in you and your story than help with his question.
 
Another for the CV 35/1.2. It is perfect for the M8 and the size is not much of a problem for me, it just feels at home on my M8.
 
Last edited:
Beemermark said:
I love fast lenses. Stuck in film because it's superb and cheap. Picked up a 50 F1.2 Canon FD lens new in the box for $100. Picked up a new F1 well used but working for slightly less than $100. Results - priceless. Cheaper than spending $10K on a digital M body and comparable lens.
Click to expand...

I`m so depressed....I just missed a Canon F-1 with a 55mm f1.2 on evilbay for $72!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yeah, the Canon FL and FD f1.2`s are the way to go, instead of paying all that money for Nocti`s and such and the Canon F`s lens performance is very very good

Tom

*PS: someone was also modifing the FL and FD f1.2`s to Leica M mount a little while back......it`s alot of work but can be done to be RF coupled, still cheaper than a Noctilux or a 0.95 Canon
 
Last edited:
For a 50mm lens, the preAsph Summilux 50mm has a smooth background at wide open and very reasonable used prices.

Jan
 
I don't have an M8, and the Nokton 35/1.2 is the only other faster-than-1.4 lens I have. Yet from my experience with the N35/1.2 + R-D1s, it's great. With that price, or double that, you just don't get anything better.
 
how come people are saying that the canon LTM 50mm 1.2 is performing really bad wide open but those flickr examples are really really sharp?

too many bad samples? lots of sharpening in photoshop?

ill see for myself i guess soon as i got one and am currently processing rolls from that!
will post them for reference
 
I don't understand the "internet standard for sharpness" either. Some of the lenses that I consider "just right" at wide open are all referred to "too soft to be useful" by some others.

By the way, gdi's Canon 0.95 shot is among the best Canon 0.95 shots I've seen.
 
Here's the 50/1.2 wide-open on the R-D1, 6ft. from the subject. (it's sweet-spot, IMO):

2856014859_d846807228_o.jpg
 
endustry said:
I actually think the Hexanon 50mm 1.2 looks the most like the Noctilux in terms of OOF highlights, vignetting, etc. except that it's a little slower and bit sharper. Most other contemporary fast lenses have more of the smoooooth and creamy OOF look of the Leica ASPH lenses. The one sample I saw of the new Noct .95 looked like this as well.

I think a lot depends on what kind of signature you're after -- pre-aspheric OOF highlights with lots of "ghostly lightbulbs" in the bokeh and a more surreal feeling OR a dead-sharp lens with a smoother, creamier OOF areas and better vignetting. If you want the latter, Any of the fast Voigtlanders will give it to you for the lowest price. If you want more of a surreal look and crunchier OOF look, the Canon 50mm 1.2 LTM is probably the cheapest way to go...

Here's a particularly good example of its OOF character wide open:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/aglimpseoftheworld/2822788995/
Click to expand...

I have to agree with this - I think Hexanon 50/1.2 or Canon 50/1.2 gives more of a Noctilux look that CV 35/1.2. I have CV and Canon and I think Canon delivers more of a Noctilux signature, but not the same, of course.Here is Canon 50/1.2 example:
2429001093_5ba347954d.jpg

and one more:

2429813674_ddd3ab613e.jpg


Canon does a good job, but.....

But I still want the Noctilux ;)
 
I think it's important to note that the extreme examples of "signature" we so often admire with these old lenses is actually just their flaws on full display. The Canon 50/1.2 is at its worst (or best, depending on your POV) wide open at close focus distance. It improves greatly focused past the 5ft. mark, and alot of the swirly weirdness goes away. I think that's where it's the most usable.

FWIW, the pre-asph Summilux 50 I owned behaved about the same. Wide open, close focus distance had a distinct tendency to get "weird," yet focused in the 5-6ft. range it looked downright "normal." :D
 
i got the first roll from my 50mm f1.2
what a creamy bokeh this lens has...




i think that's quite cool for a lens that costs 1/20 of a noctilux
my lust for a noctilux is finally satisfied.... for now :)
 
dont agree with most of the suggestions so far




an old summarit looks like the noctilux

lots of non image forming light
lots of field of curvature
very pronounced circular bokeh
soft wide open


very cheap as well but they suffer from fogging quite a bit
 
jackal2513 said:
dont agree with most of the suggestions so far




an old summarit looks like the noctilux

lots of non image forming light
lots of field of curvature
very pronounced circular bokeh
soft wide open


very cheap as well but they suffer from fogging quite a bit
Click to expand...

I partly agree with that. A Summarit comes close to a Noctilux but the Noctilux is not soft wide open, when it is really good calibrated.
 
The Noctilux is presently overpriced. Like buying Home Depot when the P/E ratio was twice what it should be. Wait until it's out of favor and attractively priced. Learn from the stock market: Don't go with the herd, look for bargains instead.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom