Pickett Wilson
Veteran
But a Noct will instantly make you the best photographer in the world. 
0bli0
still developing...
for me, since i already have a canon 50mm f/1.2, i was looking primarily for something similar to what i have in the 35 f/1.2 - fast, sharp, clear, and predictable (especially with things in the background such as branches or window blinds). i love my 50 1.2. but there are some characteristics that i would like to avoid from time to time. previously i was using the nokton 1.5 as an alternate but when i learned the 1.1 was coming out, i thought it would be exactly what i was looking for. i definitely wouldn't rate it as ho hum. yeah my socks are still on, but it's not going in the classifieds...
with those expectations, i wasn't disappointed whatsoever. i don't mind the smooth transition from sharp within the DoF to the OOF. and to those people who don't believe it's 1.1, you can physically measure the iris yourself (looks like it's just slightly over 43mm and noticeably larger than the 50mm 1.2). it is closer to 1.2, but hey everyone rounds a bit. but the 'voigtlander must have lied because of the DoF is too big' comments are completely baseless.
with those expectations, i wasn't disappointed whatsoever. i don't mind the smooth transition from sharp within the DoF to the OOF. and to those people who don't believe it's 1.1, you can physically measure the iris yourself (looks like it's just slightly over 43mm and noticeably larger than the 50mm 1.2). it is closer to 1.2, but hey everyone rounds a bit. but the 'voigtlander must have lied because of the DoF is too big' comments are completely baseless.
Pablito
coco frío
No, from what I have seen it is a MUCH better lens optically at a much lower price.
Disclaimer: FOR MY TASTE AND WAY OF WORKING
jmkelly
rangefinder user
It looks like a good lens. If I had $1,100 buring a hole in my pocket I might be interested in trying it out for a while. But I have a Canon 55/1.2 M-mount conversion that gives an honest f1.2 with very little vignetting that only set me back about $550. And I need to put a new engine in the wife's car. Meh.
bolohead
Joel Cosseboom
It shoots in the dark and is sharp. Bokeh is okeh. Works for me.
back alley
IMAGES
keith,
i never planned on getting one. take a look at my gear, small and slow works best for me.
as to the subject of this thread, i think it's a predictable topic and i have been waiting for it.
when the panasonic g1 came out there were tons of threads about it, then it was released and people bought them like crazy and then the 'what ever happened to the g1 craze' threads started.
i still have, like and shoot my g1 but i post my pics on flickr and seem to be in the minority cause i prefer the kit lenses and not m mount lenses on it.
people here and on other forums are funny, just listen to the chatter about the new gf1 from panasonic - all of a sudden there is panic regarding the oly ep1 and discussions about the new gf1 being what we all wanted in the first place.
same with the 50/1.1, it's not this or it's not that...
it's enough to make an old gear head like me shake my head.
no, let me shoot my perfect to me rd1 and zeiss lenses and be happy.
anyone want to trade a zi for a zm 85/4?
:angel:joe
0bli0
still developing...
was the 55 1.2 an S mount? or were you talking about the FL mount? how does it compare to the 50 1.2?
leicashot
Well-known
Funny enough, the Nokton does everything right in a lens and cheap at that too....and now people complain it doesn't have that 'something'. This is so ridiculous, so what of the new 0.95? It has no real signature and has now been corrected, so I guess it's just as boring as the Nokton, at 10x the price! .....complain about that!!!
chikarin
Member
from all the posts related to nokton 1.1, the only true complaint is that its bokeh isn't what most people consider as good. it performs extremely well under low light and produces sharp (apparently too sharp according to the complaints) images, but I guess that is not why people want fast lenses.
if you want effect or so called signature, just grab a cheap lens and scratch it up. it will provide you with a unique artistic effect.
if you want to blur stuff, learn photoshop.
if you want effect or so called signature, just grab a cheap lens and scratch it up. it will provide you with a unique artistic effect.
if you want to blur stuff, learn photoshop.
35mmdelux
Veni, vidi, vici
Secret: Obama has a stimulus plan where he'll take your gas guzzler and give you $4400 or something to that effect. Give Obama the car, your wife $3K, you'll have enough for the Super Nokt and $400 to send me.
thrice
Established
The bokeh has been good to excellent for me... check the sample photos thread, what is offensive about the bokeh from this lens?
Pablito
coco frío
Yanks 0, Sox 0, 13th inning.
edit: 14th inning.
edit: 14th inning.
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Maybe when Leica eventually releases a full frame replacement for the M8 (M9?) it will become a more popular choice ... but then again someone spending $8000.00 on a digital M body may not want this f1.1 cheapie mounted on their new squeeze!
My purpose here is not to criticize the performance of the super Nokton because personally I'm very happy with my old 1.2 Canon which has plenty of shortcomings and obviously the CV would romp all over the Canon optically.
Cosina appears to have created a super fast 50mm that does exactly what it was supposed to at a price that meant you could keep both kidneys when aquiring one. Maybe people were hoping for the eccentricities of the Noctilux's wide open OOF areas?
If I didn't own my Canon I would possibly buy one ... but I still make my point that there is a lack of rabid enthusiasm for a lens that we've been shouting for for a long time!
Keith
The best camera is one that still works!
Because the 35mm Nokton broke new ground in 35mm lens speed it really made people sit up and pay attention whereas the 50mm 1.1 has sort of offered an alternative to a $3500.00 used Noctilux!
Nothing really comes close to the specs of the 35mm Nokton but there are faster 50's out there than the new 1.1
David Murphy
Veteran
I'm sort of amazed that this is really only the second fast (F1.1 - F1.2) standard 35mm rangefinder lens in the history of photography sold at a price accessible to those on a middle-class budget and people are complaining! The Canon 50/1.2 was the other one - everything else was either rare or sky-high in price (or both).
raid
Dad Photographer
The 35/1.2 tempts me far more than the 50 1.1 does. I already have the 50 1.2 Canon and the 1.4 too, so a 1.1 Nokton would not be really needed. My fastest 35mm is a 2.0, so a 1.2 lens would open up new possibilities.
With sunshine almost every day in Florida, a 2.0 lens really is sufficient.
With sunshine almost every day in Florida, a 2.0 lens really is sufficient.
Last edited:
SimonSawSunlight
Simon Fabel
a fun thing, I never handled a Noctilux, nor a Nokton f1.1, I have seen a lot of shots from both though. and I have to say I just don't see where all the decades of excitement about Noctilux's comes from. people say it has character, all I've seen is mediocre image quality mostly due to a very disturbing bokeh ("character!" I hear them screaming). I just don't see where the thousands and thousands of dollars or euros are hidden in that lens. except for it saying "leica" (or "leitz" even) somewhere. the pictures that I saw from the new nokton felt a lot more balanced (a zen lens maybe!) and often sharper.
the difference maybe is the following:
when you buy a noctilux, you bought a noctilux. you spent several thousand dollars on a lens that has been a myth and a legend for decades. and when you shoot it (mostly wide open of course, because that's more or less why you bought one) you have what people call "the nocti-look" or whatnot. the shot says "NOCTILUX!".
the nokton is cheaper and very new, not a big legend or myth behind it, it's not the first super-fast 50 (not even f1.0 or f0.95 boohoo), not in an unreachable cost dimension. you're just buying a (very) fast 50. BUT when you look at the shots, you look at -the shots- for their own sake and not for the "characteristic" look of the lens. all of a sudden you have to do good photography to get oh's and ah's, because the pictures don't scream the name of one particular lens.
this sounds like I'm blaming all noctilux users to be bad photographers, that's not true! I have seen a lot of people doing great stuff with it, but I have also seen a lot of people with noctilux's doing really random and uninteresting stuff with it, but it doesn't matter since all those mediocre shots have the "nocti-look"!
nor am I unconditionally praising the new nokton, since I never even had one in my hands.
all I say is that it seems to me that the nokton is a very good lens with good sharpness and a fine bokeh, maybe not the same built quality as the noctilux, but at least you're not tempted to rely on an ugly bokeh and massive vignetting (f1.0 in the center, f2.8 on the edges or what?) to make your shots more interesting than they are.
you are free to rape me now.
the difference maybe is the following:
when you buy a noctilux, you bought a noctilux. you spent several thousand dollars on a lens that has been a myth and a legend for decades. and when you shoot it (mostly wide open of course, because that's more or less why you bought one) you have what people call "the nocti-look" or whatnot. the shot says "NOCTILUX!".
the nokton is cheaper and very new, not a big legend or myth behind it, it's not the first super-fast 50 (not even f1.0 or f0.95 boohoo), not in an unreachable cost dimension. you're just buying a (very) fast 50. BUT when you look at the shots, you look at -the shots- for their own sake and not for the "characteristic" look of the lens. all of a sudden you have to do good photography to get oh's and ah's, because the pictures don't scream the name of one particular lens.
this sounds like I'm blaming all noctilux users to be bad photographers, that's not true! I have seen a lot of people doing great stuff with it, but I have also seen a lot of people with noctilux's doing really random and uninteresting stuff with it, but it doesn't matter since all those mediocre shots have the "nocti-look"!
nor am I unconditionally praising the new nokton, since I never even had one in my hands.
all I say is that it seems to me that the nokton is a very good lens with good sharpness and a fine bokeh, maybe not the same built quality as the noctilux, but at least you're not tempted to rely on an ugly bokeh and massive vignetting (f1.0 in the center, f2.8 on the edges or what?
) to make your shots more interesting than they are.you are free to rape me now.
Last edited:
burninfilm
Well-known
Hot damn! Cosina builds a decent, and incredibly fast hunk of glass and we start threads complainin' about it?
Y'all need to spend more time with loved ones, and less time talking about lens signature The only time I talk about lens signature is when I get a little careless with the Summar, and exclaim "holy sh**, that's alot of flare!" as I'm scanning the negatives. :angel:
I'd still love to talk with Winogrand, Cartier-Bresson, Smith, Capa, Burrows, etc. and see if they liked particular lenses due to their lens signatures. Who knows, maybe these guys squabbled amongst their peers about the same crap we seem to squak back and forth to each other.
BTW, don't waste your time replying to this, or you risk being far too serious about life. Instead, give a loved one a hug. They'll thank you for it!
Y'all need to spend more time with loved ones, and less time talking about lens signature
The only time I talk about lens signature is when I get a little careless with the Summar, and exclaim "holy sh**, that's alot of flare!" as I'm scanning the negatives. :angel:I'd still love to talk with Winogrand, Cartier-Bresson, Smith, Capa, Burrows, etc. and see if they liked particular lenses due to their lens signatures. Who knows, maybe these guys squabbled amongst their peers about the same crap we seem to squak back and forth to each other.
BTW, don't waste your time replying to this, or you risk being far too serious about life. Instead, give a loved one a hug. They'll thank you for it!
Last edited:
Roger Hicks
Veteran
Photon42
burn the box
Can someone of the knowing please comment, whether the new Nokton 1.1 suffers from focus shift, similar to some other recent CV lenses?
For me, first and foremost, a lens needs to be practical in day to day practice. Visible focus shift turns me off. A larger footprint would be OK as a specialist lens, if it does not block the viewfinder too much (the Nokton 35 w/o shade is still OK, I think). So no problem here, maybe. Bokeh is not overly important for me. I more see it as a nice add-on. Great bokeh does not compensate for a focus shift or a lens which is too soft.
For me, first and foremost, a lens needs to be practical in day to day practice. Visible focus shift turns me off. A larger footprint would be OK as a specialist lens, if it does not block the viewfinder too much (the Nokton 35 w/o shade is still OK, I think). So no problem here, maybe. Bokeh is not overly important for me. I more see it as a nice add-on. Great bokeh does not compensate for a focus shift or a lens which is too soft.