summaron
Established
Not gimmicky, but a little samey and restricting.
Last edited:
To Noctilux or Summilux ASPH
- Thread starter Rangefinder Man
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
- Replies 42
- Views 4K
Not gimmicky, but a little samey and restricting.
Ororaro
Well-known
The noctilux is the only reason why I'm into Leica. It's such a good lens.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
I sold my Noct and bought a pre-asph Lux. This was before the Lux ASPH was available. Here's why I sold it.
- It's big by Leica M standards. It feels like you are running around with a 2/90 Summicron mounted. It's heavy. A Noct weighs about as much as the M body.
Both versions of the Lux are featherweights compared to the Noct, especially the pre-ASPH Lux.
- The focus throw is very long, which can make it difficult to follow action. The throw on the Lux is very short and crisp.
- The Noct will focus to 1 meter. The Lux will go as close as .7 m (70cm), which opens up a lot of possibilities.
- At f1 and focused at 1 meter you get about 1cm (1/2 inch) of DOF that is in focus. Forget about shooting anything but a static subject under these circumstances. DOF at f1 increases the further away the subject is that you are focusing on. Basically I would save f1 for subjects that were further than 5 meters away, unless they were static.
- f1 is sharp. The sharpest f1 you will see this side of something out of a spy satellite, but it's not THAT sharp. Also since the DOF is so shallow at f1, everything but the focus point is a blur. Of course this can look really cool.
- At f1 the Noct shows heavy vignetting. It clears up to a reasonable level by f1.4.
- At f1.4 the pre-ASPH Lux was sharper. The ASPH Lux will do even better.
- When shooting close-up the floating element in the Lux ASPH will blow away both lenses and even a 2/50 Summicron.
- The front element of the Noct is huge, so you always want to use a hood. The collapsible hood doesn't offer much protection, because it is rather shallow and doesn't lock into place. I had the second incarnation of the Noct, with the clip on hood. It offered plenty of protection, but made the lens even bigger.
- The Noct may be the most flare proof piece of glass ever made. It simply doesn't flare. Period. I shot mine straight into a 25,000 watt movie light and it simply sucked up the photons and spit them out the other side. Erwin Puts claims that there is zero scatter as light travels through the Noct and hits the film. Basically that means that the only image forming light that reaches the film, comes from the scene. In other words you see no blooming around specular points etc. This makes for amazingly clear pictures as night. It also means that the images the Noct produces look rather 'sterile'. This was one of the biggest reasons why I sold the Noct. I like a little glow in my pictures. For the record the pre-ASPH Lux is extremely flare proof. The ASPH Lux is supposed to be as good as the Noct (they share the same glass types)
- I wasn't too crazy about the Noct bokeh. It can vary from extremely smooth to down right bizzare and distracting. The pre-ASPH Lux is renowned for producing some of the smoothest bokeh in any lens and it draws with an amazingly wide tonal scale. For black and white photography you would be hard pressed to find a better lens.
So, there it is. The Noctilux or "The Queen of the Night" as I like to call her, is an amazing and special lens. But I would not buy it as my daily shooter. The Lux is a better choice for that. If I had money to burn I would buy both and take the Lux out for selective work, but mine ended up spending a lot of time on the shelf.
HL
- It's big by Leica M standards. It feels like you are running around with a 2/90 Summicron mounted. It's heavy. A Noct weighs about as much as the M body.
Both versions of the Lux are featherweights compared to the Noct, especially the pre-ASPH Lux.
- The focus throw is very long, which can make it difficult to follow action. The throw on the Lux is very short and crisp.
- The Noct will focus to 1 meter. The Lux will go as close as .7 m (70cm), which opens up a lot of possibilities.
- At f1 and focused at 1 meter you get about 1cm (1/2 inch) of DOF that is in focus. Forget about shooting anything but a static subject under these circumstances. DOF at f1 increases the further away the subject is that you are focusing on. Basically I would save f1 for subjects that were further than 5 meters away, unless they were static.
- f1 is sharp. The sharpest f1 you will see this side of something out of a spy satellite, but it's not THAT sharp. Also since the DOF is so shallow at f1, everything but the focus point is a blur. Of course this can look really cool.
- At f1 the Noct shows heavy vignetting. It clears up to a reasonable level by f1.4.
- At f1.4 the pre-ASPH Lux was sharper. The ASPH Lux will do even better.
- When shooting close-up the floating element in the Lux ASPH will blow away both lenses and even a 2/50 Summicron.
- The front element of the Noct is huge, so you always want to use a hood. The collapsible hood doesn't offer much protection, because it is rather shallow and doesn't lock into place. I had the second incarnation of the Noct, with the clip on hood. It offered plenty of protection, but made the lens even bigger.
- The Noct may be the most flare proof piece of glass ever made. It simply doesn't flare. Period. I shot mine straight into a 25,000 watt movie light and it simply sucked up the photons and spit them out the other side. Erwin Puts claims that there is zero scatter as light travels through the Noct and hits the film. Basically that means that the only image forming light that reaches the film, comes from the scene. In other words you see no blooming around specular points etc. This makes for amazingly clear pictures as night. It also means that the images the Noct produces look rather 'sterile'. This was one of the biggest reasons why I sold the Noct. I like a little glow in my pictures. For the record the pre-ASPH Lux is extremely flare proof. The ASPH Lux is supposed to be as good as the Noct (they share the same glass types)
- I wasn't too crazy about the Noct bokeh. It can vary from extremely smooth to down right bizzare and distracting. The pre-ASPH Lux is renowned for producing some of the smoothest bokeh in any lens and it draws with an amazingly wide tonal scale. For black and white photography you would be hard pressed to find a better lens.
So, there it is. The Noctilux or "The Queen of the Night" as I like to call her, is an amazing and special lens. But I would not buy it as my daily shooter. The Lux is a better choice for that. If I had money to burn I would buy both and take the Lux out for selective work, but mine ended up spending a lot of time on the shelf.
HL
S
Simon Larbalestier
Guest
Harry Lime said:
I'd agree with Harry on this - i did exactly the same thing in 2002 sold the Noct and bought the 43 pre ASPH lux which, for me, matches very well with the 35/1.4 pre ASPH . I shot it almost exclusively at F1.0 it does render images with a unique look to them but i've found the 50/1.4 much more flexible as an allround shooter.
I'm still saving for the ASPH version as i'd like to keep both and not have to trade the early lux against the new model.
Ororaro
Well-known
Let's face it: the 50mm focal length is ridiculed on all cameras, except the Leica. Why is that? Me, I don't see any sense in owning a 2000$ 50mm lens if it's not going to give me something real special. I'd rather use an AI Nikkor 50 1.4 for 100$, and so what if it's a little bigger then a 'lux. It's not like I'm a scorbutic 25 pound male in need of food an dying of some cancer. Even my grandma can carry a camera all day. Any 35mm camera.
MadMan2k
Well-known
Try carrying around a 1-series Canon or nikon F series with a fast zoom tele mounted (2 pound body, 3-4 pound lens), and then try to say that any m-mount lens is big or heavy...
M
Magus
Guest
Post deleted by posters request
M
Magus
Guest
Post deleted by posters request
kevin m
Veteran
So far, the new years resolution is holding up.... 😱 😀
MikeL
Go Fish
NB23 said:
There must be some reason so many people sell their noctilux after the 'honeymoon' period. Weight, focus throw, frequency of using/needing f1, and the noct look (swirly-funky) are just not worth it for many. If I had spare cash I'd get one even though I might only use it 10 percent of the time when using a 50.
For portraits I'm just not into the "eyelash-of-one-eye-in-okay-focus" look. I'd rather use it at f1.4+ and therefore I lose most of the benefit. My pre-asph is almost as flare resistant as the noct I borrowed (In a fit of weakness I almost sold the pre-asph but I came to my senses and put tabasco in my eyes as punishment). The dreamy-abstract look is pretty cool sometimes but I don't want a bunch of those on my walls or I'd be into one of those lens-baby things. If I used it too much for the look I'd feel my goals and photos would become too gimmicky.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
MadMan2k said:
The Noct on my M7 with Leicavit probably weighed as much or more than my Canon 1-v with a 50 or 35. The Noct defeated the whole purpose of having the compact M in the first place.
M
Magus
Guest
Post deleted by posters request
peter_n
Veteran
The major one is missing - it is a challenge to use really well. You need to work at it. Most people are impatient and don't want to put the time in on a lens that they're not going to use a lot anyway.MikeL said:
borismach
Established
Harry Lime said:
Totally agree. I even consider 50 lux ASP is too heavy for m system.
🙂 BM
Stephanie Brim
Mental Experimental.
A Noctilux doesn't defeat the purpose of having a rangefinder...at least in my opinion. The reason I gravitated toward rangefinders was my dislike of flash and my desire to have a camera that was quieter. The dislike of flash prompts me to look for fast lenses, no matter the size. Even with my SLRs I never use flash. Fast, to me, is king. So, in my world, the Noctilux is pretty close to a perfect lens.
To each his own.
To each his own.
Harry Lime
Practitioner
Stephanie Brim said:
I meant that for me the Noct defeated some of the greatest strengths of the M camera, which are its compact size, low weight and low-key profile.
Personally I don't think there is anything better than a RF for low light shooting, especially with a lens that needs very accurate focusing at such a wide aperture. That's one of the main reasons why I shoot with an M in the first place.
I use the 1-v in situations where I need a camera that is sealed against the environment ( heavy rain, driving dust etc)
Olsen
Well-known
Harry Lime said:
This is the best Noctilux description here.
Well. how would I know. I have only had mine Noctilux of a few weeks and havn't had any films developed yet from it. But I have had the Canon EF 50 mm 1,0L for many years and use it regularly with my 1Ds II. The description above fits very well. Exept for that i think the bokeh of the Canon equaliant is just superb. It also transits from the sharp to the unsharp area so smoothly that in larger street scenes you really don't have to have all within the DOF.
The 1Ds II & 50 mm 1,0L is a fantastic combo in that you can photograph at just any time and any light. The camera is practically noice free up to 800ASA and is low noice to about 1600 ASA. It also offer Full Frame,- which is a draw back with the Noctilux on M8; it becomes a light tele best for portraits. People think that you are just f.. around with your camera,- at a restaurant or a private setting.
The drawbacks of the 1Ds II & 50 mm 1,0L combo is the vignetting. Up to three stops from the centre to the corners. And you have to stop it down beond 1,4 to get rid of it. Further; you have to have a damned good eye sight to control that the DOF is where it is supposed to be, if you were not to trust the AF, - which you can't. - I hope and think that the rangefinder system is better at this.
Further; the 1Ds II & 50 mm 1,0L combo is a heavy one! I use the Noctilux with a MP w/motor and think it is both compact and light....
Why do people sell their Noctilux'es? Good question.
I bought my Canon equaliant from a furious devorcee selling off her ex.husband's photogear. The Noctilux from a guy who had just inherited his father's Leica equipment and decided to sell his own. I regularly get inquiries about the Canon - If I want to sell it. The Canon equaliant is no longer produced and is in great demand. Although they were a lot cheaper than the Leica variant - despite that the Canon is even more solid than the Leica version that lacks both AF and signal busses transmitting exposure data to the camera, they seem to be selling for about the same price in the 2.hand market. About 2,400 US$.
Aparture 1,0 is an impressive feature. That mens that you can shoot hand held through the scandinavian summer night at 100ASA hand held. - Or take this time of the year; a trip down town into a dark and gloomy city - there isn't a scene that you will miss. Further; the 50 mm 1,0L is a good performer in more normal situations and apartures. It has this high quality radiation about at more normal apartures.
S
StuartR
Guest
If you are deciding between the 50/1.4 ASPH and the 50/1, don't decide on speed, decide on look. The 50/1 is only f/1 in the center of the frame, it is an f/2.8 lens by the time you get to the corners (yes, it vignettes 3 stops). If you are shooting negative film, you can just underexpose it by a stop and still be fine. Even with slide film, one stop underexposure can be bad, but keep in mind that you have three stops underexposure in the corners with the noctilux, while the 50/1.4 ASPH has two stops or less, so it will be a stop slower in the center, but equal in the corners. It will also be significantly sharper and more contrasty. Erwin Puts says that the Summilux ASPH is even more flare resistant than the Noctilux. I have not owned a noctilux, but I can say that the 50/1.4 ASPH does not flare in my experience....it just hasn't been a problem.
But anyway, choose on look. If you want a sharp, crisp lens wide open, choose the summilux ASPH, if you want a painterly bokeh-frenzy get the Noctilux. It can be beautiful. I would suggest that you don't make the 50/1 your only 50mm lens unless you plan to shoot it only, or mostly at f/1. It weighs almost double the 50/1.4 ASPH, it focuses to 1m instead of .7, it uses E60 filters instead of E46 (like most other modern Leica, Zeiss and CV lenses), and it has a much longer focus throw. It also costs more and does not have a lockable lens hood. Anyway, these are just my reminders. I don't think the Noctilux is a lens that you should try to compare to other lenses. If you want a Noctilux, then you want a Noctilux. If you want a fast 50mm lens, then get the 50/1.4 ASPH.
I also wanted to disagree with Olsen, who said that the difference in sharpness between the 50/1.4 ASPH and the 50/1 is "theoretical". This is not the case. The 50/1.4 ASPH is way ahead of my 50/1.4 pre-ASPH, and that is ahead of the noctilux at f/1.4. The 50/1.4 ASPH is decidedly sharper than the Noctilux.
But anyway, choose on look. If you want a sharp, crisp lens wide open, choose the summilux ASPH, if you want a painterly bokeh-frenzy get the Noctilux. It can be beautiful. I would suggest that you don't make the 50/1 your only 50mm lens unless you plan to shoot it only, or mostly at f/1. It weighs almost double the 50/1.4 ASPH, it focuses to 1m instead of .7, it uses E60 filters instead of E46 (like most other modern Leica, Zeiss and CV lenses), and it has a much longer focus throw. It also costs more and does not have a lockable lens hood. Anyway, these are just my reminders. I don't think the Noctilux is a lens that you should try to compare to other lenses. If you want a Noctilux, then you want a Noctilux. If you want a fast 50mm lens, then get the 50/1.4 ASPH.
I also wanted to disagree with Olsen, who said that the difference in sharpness between the 50/1.4 ASPH and the 50/1 is "theoretical". This is not the case. The 50/1.4 ASPH is way ahead of my 50/1.4 pre-ASPH, and that is ahead of the noctilux at f/1.4. The 50/1.4 ASPH is decidedly sharper than the Noctilux.
Last edited by a moderator:
peter_n
Veteran
Actually the first version Noctilux takes a much more common filter; 58mm. Also you can get a little heavystar lens hood to screw into it making the lens much more manageable.
Biggles
My cup runneth amok.
Harry Lime said:
Mister Lime, I know bugger-all about Noctiluxae, but I do know good writing when I see it.
That's some damned good writing. Thanks for taking the time.
