Voigtlander 50/1.1 Nokton Images !

[thrice]

With high refractive index glass, the lens can usually gather more light that the actual diameter of the aperture would indicate. So, they may have calculated the light transmission rather than simply measuring the max aperture diameter as 45.45mm. This would account for the larger DOF than people were expecting.

So perhaps it has f-stop of f/1.2+ but t-stop of f/1.1

 

[meven]

With high refractive index glass, the lens can usually gather more light that the actual diameter of the aperture would indicate. So, they may have calculated the light transmission rather than simply measuring the max aperture diameter as 45.45mm. This would account for the larger DOF than people were expecting.

That's the explanation I was looking for, thanks!

 

[Chiif Ho]

One more pic taken at about 7:15pm, wide open, Little India, Dunlop Street - Singapore

 

[thrice]

Image

One more pic taken at about 7:15pm, wide open, Little India, Dunlop Street - Singapore

Wow that's great, has a nice 3d look to it.

 

[bolohead]

I don't want to spoil the party but is it a f2.8 lens or f1.1 😱

I mean this is sooo sharp for a 1.1 lens but nonetheless, the dof looks way to big for what it is.

I'm not exactly sure what you are referring to. It may be the transition from the dof to the oof area, but the actual in focus area is about the right size.

It may be that people are not used to seeing such sharp results from a fast lens. This is my fastest RF lens, but I used the Canon EF 50/1.2 and it did not perform as well as this lens wide open.

Here's a 100% crop of the surfboard rack on her right.

 

[fleetwoodjazz]

I'm not exactly sure what you are referring to. It may be the transition from the dof to the oof area, but the actual in focus area is about the right size.

It may be that people are not used to seeing such sharp results from a fast lens. This is my fastest RF lens, but I used the Canon EF 50/1.2 and it did not perform as well as this lens wide open.

Here's a 100% crop of the surfboard rack on her right.

Unbelievably good for f1.1. To be honest, all lens nowadays are approaching to "technical perfection" that hardly leaves any rooms for signature.

Sure, this is not full frame sample but very often I find some softness, vignetting of wide open help very much.

I shot the photo below with the Sonnar 50mm and although, it is not technically perfect I just like the depth the Sonnar gives me.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/fleetwoodjazz/3608389970/

Thanks for showing us a picture, my conclusion is that this Voigtlander lens is technically too good for me so I'll give it a miss.

 

[Thardy]

I don't want to spoil the party but is it a f2.8 lens or f1.1 😱

I mean this is sooo sharp for a 1.1 lens but nonetheless, the dof looks way to big for what it is.

Well the key to this shot is knowing the distance to the subject. If the distance is 15 ft away, there will be more dof, than if the subject was say 4-5 feet away.

I can't imagine a company selling an f/2.8 lens as an f/1.1 lens.

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

 

[fleetwoodjazz]

Well the key to this shot is knowing the distance to the subject. If the distance is 15 ft away, there will be more dof, than if the subject was say 4-5 feet away.

I can't imagine a company selling an f/2.8 lens as an f/1.1 lens.

http://www.dofmaster.com/dofjs.html

Yes, I know about that too. I think earlier in this thread there were some posters that also mentioned about the dof looks rather "thick" for such a lens.

Sure, we have to wait a little bit for more pictures to correctly judge.

 

[Krosya]

I received my lens yesterday and took a stroll with my daughter and snapped this. I really like this lens.
Leica M8, CV Nokton 50mm f/1.1 @ f/1.1, 1/60 sec, ISO 160

Hmm, I get about the same look with my Hex 50/2 wide open - as far as DOF goes. I understand it's all subjective, based on looking at the web pic, but I just dont see that "fast lens-wide open" look/feel to it. Maybe some more pics will clear this up? I hope so, cause I'm rather interested in this lens...

 

[nzeeman]

judging from the image that kid was more than 5 meters away maybe even 7m ( m8 is not full frame and she is still really small on that photo) on 5m dof for f1 is around 50cm and on 7 is 1m. so i think dof of this lens is absolutely normal - nothing unusual...
only thing why it is different from noctilux is its sharpness even wide open. i think people are confused because before this we only saw photos from 0.95 canon which is pretty soft(but i still like photos i saw with it) amd noctilux which has that strange bokeh...

 

[Pickett Wilson]

The RF world has become obsessed with photos with out of focus backgrounds. You know, if there is an important photo and no other way to get it, I guess these lenses are fine, but I have never understood the thing with small DOF photos. It seems to be the holy grail of RF photography, though.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

That's the thing, though. All these weird, OOF backgrounds ARE distracting to me. Different strokes, I guess.

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Good example. The first thing I see is that harsh background.

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

I disagree with Pickett, but agree on that sample.... Not a positive example.

Here, though, is an extreme. The large format route:
http://www.shorpy.com/node/845?size=_original

Personally, i feel (in general, and especially when dealing with pictures of people), that an image without selective DOF means the photographer just never made a decision. I don't really want to see a picture of a person + an environment with both elements at the same level of focus UNLESS the environment is either integral, appropriate, or created/controlled.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/tommyoshima/
http://www.flickr.com/search/?w=52144850@N00&q=R6.2&m=text

These two guys are fantastic at using bokeh for effect, and not just using bokeh for bokeh's sake. That is to say, there are a lot of pictures made by Noctilux owners that seem like they're 'test pictures' to demonstrate the lens' bokeh capabilities. And, they're pretty dull once you get over it. How many times can you tell someone, "yeah, but see- it was exposed by the light of only a candle!"

 

[nzeeman]

Concerning the DOF issue: nearly all shots here are taken with a digital rangefinder. These have smaller sensors, thus increasing to DOF. That might account for the perception of many viewers here, that the lens produces 1.4 to 2.0 like shots.

smaller sensor dont change dof - it behave same as if you crop photo.
(i dont know if i am clear but on M8 50mm lens have field of view like 65mm lens on full frame but its depth of field stays like in 50mm lens)

 

[CK Dexter Haven]

Pickett,
Not that i need to change your mind, but i'm curious....
This isn't simply a matter associated with rangefinder photographers.

Do you not find this image beautiful?
http://www.flickr.com/photos/jgual/3681777798/

 

[Pickett Wilson]

Soft and flared is better than harsh OOF. With this photo, though, the the blown out window is distracting.

 

[nzeeman]

i just try to say one thing - if you stay in one spot and taking photo of your friend who dont move too - and you use m7 and m8 for example with 50mm lens. you will have wider photo from m7 and tighter with m8 but the bokeh will be same on both photos...

 

[Thardy]

The RF world has become obsessed with photos with out of focus backgrounds. You know, if there is an important photo and no other way to get it, I guess these lenses are fine, but I have never understood the thing with small DOF photos. It seems to be the holy grail of RF photography, though.

I was showing some photos with that shallow dof look to a friend at work. He liked them so I tried to explain some of the variables which contribute to it. Then he says "my fuji goes down to f/2.8" why can't I get that look? I finally suggested that he buy a $70 50mm lens for his digirebel and practice. He kept going on and on about how much he loves his compact digital ... yada, yada. I finally threw my hands up and walked off.

Yeah, everybody is crazy over skinny dof. Look at all those "bokeh groups" on flickr.

 

[bobbytuck]

Some sample shots I took with Tri-X in Rodinal with the 50/1.1:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/metaincognita/sets/72157620785090949/